NHL 07 and NHL 2k7 IMPRESSIONS

[billharris44]

Okay guys, based on your collective recommendations, this is what I'm going to try:
--Aggression at to zero.
--Hook effectiveness at max.
--Poke check at max.
--shot block at max.

[billharris44]

I played two games with 5-minute periods and here's what I saw with the adjusted slider settings.

If you max out everything that can benefit the defense (hook, poke check, shot block) and turn puck control to zero, it's not nearly as easy to skate (literally) circles around the defense, because if they even barely touch you, you're probably going to lose the puck. That's not an ideal solution, but it certainly plays better than being able to skate laps.

I also didn't see three guys chasing me as often, so maybe the aggressiveness slider being set to zero does have an effect.

Could I still skate laps? Yes, but significantly less frequently. A bigger problem, to me, is that I can still generate point-blank shots way too easily. And the CPU still doesn't pass the puck more than once or twice (and twice only rarely) in the offensive end.

It's an improvement, though, and I'm going to post these notes in the blog for anyone who wants to try out the game.

[DivotMaker]

Here is a link the the sliders I have been using in All Star on 10 minute periods.

http://forums.operationsports.com/vBull ... p?t=183270

[Jimmydeicide]

I find poke check at max is to much, it makes it easier to break up the play and you want to encourage the AI to set up as much as you can so i play with it at 3 . Im still messing with the hook/pin setting , im trying to get more pins.

I did just get wooped 5-2 by Minnesota with offensive time just about even. Of course they out shot me but it was nice not being in their end all night.

[TRI]

I played two games with 5-minute periods and here's what I saw with the adjusted slider settings.

If you max out everything that can benefit the defense (hook, poke check, shot block) and turn puck control to zero, it's not nearly as easy to skate (literally) circles around the defense, because if they even barely touch you, you're probably going to lose the puck. That's not an ideal solution, but it certainly plays better than being able to skate laps.

I also didn't see three guys chasing me as often, so maybe the aggressiveness slider being set to zero does have an effect.

Could I still skate laps? Yes, but significantly less frequently. A bigger problem, to me, is that I can still generate point-blank shots way too easily. And the CPU still doesn't pass the puck more than once or twice (and twice only rarely) in the offensive end.

It's an improvement, though, and I'm going to post these notes in the blog for anyone who wants to try out the game.

The CPU offense is something that needs to be improved next year. I agree they rarely pass the puck or cycle in the offensive end and they often shoot from bad angles. Still it is better than past EA hockey games even with these issues.

[billharris44]

I totally agree about it being better than the last few years. If you compare it to EA's last few efforts on Xbox/PS2, the 360 version is a significant improvement, at least to me.

[MizzouRah]

I totally agree about it being better than the last few years. If you compare it to EA's last few efforts on Xbox/PS2, the 360 version is a significant improvement, at least to me.

and this..

As for me, the A.I. is a gamekiller. I didn't lose a dollar, though, thanks to Gamefly

Too bad, because this is something I disagree with you on. This game is great gaming and it's about time.

[Wilk5280]

I think I've already played NHL 2K7 more online than any previous hockey game I've owned. I am just having a blast with this game and it's some of the most fun I"ve had in a long time.

[billharris44]

I totally agree about it being better than the last few years. If you compare it to EA's last few efforts on Xbox/PS2, the 360 version is a significant improvement, at least to me.

and this..

As for me, the A.I. is a gamekiller. I didn't lose a dollar, though, thanks to Gamefly

Too bad, because this is something I disagree with you on. This game is great gaming and it's about time.

Whoa--add the paragraph above the "gamekiller" line, which is this:
"And if the A.I. doesn't bother you, then I think you'd really enjoy this game--it's very pretty and the commentary is fantastic. It certainly has its moments." Just cherry-picking that one line is very misleading.

I do think it's an improvement over the last few versions, because they were complete crap. But the offensive/defensive A.I., like I wrote, is a gamekiller for me. It's entirely possible for a game to be better than the last version and still have significant problems.

I'm not subjectively maligning the A.I. I documented what I wrote about. I didn't make some extravagant claim out of thin air, and I'm certainly not the only one who's noticed the same problems.

