can't wait until IGN releases complete player ratings like..

Someone obviously has way too much time on their hands...

The ratings are quickly fixed by downloading the newest roster release from NLSC... So they really aren't a problem.

You guys forget that the ratings are from 0-99... So actually 60 in something is already way above league average. And average shooting rating should be 45-55... Ever wonder why guys like Fisher and Ward and the rest of the pedestrian point guards put up so many points and put down some crazy shots??? Maybe it's due to the fact that someone has bumped up their shooting ratings to 70...

Doing the ratings is hard... Balancing the ratings so that simulation produces realistic scores is even harder. Who decides this guy is a better shooter than this guy when the other shoots .452 and the other .448... Does that really reflect anything? Does it make the .452 a better shooter, or does is simply make him a smarter shooter? Does the other guy go to the rim more and the other guy is more of a shooter...

And when you complain that they get it always wrong for the bench guys, well they have to make a difference between bench players and starters... They can't all be great. There has to be something that separates the start from the bench warmer...

You think you could do the ratings better??? It's a humongous task that would take the entire year of playtesting to get it right... They probably have very limited resources to get it done and probably a week or two for the couple of guys to do it... It's easy for us to modify the rosters until we get it right as we have an entire year to devote to the game as we play it... And solely to the "getting ratings right" thing...

EA does a decent job with the ratings... Could do better, but I think they don't have the time or the resources to do it any better. Predicting how rookies will play out is a total crab shoot... Sometimes you win and sometimes you lose...

Maybe they will get it right someday... Until then, we will have to the tweaking ourselves... Don't you people like EA's games??? I like them... Take the 350 guys that play in the NBA and get their numbers right, that will never succeed.

I never like seeing just bashing because of bashing... That's like hitting a guy on the face and knocking him down and then adding insult to injury start kicking him on the head... That would be about what you are doing. This is so unnecesary because this won't change a thing.

Get PCs and update the roster from NLSC! That's the way to go about these things...

I was thinking that if EA can make the ratings more realistics, NLSC patchers don't need to do as much work as they should have except for rosters, court, jersey, face and shoes updates.

Someone obviously has way too much time on their hands...

I definately did, I actually don't believe I wasted about 30 mins typing all that out while talking on MSN

The ratings are quickly fixed by downloading the newest roster release from NLSC... So they really aren't a problem.

For the most part they are....

You guys forget that the ratings are from 0-99... So actually 60 in something is already way above league average. And average shooting rating should be 45-55... Ever wonder why guys like Fisher and Ward and the rest of the pedestrian point guards put up so many points and put down some crazy shots??? Maybe it's due to the fact that someone has bumped up their shooting ratings to 70...

I'm not complaining about overall ratings, who cares about that, but individual things need to be fixed. I don't see a need to make excuses for them about this. With your Fisher example, it's not like that, I have Fisher being able to shoot three's [he has the icon], and when I play the Warriors he only takes open shots, he already had an 87 FG rating which I actually lowered. If it was like that it would just be stupid, so a role player shooter would either have to suck at shooting which then doesn't make him a shooter, or if he could shoot he'd have to become a shot jacker. I thought the primacy rating was there for a reason?

Also Charlie Ward had a 61 FG in the orignial ratings, and an 85 3PT......

Doing the ratings is hard... Balancing the ratings so that simulation produces realistic scores is even harder. Who decides this guy is a better shooter than this guy when the other shoots .452 and the other .448... Does that really reflect anything? Does it make the .452 a better shooter, or does is simply make him a smarter shooter? Does the other guy go to the rim more and the other guy is more of a shooter...

It's actually not that hard. A players FG% in simulation is determined by a combination of their FG rating, and their inside scoring rating. Also those other things are figured out by watching and knowing basketball, which they should do as they make a basketball videogame.

You think you could do the ratings better??? It's a humongous task that would take the entire year of playtesting to get it right... They probably have very limited resources to get it done and probably a week or two for the couple of guys to do it... It's easy for us to modify the rosters until we get it right as we have an entire year to devote to the game as we play it... And solely to the "getting ratings right" thing...

