Live 15 Player Ratings

[zz21]

Looks like they might be releasing ratings if you ask during the Q&A. First rating revealed:

[Andrew]

Unfortunately that was the only one. I'm guessing since Oladipo is part of their "athlete lineup" for the game, they had the screenshot and the rating reveal ready to go.

[NBALIVEFernando]

There will be more reveals coming... Hopefully, we'll have a date soon.

[Kevin]

There will be more reveals coming... Hopefully, we'll have a date soon.

Good to know! Just like EA, did you also change the way you grade/rate the players?

[NBALIVEFernando]

There will be more reveals coming... Hopefully, we'll have a date soon.

Good to know! Just like EA, did you also change the way you grade/rate the players?

Well, we have something new every year.

What didn't you like about the previous year? I could possibly address that.

[TBM]

He means, are you changing your roster rating system like 2K is doing, spreading out the ratings more for more variation.

[NBALIVEFernando]

He means, are you changing your roster rating system like 2K is doing, spreading out the ratings more for more variation.

It's hard to say what they're doing until we have everything in front of us.

But, I have received internal feedback that two guys may be rated 84 and they can look through the ratings and see that they're completely different play styles.

So, I like hearing that since once of my goals was try to be inclusive of players who are equally good but, have strengths in different areas.

Does that answer your question?

[ChrisCP3Paul]

Well, we have something new every year.

What didn't you like about the previous year? I could possibly address that.

YEA, we didn't have the promised Synergy rating and playstyle daily updates you guys promised you would be doing on an almost daily basis....

There's no beating around the bush, last year you pretty much completely abandoned the game after it got released, once you realized how many copies it sold I guess you didn't think it was important enough so you bailed on the promised updates, and the nail in the coffin was we didn't have sliders, so we couldn't fix the rosters on our own, and that's a double whammy.
Still don't have sliders, and we have to rely on programmers at EA who log onto NBA.com and read stats and base their ratings off that, instead of actually knowing and seeing the players play in actual games.


So if we don't have proper sliders, what sort of updates will we be seeing, and how often can we expect to see them ?

[NBALIVEFernando]

Well, we have something new every year.

What didn't you like about the previous year? I could possibly address that.

YEA, we didn't have the promised Synergy rating and playstyle daily updates you guys promised you would be doing on an almost daily basis....

There's no beating around the bush, last year you pretty much completely abandoned the game after it got released, once you realized how many copies it sold I guess you didn't think it was important enough so you bailed on the promised updates, and the nail in the coffin was we didn't have sliders, so we couldn't fix the rosters on our own, and that's a double whammy.
Still don't have sliders, and we have to rely on programmers at EA who log onto NBA.com and read stats and base their ratings off that, instead of actually knowing and seeing the players play in actual games.


So if we don't have proper sliders, what sort of updates will we be seeing, and how often can we expect to see them ?

Good question.

Well, I'm not a programmer but, I'll be that guy making the changes throughout the season.

Synergy does provide a lot of data and we're using it to drive player tendencies for the AI and in Live Seasons to create the scenarios in there, quickly.

We receive all that data within the hour of when a game is finished.

Synergy doesn't do shoe updates, player creation or drive the ratings (yet).

Ratings will still be done manually, to an extent. And I plan on having conversations throughout the season with the community for who's ratings are too high or low.

I'd like to see the Roster/Rating updates come out on a weekly basis. We've changed the way we do updates to make it less cumbersome. That even me, a non-programmer can do it.

You seem like a person to whom actions speak louder than words. If all goes well, how does this sound?

As far as sliders go, unfortunately, all I can do is voice your concerns whenever we have meetings that concern such things.

[Patr1ck]

Well, we have something new every year.

What didn't you like about the previous year? I could possibly address that.

YEA, we didn't have the promised Synergy rating and playstyle daily updates you guys promised you would be doing on an almost daily basis....

There's no beating around the bush, last year you pretty much completely abandoned the game after it got released, once you realized how many copies it sold I guess you didn't think it was important enough so you bailed on the promised updates, and the nail in the coffin was we didn't have sliders, so we couldn't fix the rosters on our own, and that's a double whammy.
Still don't have sliders, and we have to rely on programmers at EA who log onto NBA.com and read stats and base their ratings off that, instead of actually knowing and seeing the players play in actual games.