For anyone who is enjoying the game, great. I didn't even start the discussion about what I wrote--I just came in on it because you guys had questions. I just write what I see, and everyone has different standards for what they consider acceptable or fun.

[MizzouRah]

I totally agree about it being better than the last few years. If you compare it to EA's last few efforts on Xbox/PS2, the 360 version is a significant improvement, at least to me.

and this..

As for me, the A.I. is a gamekiller. I didn't lose a dollar, though, thanks to Gamefly

Too bad, because this is something I disagree with you on. This game is great gaming and it's about time.

Whoa--add the paragraph above the "gamekiller" line, which is this:
"And if the A.I. doesn't bother you, then I think you'd really enjoy this game--it's very pretty and the commentary is fantastic. It certainly has its moments." Just cherry-picking that one line is very misleading.

I do think it's an improvement over the last few versions, because they were complete crap. But the offensive/defensive A.I., like I wrote, is a gamekiller for me. It's entirely possible for a game to be better than the last version and still have significant problems.

I'm not subjectively maligning the A.I. I documented what I wrote about. I didn't make some extravagant claim out of thin air, and I'm certainly not the only one who's noticed the same problems.

For anyone who is enjoying the game, great. I didn't even start the discussion about what I wrote--I just came in on it because you guys had questions. I just write what I see, and everyone has different standards for what they consider acceptable or fun.

I just lost 5-3 against the Blackhawks and wow, was it a fun game. Bill, I follow your impressions on every game, but you're wrong. How is the AI a gamekiller for you? Play the game for what it is, a fast paced hockey game. Seriously, can you win every game on AS defaults? You make it seem like this game sucks, and it's farrrrrr from that.

[billharris44]

I think I've explained pretty thoroughly why the A.I. is a gamekiller for me--the CPU makes very few passes in the offensive zone and they have terrible positioning on defense. Look, I could put together more data on this--I could record the number of point-blank shots I get (many), I could record more data on how the CPU doesn't pass in the offensive zone--but it wouldn't matter, because I would just be showing in more detail why the A.I. is weak and you'd be saying I was wrong. It's just going to go in circles.

Like I said, I documented what I wrote about--I explained in detail the guidelines I used. I was as specific as possible so that people would understand what I perceived to be the problems with the game. I don't know many people who write about sports games who take the time to collect data to verify that they're not being unfairly subjective.

[10spro]

It's unfortunate that the game jumps from 5 minutes to 10. Ten for me it's a bit too long and ideally a 7 or 8 minute period would have had a normal range of shots in today's NHL, say from 25 to 35 shots with the sliders that I am using. Playing ten minutes has an unrealistic amount of hits and shots.

And in real life that depends on which building the hockey game it's being played, here in Vancouver a shot is counted when a team has a realistic chance of scoring while in other arenas they count for anything that the goalie touches whether or not the shot has a way of making it to the net as long as it's directed towards the goalkeeper, and I think EA chose the latter.

Also with penalties maxed out, I would like to see more penalties called, especially 5 on 3's which happens often today and not enough to my liking in the game. Still, EA's product is going the right way IMO, despite the light choppiness and transition from offense to defense, they have made great strides in comparison to their previous versions of the game.

[RallyMonkey]

I could record the number of point-blank shots I get (many),

Bill,

As others have said i respect many of your opinions on games, not 07 necessarily but i also agree that it's not for everyone. My questions about the above is your definition of "point-blank". Are you defining them in terms of the scoring area, which is a box (more a rectangle actually) from the goal line out to the face off dot, across the slot to the other face off dot, then back down to the goal line. Anything outside there is not really "point blank". Sure goals can and do go in from outside that area, but on average in a 30ish shot game, how many of those 30 are coming from that area? I ask because if your making your way there to easily then perhaps a shift to Superstar is in order. I've been playing that level for 25 or so games now (after a similar amount on All-Star) and while i can get into the scoring area, it takes a lot more effort to do so.

I'm also curious as to your record. While wins and losses in video games certainly don't tell the whole story (and often not even half the story), are you winning more than losing? Again if you're smoking the CPU then Superstar may be for you.

