Placebo
Ԁlɐɔǝqo
Age.
Fifa 11 Xbox 360/PS3
- Thread starter jonneymendoza
- Start date
mfmaxpower
International
- 29 July 2010
Your personal opinions aside, I hope that as a GC and a representative of the community you are not ignoring the massive segment of CM fans who consider re-instituting user-input into the player development system a top priority. From comments made here, at FSB, on the official forums, and elsewhere, it's pretty clear that returning player growth to a more interactive feature is one of the more popular wishes for FIFA 12's CM.
I'm not sure what you mean by "nothing in a game of football should be a given," and I can't even begin to understand after the debacle with growth this year why anyone would be adamant against the return of an optional feature like manual growth. If you didn't like it before you never were forced to use it, and if you're opposing an optional feature just on principle, well ultimately you're just cock-blocking... you don't want to be known as the cock-blocking GC do you!?
Your opposition to re-implementing manual growth is somewhat irrelevant, however, since none of us have been suggesting a return of the old system. While many people on forums have suggested that we'd be in a better situation this year if we had the option of manual growth - a sentiment I agree with considering the poor state of player development in CM, and again because we're talking about what was an optional feature - the more forward thinking of us fans have almost universally suggested a player development system that lies somewhere between the two extremes of no user-input and manual micro-management.
In the end, although ML's player development system (among other features) has been a little "out there" in the past, and often times has more in common with JRPGs than with similar modes in other sports games, PES succeeds where FIFA fails: in building an emotional connection between you and your club, making you care about your players, and ensuring the game mode is about more than just playing match after match after match.
Developing a football video game ultimately is about striking the right balance between fun and realism in both gameplay and the various game modes. When the advocates of ultra-realism in MM/CM get their way, what we get is this year's boring, uncreative, and shallow entry into the series. That's what happens when you focus too much on the realism and strip away all the fantasy, which in the end is what management modes are all about - the fantasy of managing a club, from top to bottom, overseeing transfers, contracts, squad selection, player development, and then controlling them on the pitch. Yet when realism is the sole prism through which CM features are evaluated much of that fantasy is lost - and more importantly the joy, emotion, and connection that comes with it.
The importance of all this is that the frame of reference - the lens through which CM and its various components are evaluated - from which the devs operate from is critical, and a strip-downed, repetitive, and overall lame experience is what results from an incorrect prioritization that emphasized realism at the expense of fun over several years of development.
Was the old scouting feature poorly implemented? Of course. Were all the random mini-events, like your team bus breaking down, that occurred through-out the season a little silly? Yep. Is micro-managing each attribute of your players as if you were God unrealistic. Sure. But features, imperfect as they were, such as these - and there haven't been many to begin with! - are what makes management game modes worth playing and differentiates MM/CM from just playing through an EPL or La Liga season in tournament mode. Further it is the fantasy element that differentiates these modes from the dedicated football manager games - what is more fantasy and unrealistic after all than being able to control the actions of your players on the pitch (rather than allow outcomes to be decided by an engine designed exclusively for simulation)?
We could defend EA by saying these long-gone features were a necessary sacrifice, born out of the realities of the older game code, as MM was recreated into CM... but I think we all know that's just a big pile of horse shit. Not only is the new mode just as error riddled but some of these features, like user input into growth and the mini events, were eliminated after FIFA 09. No, the real crux of the matter is that whoever has been behind the concepts of MM/CM since FIFA 08 (which despite unrealistic transfers and some quirks was the most enjoyable manager mode I've played in FIFA since switching from PES) has operated with a mission to first and foremost create a more realistic game mode - and as I've said, the result is a CM that is devoid of personality, creativity, emotion, and fun. But still with bugs and poorly conceived and written code.
It was not wrong for the devs to focus on realism, such as more realistic transfers, player costs, match times, league outcomes, etc. It was wrong for them to focus only on realism. Many of us, if not most of us, if given the option to trade more realistic player valuations or transfers for FIFA 08's MM, I believe would be open to the idea. After all I still see unrealistic transfers, and we all are familiar with some of the strange issues in the transfer market, like not being able to purchase players listed for loan, but what I don't have are features that connect me to club, that break up the monotony of match after match with nothing to do.
CM's transfer market is the perfect example of why realism shouldn't be the primary focus point for conceiving and designing the mode, because it is an unrealistic expectation in itself - even the best code programmer out there couldn't create a transfer feature (or a growth feature, etc.) that would be a perfect realistic representation of the real world. Emphasizing realism to the exclusion of what is truly important, like making the mode actually fun to play, is the wrong route to take.
I am NOT saying realism shouldn't be a goal or even a priority. I am saying it shouldn't be the goal or the only priority - which I believe it has been since 08 and to the detriment of the game mode.
So if you ask me which I'd prefer, a supposedly realistic player development engine or an unrealistic but optional manual growth feature, I'll take the one that boosts my interactivity with my players, gives me something to do between matches, oh and allows me the option to prevent my starting under-25 CB from decreasing in OVR because the code determining growth thinks that makes sense. Given the option between fun and realism, give me the fun first and then tweak to make it more realistic if necessary, rather than focus on realism and end up giving me neither fun nor realism.
And while making eliminating all unrealistic outcomes a goal will always be unattainable, creating fun features not only is attainable but often times by putting more power into the hands of the gamer the outcomes prove to be more realistic then if left up to the code. Better yet, give the fans the option to create realistic or unrealistic outcomes to suit their individual preferences. Some form of user input into player development is one such feature. And while the return of the old manual growth feature wouldn't be my first option, I still say having that option is better than nothing at all (although XP accumulation may be the bigger problem overall this year?).
