DDA is real

jimshredder said:

I have looked it up

While DDA can boost fixed ratings such as speed, it can also boost not fixed RNG ratings to occur more often then they should

One element of DDA is targeted RNG

If you have a Dlineman with 0 abilities going  against a secure protector/All Day Olineman, the chance of them shedding  vs blocked is not fixed - not 0% or 100% - its somewhere in the middle, hence RNG - its random each play - and has a small change of happening

I would think a non ability DLineman would shed a secure protector/all day Olienman maybe 5% of the time

However DDA can make this DLineman with no abilities shed about 50% or more of the time (its probability increases)- but its still RNG based - not 100% certain

.

Almost all abilities in madden and now RNG based - occuring a random probability - however DDA can make this probability occur more often for your opponent and less for you

.

Look at playing against All Madden difficulty vs Rookie as a prime example of how the same OVR player ratings produce higher RNG outcomes - that is shifting the favor to your opponent on All Madden

sorry, what source was there for linemen shedding 50% of the time just to benefit someone? Or is it just the anecdote thing again

elmango30 said:

did you link à source to the resource intensivity claim ? I didn’t see

My point is largely that I can say all sorts of stuff and then say ah but I wasnt proven wrong in court - doesn’t make it true. 

Anecdotes are not facts, and there is a confirmation bias involved - youll remember your dropped picks more than your opponents’

I haven't disputed anything you've said about bias. On the other hand, there's no conclusive proof that the algorithms do not slant for or against users in particular contexts. The dropping of a lawsuit wasn't proof of anything.

Lawyers don't publicize that they routinely tell clients, "This will cost you more than you'll recover." I also didn't state it as a matter of fact, I merely indicated it was likely. For myself, I'm absolutely certain that's what happened, if for no reason other than the technical complexity of proving such a case, the likelihood that damages awarded wouldn't be significant even if the claim was proven, and my own experience with the legal system. I have yet to be party to a legal claim, criminal or civil, that proved that "truth" was what everyone in the room was after.

droblunts313 said:

Look up the difference between RNG and DDA. DDA is not in online gameplay. It’s been proven in court.

This isn't true, and also you think EA couldn't pay their way out of this? You're crazy lol

elmango30 said:

sorry, what source was there for linemen shedding 50% of the time just to benefit someone? Or is it just the anecdote thing again

Its simply a guess based on my gameplay expereince 

Obviously EA doesnt reveal their exact RNG/DDA probabilities, they probably keep them locked in a digital Safe somewhere

phatalerror said:

I haven't disputed anything you've said about bias. On the other hand, there's no conclusive proof that the algorithms do not slant for or against users in particular contexts. The dropping of a lawsuit wasn't proof of anything.

Lawyers don't publicize that they routinely tell clients, "This will cost you more than you'll recover." I also didn't state it as a matter of fact, I merely indicated it was likely. For myself, I'm absolutely certain that's what happened, if for no reason other than the technical complexity of proving such a case, the likelihood that damages awarded wouldn't be significant even if the claim was proven, and my own experience with the legal system. I have yet to be party to a legal claim, criminal or civil, that proved that "truth" was what everyone in the room was after.

Right, but “no proof it doesn’t exist” is a logical fallacy.

elmango30 said:

Right, but “no proof it doesn’t exist” is a logical fallacy.

Absence of coherent, logical arguments to the contrary. How about that?

The arguments that DDA doesn't exist are super-weak. Like, shield-of-disbelief weak.

phatalerror said:

Absence of coherent, logical arguments to the contrary. How about that?

The arguments that DDA doesn't exist are super-weak. Like, shield-of-disbelief weak.

I actually believe quite the contrary.  I think the arguments that DDA does exist are super-weak and a shield-of-excuse on why people lose games.  The burden of proof is on the accuser.  I have not seen nor heard a compelling example ever that in Madden there is DDA.

whiplash13 said:

I actually believe quite the contrary.  I think the arguments that DDA does exist are super-weak and a shield-of-excuse on why people lose games.  The burden of proof is on the accuser.  I have not seen nor heard a compelling example ever that in Madden there is DDA.