[billharris44]

I could record the number of point-blank shots I get (many),

Bill,
My questions about the above is your definition of "point-blank". Are you defining them in terms of the scoring area, which is a box (more a rectangle actually) from the goal line out to the face off dot, across the slot to the other face off dot, then back down to the goal line.

Yes. I assumed that was the standard definition. I haven't played on All-Star--I started off on Superstar. And no, I don't win every game, because I don't shoot well with the analog stick. But I'm getting a ton of (per the definition) point-blank scoring chances, and I'm not claiming I'm great at hockey games--the defense is just out of position.

If I can get the blog finished early enough, I'll play a game this afternoon and actually record the number of shots I get that are point-blank. That's the one thing I've said about the A.I. that I didn't actually collect numbers on. I'll even try a second game on All-Star if I have time.

[Dave]

It's unfortunate that the game jumps from 5 minutes to 10. Ten for me it's a bit too long and ideally a 7 or 8 minute period would have had a normal range of shots in today's NHL, say from 25 to 35 shots with the sliders that I am using. Playing ten minutes has an unrealistic amount of hits and shots.

This is by far my biggest complaint about NHL 07. I just don't want to spend 40 minutes or so playing each game, but the five-minute periods just don't allow enough time for a "full" hockey game to unfold.

Since I'm not nearly into the sim style as much as some, I might try just bumping the game speed back up from one click to see how it goes.

[RallyMonkey]

Yes. I assumed that was the standard definition. I haven't played on All-Star--I started off on Superstar. And no, I don't win every game, because I don't shoot well with the analog stick. But I'm getting a ton of (per the definition) point-blank scoring chances, and I'm not claiming I'm great at hockey games--the defense is just out of position.

If I can get the blog finished early enough, I'll play a game this afternoon and actually record the number of shots I get that are point-blank. That's the one thing I've said about the A.I. that I didn't actually collect numbers on. I'll even try a second game on All-Star if I have time.

Great, look forward to it. As i said, i have had success but by no means to the degree that you mention. I do think my sliders are different that yours which could be the reason.

[ScoopBrady]

You can't accurately test the game with a handful of games. That's not a large enough sample size for the statistics. What teams are you using when you test the game? What are their offensive and defensive rankings? Do you exclusively skate around the offensive zone or do you actually try to set up your plays? How many goals are you scoring per game? You say you're not winning consistently, despite the bad AI, because you're not the greatest with shot aiming. Play a handful of games with auto-aim and report how many goals you're scoring. I'm playing 10-minute periods and neither team gets 30 shots on goal unless we go to overtime. Of my less than 30 shots I'd say a third of them are from what I consider excellent position. I work for every single one of those opportunities too. The AI in this game is clearly not as good as 2k's but when you actually play the game like it's meant to be played it plays a solid game of hockey. If all you're trying to do is prove that you can skate along the boards in the offensive zone you're not playing hockey.

[MizzouRah]

I will agree the defense is not as good as 2k7, but I do think today's hockey game has more scoring opportunities and I do get many good chances when playing 07 - I just don't get good shots as a defender is always there to break it up most of the time or at least lessen my chance at a un-obstructed shot on goal.

Bill does an excellent job at breaking down console games (see NFL 2k5) and I feel kind of odd disagreeing with him on this one.

I guess it's the "fun" factor for me that I don't really see many issues with this game besides CPU hitting and I would like to see more major penalties. I just lost my best goal scorer Bill Guerin to an ankle injury and have to play a month without him. I'm going to have to change my gameplan until his return because player abilities are so noticeable in this game.. and that's refreshing for a hockey game.

[HipE]

I'm playing 5 minute periods using default all star settings right now, with the only change being to max the penalties. I'm not really finding the games to be too short, and my Penguins are leading the league in scoring with 3.6 goals per game. I really like being able to complete a game in 20 minutes, because of that I've been able to get 25 games into my first season already. One thing I'm really enjoying is how much harder road games are than home games. The ratings for teams are significantly different depending on whether they are the home or away team, and you can really tell by the way they play.