So if we don't have proper sliders, what sort of updates will we be seeing, and how often can we expect to see them ?

Don't make false accusations. They did not abandon the game. It probably got some of the most updates any Live gamehad ever gotten throughout the year. Yes they dropped the ball on the updates within an hour of the game and shouldn'tbe making promises they can't keep. Yes the game needs sliders and player editing because players enjoy customizing the game to their liking and hardcore players go all out with edits attempting to make the game more enjoyable for everyone.

If you want to continue to use Fernando to vent your frustrations in a destructive manner, you will have to do it somewhere else. He has been very kind by opening a dialog with the community to more understand what we would like to see from the game and what he can do in his position.

[ChrisCP3Paul]

Good question.

Well, I'm not a programmer but, I'll be that guy making the changes throughout the season.

Synergy does provide a lot of data and we're using it to drive player tendencies for the AI and in Live Seasons to create the scenarios in there, quickly.

We receive all that data within the hour of when a game is finished.

Synergy doesn't do shoe updates, player creation or drive the ratings (yet).

Ratings will still be done manually, to an extent. And I plan on having conversations throughout the season with the community for who's ratings are too high or low.

I'd like to see the Roster/Rating updates come out on a weekly basis. We've changed the way we do updates to make it less cumbersome. That even me, a non-programmer can do it.

You seem like a person to whom actions speak louder than words. If all goes well, how does this sound?

As far as sliders go, unfortunately, all I can do is voice your concerns whenever we have meetings that concern such things.

yes that's exactly what I was talking about, last year we were told we would be getting regular roster updates as they happen in real life, instead we got rosters that were weeks if not months late, it really REALLY felt like to a lot of us the game has been abandoned. Sliders and ability to edit various things would have definitely softened the blow but we didn't have those options, and speaking on that point, I understand fully what the issue is, you guys are right now trying to stabilize and get the gameplay to run solid before adding sliders, most of us understand that and why it has to be that way, I personally accept it because I'm one who wants solid gameplay first and foremost.
And weekly roster updates sound like a major step up from last year

Don't make false accusations. They did not abandon the game. It probably got some of the most updates any Live gamehad ever gotten throughout the year. Yes they dropped the ball on the updates within an hour of the game and shouldn'tbe making promises they can't keep. Yes the game needs sliders and player editing because players enjoy customizing the game to their liking and hardcore players go all out with edits attempting to make the game more enjoyable for everyone.

If you want to continue to use Fernando to vent your frustrations in a destructive manner, you will have to do it somewhere else. He has been very kind by opening a dialog with the community to more understand what we would like to see from the game and what he can do in his position.

and Pdub relax a little bit and understand everything I brought up were valid and legitimate points, if I sounded like I was venting a little bit well I may have been on that fine line, but Fernando himself understood what I was trying to get across and kindly replied...


as I said, everything I brought up can be summed up on this OS thread linked below with some quotes highlighted, there's no "false accusations" coming from me whatsoever, and I don't appreciate being accused of spreading misinformation especially from someone at your position

http://www.operationsports.com/features/1770/nba-live-14-roster-updates-not-living-up-to-promises/

"I want NBA Live to be relevant to the NBA fan throughout the entire NBA season, providing data and content updates that keep your gaming experience fresh and in lockstep with everything that's going on in the real world NBA...I'm really excited about being able to update our game within an hour of something happening in the NBA. We're going to be making an enormous investment into this connected experience."

Sean O'Brien, Executive Producer NBA Live 14

"If something happens in the real world the night before, you see it in your game the next day -- actually, an hour from when it actually happens."

Sean O'Brien, Executive Producer NBA Live 14
November 6, 2013

"Our connected experience doesn’t stop at player ratings – data will also affects the way each player looks. If Derrick Rose drops a new colorway for his sneakers during the season, the new kicks will be updated in NBA LIVE 14. No waiting for a roster update, no special patch, just another piece that gets automatically updated each day. Same goes for new accessories or gear, even haircuts. Anytime an NBA player changes up his look NBA LIVE 14 will be there to make him look right in-game."