I can do about 3 teams a day, do Dynasty or Season, and get the simulation stats right too, while actually having them play realistically on the court and being able to do what they can do. I don't spend the whole day on it, but about 3 hours on days I have a lot of time, I can do 2-3 teams. If they have 2 weeks, and are working on this all day [it won't even be one person], they should be able to do the whole league no problem.

Their's a difference between not being able to, and just not wanting to.

Get PCs and update the roster from NLSC! That's the way to go about these things...

Yes, that is always nice, but getting simple things wrong like a PG being able to dribble is just stupid. I was playing with San Antonio and I try to put the ball through the legs with Udrih and I get a turnover.

Also not everyone likes playing on PC. For me it's not a problem, I update all my ratings on XBox, and I sometimes get the game on PC [01,03,04]and the game plays great, but it takes time, and it's annoying to see them get stupid little things wrong that if they actually had someone that knows basketball should be obvious.

Look at Luke Jackson - shooter, 67 FG, 58 3PT, 36 inch vertical, 49 jump rating, has ability to play PG because of handles, 42 dribble, 57 speed, 46 quickness [he has the speed and quickness of the slowest centers] Their's just no excuse for this one, that's just stupidness....

Your Luke Jackson thingy... A rookie... Impossible to say how much of the summer stuff is just hype and how much of his shooting is better due to not playing in a real game and playing against rookies and NBA-wannabes...

Primacy is there for a reason, but the problem with this is that it changes automatically when you get new players etc. So actually your top notch shooting guard may fall to third string shooter when you trade your power forward... Which is just wrong. The primacy shouldn't change as much. Like someone said last winter when they traded Doug Christie from Sactown to Orlando and he started scoring 20 points per game... Which is just wrong. Christie is not a scorer and would never score 20 unless he was the only guy on the team that could actually shoot.

You should be able to name your first gunner, your second gunner etc. if you would want to. I've T-Mac on one dynasty and he's taking like 14 shots a game when he should be taking 20 shots per game... All this because I made some trades... His scoring average dropped from 23 to 18. I would like to get him back on the 20 shot pace no matter who plays with him...

Marciej Lampe

Wohoo, I played with him from '94-'96 back here in Sweden on a team called "Polisen"

Also I agree with the whole ratings issue. Too many players fail to fill their role in the Live-series. Somehow they need to fix it, that'll only add to the realism..

Your Luke Jackson thingy... A rookie... Impossible to say how much of the summer stuff is just hype and how much of his shooting is better due to not playing in a real game and playing against rookies and NBA-wannabes...

Primacy is there for a reason, but the problem with this is that it changes automatically when you get new players etc. So actually your top notch shooting guard may fall to third string shooter when you trade your power forward... Which is just wrong. The primacy shouldn't change as much. Like someone said last winter when they traded Doug Christie from Sactown to Orlando and he started scoring 20 points per game... Which is just wrong. Christie is not a scorer and would never score 20 unless he was the only guy on the team that could actually shoot.

You should be able to name your first gunner, your second gunner etc. if you would want to. I've T-Mac on one dynasty and he's taking like 14 shots a game when he should be taking 20 shots per game... All this because I made some trades... His scoring average dropped from 23 to 18. I would like to get him back on the 20 shot pace no matter who plays with him...

That's just an overall ratings problem, Christie can't even shoot in the game.

My Luke Jackson thing what? So because he's a rookie he also losses all his vertical, becomes unable to dribble, and becomes extremely slow even though he's a SG/SF? You didn't justify anything with that response, I can understand the shooting, okay, that's fine, what about the rest? Even if his handles aren't as good on the NBA level, it still wouldn't be 49 which means he can't even do moves without commiting a turnover. Your vertical doesn't decrease when you get to the NBA, and you also don't become slow.

You should be able to name your first gunner, your second gunner etc. if you would want to. I've T-Mac on one dynasty and he's taking like 14 shots a game when he should be taking 20 shots per game... All this because I made some trades... His scoring average dropped from 23 to 18. I would like to get him back on the 20 shot pace no matter who plays with him...

I agree, the game has many things missing in it, but really primacy should take care of this. I think it actually woeked better in 2004, and got worse in 2005. Even on the norm, players don't average what they're supposed to. Me with my experimenting, I put everyone on Iverson's teamdown to 0 primacy, while he had 99 primacy and 99 OAwareness, and he still only averaged bout 23 PPG. Then I tried changing the OAwareness to different amounts, but his averages still sucked.