[seanmac31]

I'm playing 5 minute periods using default all star settings right now, with the only change being to max the penalties. I'm not really finding the games to be too short, and my Penguins are leading the league in scoring with 3.6 goals per game. I really like being able to complete a game in 20 minutes, because of that I've been able to get 25 games into my first season already. One thing I'm really enjoying is how much harder road games are than home games. The ratings for teams are significantly different depending on whether they are the home or away team, and you can really tell by the way they play.

Agreed. I love being able to rip through a playoff series in one sitting. And the AI tends to be better once you get more comfortable with the game. Early on I was giving up a lot of shots because I was giving the AI players open looks. When there is a shot to be taken, the AI will take it instead of passing around (not true in 2K7), but if the shot isn't there, it will pass the puck around and look for an open shot. At this point I give up somewhere between 6-10 shots per period while playing with 5 minute periods. Works for me.

[billharris44]

You can't accurately test the game with a handful of games. That's not a large enough sample size for the statistics. What teams are you using when you test the game? What are their offensive and defensive rankings? Do you exclusively skate around the offensive zone or do you actually try to set up your plays? How many goals are you scoring per game? You say you're not winning consistently, despite the bad AI, because you're not the greatest with shot aiming. Play a handful of games with auto-aim and report how many goals you're scoring. I'm playing 10-minute periods and neither team gets 30 shots on goal unless we go to overtime. Of my less than 30 shots I'd say a third of them are from what I consider excellent position. I work for every single one of those opportunities too. The AI in this game is clearly not as good as 2k's but when you actually play the game like it's meant to be played it plays a solid game of hockey. If all you're trying to do is prove that you can skate along the boards in the offensive zone you're not playing hockey.

Look, you guys. For one, this is my last post on the subject--if you want to discuss it via e-mail, but this isn't really a discussion of the two games anymore--it's a discussion of what I'm seeing that you guys disagree with, and you're all telling me I'm wrong, even though I'm the only person who's actually took the time to collect data. And I didn't come in here and tell people they shouldn't enjoy the game--I came in to respond to questions you guys had about a blog post.

I don't need more than a handful of games to tell me that the A.I. is bad, Scoop. Bad A.I. is bad A.I.--playing ten more games isn't going to improve it. And I'm not using some kind of exploit or not playing the game the "right" way. I get those point-blank shot because the defense is out of position. I'm not cycling the puck around with four or five passes to get these chances--it's two or three passes, max.

Here are the settings I used for the game I just finished. I played as the Blackhawks against the Sabres. No great offenses, no great defenses, pretty evenly matched teams.
Superstar difficulty
Game speed--1
puck control--1
Fatigue recovery--1
Acceleration--2
Hitting power--3
Aggression--2
Poke effectiveness--5
Pass speed--1
Saucer pass speed--1
Pass interceptions--6
Shot accuracy--4
Shot power--1
Shot block--6
Hook effectiveness--6
Penalties--4
Period Length--10
The "player/goalie advantage screen" was set to 3 (neutral).

I double-checked these settings after I started by pausing the game to verify all of them (except difficulty, which appears to be only selectable before the game starts).

Again, when the CPU is carrying the puck into the offensive zone, they rarely pass before they shoot, or they pass once. They will cycle the puck a bit if they pick up a loose puck in the offensive zone (particularly if they're behind the net or in to deep to immediately shoot), but that cycling is 3-4 passes. On regular offensive plays, though, very little passing and almost all shooting.

On defense, they just don't use good positioning. I had 34 shots in three 10-minute periods--31 were from point-blank range (point-blank as defined in the previous post). There didn't seem to be much reason to take a slapshot from outside because I didn't need to--the three I took were accidents. Yes, I lost the puck in the offensive zone at times--when you max out the defensive settings and lower puck control to 1, it doesn't take much to lose the puck--even a little nudge will do it. But there were still many, many times when I either got behind the net or could skate way too easily in front of the net.

I only won 1-0. How do I only get 1 goal on 30+ point-blank attempts? Because my aiming is crap--I've got the shooting part of the stick down, but aiming with the left stick is something I do terribly. In fact, my goal was sheer luck--the goalie's view was blocked. And I should have given up several goalies, because I gave up some wide-open shots, but my goalie was hot.