Most popular streamers who play the game much more than me, PopStranger, Chuflocka, Hexied, Dyl, Throne have made claims in videos there is DDA and I have seem obvious examples where they lose games they should have won because of DDA or targeted RNG against them

Obviously i dont remember the exact video and dont watch all their stuff, mostly just a few sporadically but have heard them mention it mulitple times

Crab5 said:

This isn't true, and also you think EA couldn't pay their way out of this? You're crazy lol

They might have paid their way out, no one will ever know. But I’m still thinking logically and using the facts that we have and I’m not going to let emotions decide for me. It just blows my mind that 1000’s of people play this game and know one has the slightest bit of evidence. Trust me there are times when I play and I’m wondering why tf did that just happen. I think people need to realize making online sports games is harder than people think. We will never get a perfect game. There’s too many variables for everything to go the way it should. DDA is not the reason you dropped a pick or fumbled the ball. 

You might think I’m crazy and that’s fine. I think you’re crazy for thinking something is there and can’t provide any evidence what’s so ever. That’s crazy lol

whiplash13 said:

That is correct there never was a court judgement, the case was dropped before going to court.

• EA provided plaintiffs with detailed technical information + direct access to engineers. The plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the case in early 2021 after verification.
• EA's public statement (still on their site): "We do not use any scripting or 'Dynamic Difficulty Adjustment' (DDA) or anything similar that would automatically adjust the difficulty of gameplay in FIFA, Madden and NHL Ultimate Team matches." They add: "While EA does own a patent for DDA technology, that technology never was in FIFA, Madden or NHL, and never will be. We would not use DDA technology to give players an advantage or disadvantage in online multiplayer modes in any of our games and we absolutely do not have it in FIFA, Madden or NHL."

If DDA is in online gameplay can you show me how it works? Do you have any clips that prove DDA or maybe some paperwork from the development team or something? How can you say something is there but you can show any proof?

Buccs4047 said:

you are correct. It's 100% real.

100% correct? Really? Can you show me where it is in the game? Do you have some clips that prove it or maybe documents from the development team? I would love to see how it works in an online games.

whiplash13 said:

I actually believe quite the contrary.  I think the arguments that DDA does exist are super-weak and a shield-of-excuse on why people lose games.  The burden of proof is on the accuser.  I have not seen nor heard a compelling example ever that in Madden there is DDA.

Congrats on the dump truck.  I knew I recognized the name.

phatalerror said:

Look at how the game worked this year, and tell me why the folks at EA responsible for the statement you quote have any basis for confidence in their software engineers.

They can't patch the most fundamentally simple bugs without needing months to do so. Some go right through the entire iteration of the current-year Madden.

I'm also not arguing that DDA in the iteration specified in EA's patent is what is at work in Madden. Registration of a patent requires a certain meeting a certain technical complexity meriting protection as an intellectual property. Even so, if you have code that evens out random events as observed with sports umpires (evening out a prior bad call as an analogy for weighting the outcome of a random event as more or less probable on the basis of the outcome of an earlier event), or code that factors in ELO in any situation other than the initial matchmaking, that would constitute the dynamic adjusting of difficulty for both users, even if these outcomes aren't the result of an iteration of EA's patented system of DDA.

The people who most vehemently deny the existence of DDA seem to see the concept as an assault on their belief in their own relative skill in the game. But not to worry: Anyone's proficiency at exploiting the holes in Madden's artificial intelligence is generally sufficient to minimize any potential encroachment of DDA or its variants into the results of a game. In theory, DDA would be more significantly manifest in a game involving a relatively high number of randomly-determined events. If you're exploiting coding logic to send in rushers unblocked, throwing to wide-open receivers in the flats, or using cheat boosting, you're inherently reducing the frequency of randomly-determined outcomes, with the effective result that DDA isn't playing heavily into your results.

TL;DR: The problem here is that "DDA" involves more than what is explicitly described in EA's patented system for Dynamic Difficulty Adjustment. Arguments citing the court case involving DDA serve as a red herring for the actual issue.

I mean all you have to do is show some clips or do some research and find some ea documents that explain it being in online games. 

How are you going to sit here and say something is real but then refuse to show any evidence. Do you “think” it’s in online gameplay or do you “know” it’s in online gameplay?

droblunts313 said:

100% correct? Really? Can you show me where it is in the game? Do you have some clips that prove it or maybe documents from the development team? I would love to see how it works in an online games.

EA needs to keep little Johnny and Timmy engaged to the game. There is something in the game that keeps players playing. people don't want to play if they lose all the time. EA makes sure they win a few.  That's also the #1 reason there are a bunch of glitches in the game. EA puts them there for a reason. player engagement.