I agree, the game has many things missing in it, but really primacy should take care of this. I think it actually woeked better in 2004, and got worse in 2005. Even on the norm, players don't average what they're supposed to. Me with my experimenting, I put everyone on Iverson's teamdown to 0 primacy, while he had 99 primacy and 99 OAwareness, and he still only averaged bout 23 PPG. Then I tried changing the OAwareness to different amounts, but his averages still sucked.

They should just get rid of the whole primacy rating and instead incorperate a 1-5/1-10 scale. Since there is only 5 guys from a team on court at once, if you had a 1 you'd be the number one gunner. I guess that would be a bit complicated when the bench players enter the game, but still, I think they should revamp the primacy rating system.

Primacy is actually fine, they just have to make it work properly.

Primacy is actually fine, they just have to make it work properly.

Yeah, well either way is fine, I'm just sick of Kobe averaging 20ppg

Primacy is working sort of fine... The well known problem is the certain maximums that players average over the season with simulation. The 23ppg that would seem to be the maximum is just way too low... I believe that Amare could average over 30 or even over 35 points next season and there is no way the game can reflect that. Even if you up the maximum...

The maximum should be like 35 or something... This is where the system is still to dependant of pre-set maximum values... There really shouldn't be any maximums or minimums. An excellent player in a very bad team should be scoring around 30 points... He should be taking 30 shots per game too.

The game distributes too many shots for the small forwards and point guards... I had an average point guard with a very low offensive awereness and he still occationally took more shots than my super-star scoring shooting guard.

I've also been noticing that a good defender can hold the best offensive stars in the game to taking like 8 shots in the entire game and still play 35 to 40 minutes... A guy like Kobe or TMac will take his 15-20 shots against anyone... Against Bowen and against Nash... The difference is whether he makes 12 or 7 shots... Against Bowen, he might score 7/15 and against Nash he might score 11/15 shots... It all comes down to shot selection and losing your defender without attracting too much help defense.

The simulation system needs to be redone from the ground up... The current system can't possibly handle the changes that happen in the NBA from season to season... It needs something else.

I definately agree, I've felt this way for a while, the max shouldn't be set by who averaged the most PPG last season, it should just be something like 28 shots PER 40 minutes for a guy with 99 Primacy. So their wouldn't be anyone in the current NBA with a 99, the only guys with 99 would be Wilt and Jordan. Guys like Iverson, Tmac, Kobe would have a 90, and that should have them taking about 22 shots PER 40. They also need to tweak the foul drawing, their actually needs to be a foul drawing rating.

I made a post about it before: Using PER 48 minutes, it would go something like this:

99 - 19 FT's per 48 minutes - No one
97 - 17 FT's per 48 minutes - No one
95 - 15 FT's per 48 minutes - Shaq would have this
93 - 13 FT's per 48 minutes - Maggette, Amare
91 - 12 FT's per 48 minutes - Wade, Iverson, Kobe
89 - 11 FT's per 48 minutes - Dirk, Pierce
87 - 10 FT's per 48 minutes - Carmelo, Francis, Duncan, Arenas
84 - 9 FT's per 48 minutes - Ilguaskas, Yao, Ginobili, Hughes, Lebron, Bosh
80 - 8 FT's per 48 minutes - DMase, KG, E.Curry, M.Jackson, McGrady, Okur, Marbury, Vince, Brand, Sweetney, Corliss
75 - 7 FT's per 48 mins - Dwight, Rip, S.Hunter, Boozer, Chandler, Daniels etc etc
70 - 6 FT's per 48 mins - Whoever

Let's just hope for improved simulation stats in the Next Gen, b/c the chances of it happening in Live 06 on Current Gen is not that high.

If we could easily edit those maximums it wouldn't be so bad, though it does leave console gamers behind. It would be really useful for old season roster patches though.

Having been doing the ratings for roster patches for many years now, I can tell you it isn't always easy. With some players, there's a lot of guesswork and generic rating assignments. Fortunately I have the luxury of being able to keep releasing updates with everyone's feedback.

the roster releases dont work for console verisions so the ratings system is a problem