I would have considered myself above average at hockey games a few years ago (when I was playing NHL2K3)--I had practiced enough where I generally had excellent defensive positioning and worked to set up shots in the offensive end. But I haven't played a hockey game seriously since then, so I'm not sure I'd even qualify as average now. It's not my superior skill enabling those point-blank shots, and it's not some kind of exotic exploit--it's poor defensive A.I.

Like I said, if any of you guys want to e-mail me and continue this, please do so. But telling me I don't play the game "right" or that I'm harder on EA games is goofy. I'm the guy who spent 200+ hours over two years fixing MVP's broken player progression (and had about a dozen people helping me with testing). I've done slider projects for Madden (once) and NCAA (twice). I've bought Tiger Woods for the PC five years in a row and was in the beta test twice. And I said MLB2K6 was released in the worst condition of any major sports game since the last version of Front Page Sports Football. I praise what I think is good and criticize what I think is bad.

[billharris44]

You can't accurately test the game with a handful of games. That's not a large enough sample size for the statistics. What teams are you using when you test the game? What are their offensive and defensive rankings? Do you exclusively skate around the offensive zone or do you actually try to set up your plays? How many goals are you scoring per game? You say you're not winning consistently, despite the bad AI, because you're not the greatest with shot aiming. Play a handful of games with auto-aim and report how many goals you're scoring. I'm playing 10-minute periods and neither team gets 30 shots on goal unless we go to overtime. Of my less than 30 shots I'd say a third of them are from what I consider excellent position. I work for every single one of those opportunities too. The AI in this game is clearly not as good as 2k's but when you actually play the game like it's meant to be played it plays a solid game of hockey. If all you're trying to do is prove that you can skate along the boards in the offensive zone you're not playing hockey.

Look, you guys. For one, this is my last post on the subject--if you want to discuss it via e-mail, but this isn't really a discussion of the two games anymore--it's a discussion of what I'm seeing that you guys disagree with, and you're all telling me I'm wrong, even though I'm the only person who's actually took the time to collect data. And I didn't come in here and tell people they shouldn't enjoy the game--I came in to respond to questions you guys had about a blog post.

I don't need more than a handful of games to tell me that the A.I. is bad, Scoop. Bad A.I. is bad A.I.--playing ten more games isn't going to improve it. And I'm not using some kind of exploit or not playing the game the "right" way. I get those point-blank shot because the defense is out of position. I'm not cycling the puck around with four or five passes to get these chances--it's two or three passes, max.

Here are the settings I used for the game I just finished. I played as the Blackhawks against the Sabres. No great offenses, no great defenses, pretty evenly matched teams.
Superstar difficulty
Game speed--1
puck control--1
Fatigue recovery--1
Acceleration--2
Hitting power--3
Aggression--2
Poke effectiveness--5
Pass speed--1
Saucer pass speed--1
Pass interceptions--6
Shot accuracy--4
Shot power--1
Shot block--6
Hook effectiveness--6
Penalties--4
Period Length--10
The "player/goalie advantage screen" was set to 3 (neutral).

I double-checked these settings after I started by pausing the game to verify all of them (except difficulty, which appears to be only selectable before the game starts).

Again, when the CPU is carrying the puck into the offensive zone, they rarely pass before they shoot, or they pass once. They will cycle the puck a bit if they pick up a loose puck in the offensive zone (particularly if they're behind the net or in to deep to immediately shoot), but that cycling is 3-4 passes. On regular offensive plays, though, very little passing and almost all shooting.

On defense, they just don't use good positioning. I had 34 shots in three 10-minute periods--31 were from point-blank range (point-blank as defined in the previous post). There didn't seem to be much reason to take a slapshot from outside because I didn't need to--the three I took were accidents. Yes, I lost the puck in the offensive zone at times--when you max out the defensive settings and lower puck control to 1, it doesn't take much to lose the puck--even a little nudge will do it. But there were still many, many times when I either got behind the net or could skate way too easily in front of the net.

I only won 1-0. How do I only get 1 goal on 30+ point-blank attempts? Because my aiming is crap--I've got the shooting part of the stick down, but aiming with the left stick is something I do terribly. In fact, my goal was sheer luck--the goalie's view was blocked. And I should have given up several goals, because I gave up some wide-open shots, but my goalie was hot.

