Official Nats on FIFA 2003 Ratings Thread.

Discussion in 'Games' started by eric515, Nov 11, 2002.

  1. eric515

    eric515 Member

    May 8, 2002
    Atlanta, GA
    Club:
    Aston Villa FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Since I haven't had a chance to buy or rent FIFA 2003 yet...just wondering what the ratings are for some of the players. I heard already that Pope is a 42 (gimme a break) Sanneh and 84, and JOB an 87. What are the other ratings?
     
  2. art

    art Member

    Jul 2, 2000
    Portland OR
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Let's see: from top to bottom,

    O'Brien 87
    Sanneh 84
    Regis 79
    Reyna 79
    Friedel 78
    Agoos 78
    Cobi 76
    Wolff 73
    Donovan 71
    Armas 69
    Mathis 69
    Kreis 69
    Berhalter 69
    Moore 67
    Cherundolo 66
    Mastroeni 64
    Keller 61
    DaMarcus 59
    Lewis 52
    Pope 42

    There's few explanations I can think of for Pope's 42 (or Eddie's 52 for that matter)...either EA hates him for some reason, or they just screwed up. And with no creation centre to fix the rating, you just have to sub the guy out, because he sucks.

    Oh well. It's just a video game.
     
  3. Auriaprottu

    Auriaprottu Member+

    Atlanta Damn United
    Apr 1, 2002
    The back of the bus
    Club:
    Atlanta
    Nat'l Team:
    --other--
    There are eight categories (Speed, Fitness, Shot, Pass, Agility, Strength, Ball Control and Tackle) each with a maximum of 10 points. But players ratings seem to be based on a maximum of 100 points.

    So this brings us to:
    1) What criteria are EA using to determine how many of the remaining 20 points a given player deserves, and

    2) Why hasn't there been full documentation of the criteria?

    It's one thing to add some subjective or non-quantifiable qualities when assigning ratings to a player or team. It's another thing entirely to do so without full disclosure and an explanation. In a nutshell, EA has refused to account for 20% of its evaluating criteria. This might be okay if the most recent World Cup were taken into account when assigning ratings to teams, but that hasn't been done.

    Portugal, despite having great players, isn't much of a team. Yet Portugal and Spain (another classic nonachiever) have the same team rating as Brasil. The USA, despite having no true stars, outdid Portugal, France and Argentina, and are level with England, Italy and Spain. All six of these teams are loaded with superstars, but none were able to advance any further that the USA. The USA's (or any other team's) rating should include an attribute that reflects its ability to win.

    If EA wanted to make the most effective use of "intangibles", the team rating would be the place to do it- not with individual players.
     
  4. eric515

    eric515 Member

    May 8, 2002
    Atlanta, GA
    Club:
    Aston Villa FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Unbelievable...like I said, Euro bias...Regis is one of the worst defenders we have, and Donovan was a stud in the World Cup and MLS, yet he is only a 71, which I believe is a downgrade from an 81 or 82 in teh World Cup game...

    I am wondering, though, since someone said that the ratings scale is based on a 1-10 scale, as opposed to the former 1-7 scale, if that is the major reason for the complete redoing of many of these ratings...
     
  5. Playable Back

    Playable Back New Member

    Apr 26, 2002
    w/o the creation mode I just say to hell with it and I play with my favorite players no matter their rating. Despite the low rating there's no way I'm taking Pope out and putting Regis in instead...

    Maybe the 42 was intended for Agoos but they just made a goof.
     

Share This Page