EA Sports Press Release
November 6, 2013

[Andrew]

He means, are you changing your roster rating system like 2K is doing, spreading out the ratings more for more variation.

It's hard to say what they're doing until we have everything in front of us.

One of the things they're doing is avoiding having too many 90+ overall rated players (reportedly only four players will be rated that high in the roster the game ships with), and no active player will be rated 99 overall. I'm guessing TBM might have been alluding to that, and asking whether or not the average overall rating has been lowered this year to avoid having too many 90+ players.

My follow on question from that would be, do you know if there's been any change in the way that overall ratings are calculated (ie the way individual ratings are weighted when calculating the overall)? I know from having done unofficial roster updates for many years that overall ratings can be a huge pain; players like Josh Smith can end up looking a bit overrated because of their athletic abilities, while players such as Steve Nash can look underrated because they aren't as athletic or are a bit average in one department while being fantastic in several others.

[[Q]]

Remember a few years back there was a big debate when live went to a 0-99 scale instead of the traditional 50-99? I felt that in Live 10, the only reason to give a rating in any stat below 50 was to help keep an unproven player's overall rating down. It just seemed really bad to have an NBA player rated like 23 in anything

[Andrew]

I've always wondered whether the NBA Live or NBA 2K developers have copped some flak for that from the players themselves, when they've been unhappy with their ratings. "55 in Offensive Awareness? How clueless do you think I am?!?"

[NBALIVEFernando]

He means, are you changing your roster rating system like 2K is doing, spreading out the ratings more for more variation.

It's hard to say what they're doing until we have everything in front of us.

One of the things they're doing is avoiding having too many 90+ overall rated players (reportedly only four players will be rated that high in the roster the game ships with), and no active player will be rated 99 overall. I'm guessing TBM might have been alluding to that, and asking whether or not the average overall rating has been lowered this year to avoid having too many 90+ players.

My follow on question from that would be, do you know if there's been any change in the way that overall ratings are calculated (ie the way individual ratings are weighted when calculating the overall)? I know from having done unofficial roster updates for many years that overall ratings can be a huge pain; players like Josh Smith can end up looking a bit overrated because of their athletic abilities, while players such as Steve Nash can look underrated because they aren't as athletic or are a bit average in one department while being fantastic in several others.

To me, it doesn't matter if there's 30 90s or none. As long as the players are ordered consistently/correctly, I'm ok.

I know most of us don't care about overall but, here we are having this conversation.

We changed the way it's calculated. I'd like to think so, we look at a lot more factors than '14.

[NBALIVEFernando]

Remember a few years back there was a big debate when live went to a 0-99 scale instead of the traditional 50-99? I felt that in Live 10, the only reason to give a rating in any stat below 50 was to help keep an unproven player's overall rating down. It just seemed really bad to have an NBA player rated like 23 in anything

The question is what does that 23 mean?

Does it mean he runs slower than us mortals? Or that he's just in the lower percentage of world class athletes?

I'm for using the scale completely to help differentiate but, then there's the perception that a 1 in anything means he's barely better than anyone in a coma.

[TBM]

I think the argument for not having so many 90s was to make them more special. For example, in game, if Lebron is a 99 and Carmelo is a 97 (just making up numbers here), then there really isn't too much of a need for LeBron, and Melo is almost as good as him, seeing as how a 2 point difference is pretty marginal. However, in real life, LeBron is far better than Melo, with no real debate about it, but in games where there are a lot of 90s, guys like LeBron and Durant don't stand out enough.

[NBALIVEFernando]

I think the argument for not having so many 90s was to make them more special. For example, in game, if Lebron is a 99 and Carmelo is a 97 (just making up numbers here), then there really isn't too much of a need for LeBron, and Melo is almost as good as him, seeing as how a 2 point difference is pretty marginal. However, in real life, LeBron is far better than Melo, with no real debate about it, but in games where there are a lot of 90s, guys like LeBron and Durant don't stand out enough.

I see what you're saying. And that's a very good argument!

Thanks for sharing your point of view.