I would have considered myself above average at hockey games a few years ago (when I was playing NHL2K3)--I had practiced enough where I generally had excellent defensive positioning and worked to set up shots in the offensive end. But I haven't played a hockey game seriously since then, so I'm not sure I'd even qualify as average now. It's not my superior skill enabling those point-blank shots, and it's not some kind of exotic exploit--it's poor defensive A.I.

Like I said, if any of you guys want to e-mail me and continue this, please do so. But telling me I don't play the game "right" or that I'm harder on EA games is goofy. I'm the guy who spent 200+ hours over two years fixing MVP's broken player progression (and had about a dozen people helping me with testing). I've done slider projects for Madden (once) and NCAA (twice). I've bought Tiger Woods for the PC five years in a row and was in the beta test twice. And I said MLB2K6 was released in the worst condition of any major sports game since the last version of Front Page Sports Football. I praise what I think is good and criticize what I think is bad.

[ScoopBrady]

Sorry I got your dander up Bill. I was just trying to point out that you can't get any sort of good statistical base off of a handful of games. The standard deviation would be too big. I'm not a big fan of reporting numbers for one or two games because the sample size is too small. I'm also not trying to say that you don't know how to play hockey games, I'm trying to say that if you keep doing the same thing over and over you're not really playing normally. Again, I apologize if it seemed like you were under attack by me.

I was able to post a new video of NHL 07 on All Star difficulty with the sliders I use. I skated up the left wing boards a couple of times only to be chased and met in the corner each time. I show my sliders at the beginning of the video and just show the game straight through for about 5 minutes or so. Its Rangers at Devils with me controlling the Devils.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyxJYphxCYw

BTW, I cut it off before the Rangers scored 3 goals on me before the period ended (one off a mistake in my defensive zone, one off a nice one-timer, and one off a rebound).

[Danimal]

I feel bad that this thread has gone down this road, i fear it is my fault for saying Bill is generally harder on EA games. While i won't change that statement, I will say I don't believe for a second he has an agenda against EA he just judges them a little harder and frankly he has that right. They have the resources to deliver better products then what we are getting in some sports areas (hello madden).

Everyone has a game, TV show, band etc. that they enjoy over something else and no one is beyond bias when other people aren't as excited as you are about said product. It's natural for people to feel the need to defend their tastes.

What is really puzeling however is how people can claim Bill is wrong, or doesn't play the game right. What gives anyone the right to determine what someone elses standards should be? A guy i work with thinks Judge Dread is the best movie ever, we all kid him about it, but to tell him he is wrong and has bad tatse is out of line and that is what is happening here IMO.

Anyway I didn't mean to rant or get preachy, I just wanted to apologize to Bill if I caused this thread to sprial down this rotten path.

[Leebo33]

What is really puzeling however is how people can claim Bill is wrong, or doesn't play the game right. What gives anyone the right to determine what someone elses standards should be?

Here's how. He makes the statement, "And on offense, if the CPU makes more than two passes before shooting, consider yourself as the witness to an improbable and miraculous event." For one thing, just the tone of the statement makes it sound biased rather than just analyzing and providing data and the results. If you are trying to be taken seriously as a tester then you have to present the results in the same manner. If I'm auditing and presesented my results to management in a sarcastic tone then I wouldn't be taken seriously. I'm not saying that Bill can't be sarcastic or write in any manner, but he can't expect us to take the results seriously either just because he wrote some numbers down.

Besides, if you look at Scoop's short video at about the 7:20-7:30 mark the CPU attempts 5 passes. Even if you don't count the failed centering pass that hits the back of the net and start the counting over again, then you have the pass to the right boards, the pass back behind the net, and then the intercepted centering pass.

If you make definitive statements and provide numbers, it's pretty easy to refute the results. I'm using his standards and it took me one random video to find the miraculous event he describes. In my games, I see plenty of CPU passing and I have probably had sequences where there have been up to 7 or 8 passes before a shot. Is it perfect? Absolutely not, but I don't think anyone is saying it is.