[ChrisCP3Paul]

Not a suggestion or anything like that, just a random thought that went through my head right now reading this thread.... I think what could solve this seemingly eternal issue if you even wanna call it an issue, with Overall would be just having 2 separate Overalls instead of one, 1 for defense and 1 for offense. So there is no instances of either defense or offense boosting up a players single overall to higher overall levels.
I personally am not confused by the overall because I know who these players are in real life and what they're about, but a lot of kids get hyped up for no really no good reason over these overall ratings, just on gut reaction and not on much common sense.

For example it would work like this, James Harden Offense 96 and Defense 67, while let's say comparing him to another elite SG who plays both ends of the floor like Dwayne Wade sitting at Offense 87 and Defense 88.
So now you look at it that way, you can see a crystal clear distinction between the two and it leaves no room for argument....

but I mean I know who these players are personally I don't have a problem with the way things are, but that just ran through my head real quick something that would shut up a lot of kids barking about this guy and that guy's overall

[Andrew]

We changed the way it's calculated. I'd like to think so, we look at a lot more factors than '14.

Appreciate the insight! As I said, having done unofficial roster updates for many years, I can relate to the frustration of overall ratings and their perceived importance. The individual ratings for players like a Josh Smith might be spot on, but the overall looks a little high because the athletic ratings boost it up. Then you have valuable role players like Kyle Korver who may appear to be underrated, because they're not particularly well-rounded or athletic players, so their overall is dragged down.

But that's good to hear that there's been a change in the way they're calculated. I'm guessing there'll always be some controversy, some fans who believe Player X should be rated Y overall, even if there's only a one or two point difference. Unfortunately we do need that measure of value to be visible to make trades in Dynasty Mode, so displaying it - and enduring those debates from the gamers - becomes a necessary evil. They're useful, but frustrating to handle.

[[Q]]

The question is what does that 23 mean?

Does it mean he runs slower than us mortals? Or that he's just in the lower percentage of world class athletes?

I'm for using the scale completely to help differentiate but, then there's the perception that a 1 in anything means he's barely better than anyone in a coma.

These are all good questions to bring up about any rating system. I agree that the overall rating doesn't mean a whole lot and that being able to differentiate players is great, but there are several questions that you have to ask about each individual rating:
A) how does it affect the gameplay itself?
B) how does it affect players' interactions with the game?
C) how big of a difference is 1 point in the rating system?
D) how much of a difference gameplay-wise would a 1 vs 99 be? (slow as molasses theory)
E) how low can you rate someone before their feelings get hurt or game players avoid playing with them altogether?

In Live 14, you guys did a great job of keeping overall ratings between 50 and 99 while using individual ratings that went as low as 20 or so for a few categories. I guess what I want to know most is how a rating difference affects gameplay. For example, in speed if you had two players and one had a head start, what kind of speed rating difference would there need to be in order to make up the difference in the distance of half the court? Or would only players rated 80 or 85 and above only be able to catch them? I know in other basketball games, you could get a steal and go on a fast break with a guard and a power forward or center would be able to keep up or even catach up when both players are at a full (turbo) sprint.

[NBALIVEFernando]

We changed the way it's calculated. I'd like to think so, we look at a lot more factors than '14.

Appreciate the insight! As I said, having done unofficial roster updates for many years, I can relate to the frustration of overall ratings and their perceived importance. The individual ratings for players like a Josh Smith might be spot on, but the overall looks a little high because the athletic ratings boost it up. Then you have valuable role players like Kyle Korver who may appear to be underrated, because they're not particularly well-rounded or athletic players, so their overall is dragged down.

But that's good to hear that there's been a change in the way they're calculated. I'm guessing there'll always be some controversy, some fans who believe Player X should be rated Y overall, even if there's only a one or two point difference. Unfortunately we do need that measure of value to be visible to make trades in Dynasty Mode, so displaying it - and enduring those debates from the gamers - becomes a necessary evil. They're useful, but frustrating to handle.

Yea, I posed the question in another forum. What does an overall rating mean to you?

Is it how well rounded they are? How impactful their presence is? How easy they are to use?

I had a co-worker say, a person with a high overall should be a great scorer. So, is that what we want to make the overall represent?

Not a suggestion or anything like that, just a random thought that went through my head right now reading this thread.... I think what could solve this seemingly eternal issue if you even wanna call it an issue, with Overall would be just having 2 separate Overalls instead of one, 1 for defense and 1 for offense. So there is no instances of either defense or offense boosting up a players single overall to higher overall levels.
I personally am not confused by the overall because I know who these players are in real life and what they're about, but a lot of kids get hyped up for no really no good reason over these overall ratings, just on gut reaction and not on much common sense.

For example it would work like this, James Harden Offense 96 and Defense 67, while let's say comparing him to another elite SG who plays both ends of the floor like Dwayne Wade sitting at Offense 87 and Defense 88.
So now you look at it that way, you can see a crystal clear distinction between the two and it leaves no room for argument....

but I mean I know who these players are personally I don't have a problem with the way things are, but that just ran through my head real quick something that would shut up a lot of kids barking about this guy and that guy's overall

Not a bad idea, Ultimate Team has small categorized ratings like offense, defense. They did it last year and have made some minor tweaks on the calculations of those ratings. I'd like to hear the feedback once that info is released.

The question is what does that 23 mean?

Does it mean he runs slower than us mortals? Or that he's just in the lower percentage of world class athletes?

I'm for using the scale completely to help differentiate but, then there's the perception that a 1 in anything means he's barely better than anyone in a coma.

These are all good questions to bring up about any rating system. I agree that the overall rating doesn't mean a whole lot and that being able to differentiate players is great, but there are several questions that you have to ask about each individual rating:
A) how does it affect the gameplay itself?
B) how does it affect players' interactions with the game?
C) how big of a difference is 1 point in the rating system?
D) how much of a difference gameplay-wise would a 1 vs 99 be? (slow as molasses theory)
E) how low can you rate someone before their feelings get hurt or game players avoid playing with them altogether?

In Live 14, you guys did a great job of keeping overall ratings between 50 and 99 while using individual ratings that went as low as 20 or so for a few categories. I guess what I want to know most is how a rating difference affects gameplay. For example, in speed if you had two players and one had a head start, what kind of speed rating difference would there need to be in order to make up the difference in the distance of half the court? Or would only players rated 80 or 85 and above only be able to catch them? I know in other basketball games, you could get a steal and go on a fast break with a guard and a power forward or center would be able to keep up or even catach up when both players are at a full (turbo) sprint.

All of these are the questions that we ask ourselves. I'm constantly going back and forth with our gameplay guys who use the ratings to drive actions in game. We tune accordingly to help make the game feel consistent and react accordingly to the rating you're seeing.

[Patr1ck]

I would say that the overall rating should reflect how much impact a player can have on the game. That way non- scoring players can still have a high overall.

[bigh0rt]

I would say that the overall rating should reflect how much impact a player can have on the game. That way non- scoring players can still have a high overall.

I agree with this. It should be an accumulation of their skills, abilities, and impact on a game. Guys do it via scoring, via lockdown perimeter defense, via owning the paint. Throughout the history of sports video games, two things have remained apparent:

1) Speed kills. If you have the fastest players, you are at a distinct (often unrealistic) advantage. This is the biggest deal in football games, although you still can see its impact in NBA ones as well.
2) High scoring capability = High Overall Rating. Some guys are one dimensional, volume scorers, and become vastly overrated, in terms of overall, because of it. The ability to play perimeter or post defense, facilitate, etc. don't seem to 'count' towards Overall as much as the good old fashioned scoring ratings do. Not that all should be weighted equally, but the gripe you most often see are that either one-dimensional scorers are overrated, or that lockdown defenders who don't offer as much offensively are underrated.

There's a ton of subjectivity to be dealt with here, of course. I like PDub's "how much impact a player can have on the game" explanation.

[Patr1ck]

And that impact could be system related. As a Clippers fan, I was happy to see Jared Dudley become a Clipper due to his performance with the Suns as a perimeter shooter. However, he didn't put up similar numbers. With that said, the team a player is on should also have an effect on their overall.

You could actually use two overall ratings. One based on their individual skills, and one based on their current performance, like an effective overall rating that gives you information on how well the player had between performing lately.