It may seem that manual growth is a sore point for me (and it is) but it's not the real issue here, which is that since FIFA 08 the emphasis on making the mode more "realistic" has come at a price in the areas of immersion and enjoyment - a price that is above and beyond the benefits gained from increased realism. While realism should be a goal, by making it the only goal the devs have stripped all the joy that once was there.
Wabak's post above is the perfect example of how a not-quite-realistic feature's benefit can outweigh the cost of a little fantasy for many of us. Is it totally realistic that he was able to manipulate Chicharito's training in such a fashion that he added two new traits to his game after one season? Probably not. But for many fans of ML (or MM/CM) being a part of our players development in any fashion is better than leaving it solely up to the abstract, cold, and inhuman but supposedly realistic game code. I'll take an unrealistic but interactive feature over no user input any day. Ultimately, the goal for development should not be either realism or fantasy but both. The best design would be one that allows for us to have a say in its outcomes, so that we can tailor the levels of realism and fantasy to our own preferences. The answer is to, rather than remove them, include as many options (sliders for CM?) as possible.
And manual player growth was OPTIONAL dammit!
mfmaxpower
International
- 29 July 2010
Wow, didn't realize how long that was until I now see it posted. In my defense I work at home and when I'm in-between projects I have FAR too much time on my hands.
So, sorry for posting an essay!
So, sorry for posting an essay!
50k though? Surely that doesn't justify it? Friedel is a very good keeper and surely anyone selling him wouldn't sell him that cheap. That's more like a free transfer.
Also, I can't find where to look at my current team stats, like every player's goals scored, assists, yellow/red cards, passing completion % etc. I thought Fifa had all that..?
romagnoli
Misses Retri
- 7 August 2004
It does also overly place the blame for FIFA 11's poor CM on focussing on realism - it's poor because there's barely anything there at all. Training is realistic, after all. As is having managers who make formational and strategic changes. As indeed is having press conferences or players who throw strops or star players who make trainees' bottoms bleed. In order to blame a focus on realism for CM it'd have to far less threadbare than it is now.
Nick's asking for something in between as well. We all are and we (and Nick) have made that point to the devs. There's no reason why manual can't be an option in some way, as long as it and fully auto are not the only options.
And manual player growth was not optional for those of us who wanted something less gamey dammit!
Nick's asking for something in between as well. We all are and we (and Nick) have made that point to the devs. There's no reason why manual can't be an option in some way, as long as it and fully auto are not the only options.
And manual player growth was not optional for those of us who wanted something less gamey dammit!
Last edited:
nerf
Forming triangles
Yeah, I have to say this was my thought when reading mfmaxpower's essay.
Ultimately we have the same goal in mind, but I disagree with the reasoning that a focus on realism is the cause of the problem. The reason multiple-choice questions were ditched was not because they were realistic or unrealistic, they were just... s**t. Ditching stadium upgrades was not due to realism or otherwise, it was just implemented in a dull and pointless way.
There's nothing realistic about the email system they've recently added.
I don't believe that it's a misguided chasing of realism that's the issue... simply poor design. Perhaps now that they've appointed a Creative Director to career mode (what took so long?) we might actually see something approaching gameplay in future versions.
Placebo
Ԁlɐɔǝqo
Yeah that'll make a massive difference, 10 = riddled with bugs, fundamentally broken, fixed nothing, 11 = riddled with bugs, some parts of it fundamentally broken (SPL and growth 2 key examples), fixed nothing.
Where is this new creative director addressing all of the issues with 11? Where is this new creative director letting us know how all these past problems will be remedied for 12 on?
11 can be patched without patches, EA proudly boasted this in the wake of the storm surrounding 10's abomination of a release, where are these patches without patches?
mfmaxpower
International
- 29 July 2010
Fair enough. Nothing you or Rom said I necessarily disagree with, and I probably framed my argument incorrectly, placing too much blame at the feet of realism for realism's sake.
Ultimately we all pretty much want the same thing, although I appear much more open to the idea of sacrificing some realism for the sake of greater user-input and hence immersion than some others, like maybe Nick. My real point is that the more options that can be included the better, so that we can all have our various preferences for realism vs fantasy satisfied.
Simon Humber (is that the new creative director?) did excellent work on the WC game, including his fantastic participation rate on the forums, so his addition can be nothing but a good thing in my eyes. Placebo is right to be frothing at the mouth but let's at least wait until we hear what he's got to say about 12 before we hang him out dry.
Last edited:
I'm with you on the user input. They can't seem to get the basics right let alone put realism in it. I need some control on how my players develop, whoever wants to be realistic can be realistic manually. I had over 10,000 unused exp points per player in either 08 or 09, at least then you can try your best to make it realistic.
Perhaps they can set up a system where you designate what type of player you want to train him to be and then the growth is automatic from there. I.e you can assign a cm as a deep lying play maker which makes the bulk of his growth on passing, vision, ball control etc. or assign him as a box to box which would make the bulk of his growth on movement, stamina, defense, aggression etc.,etc.
nerf
Forming triangles
In games dev it's important to have people whose role is purely creative direction, who are responsible for making sure things are good rather than merely existing. Otherwise you just churn out stuff with no quality control. So I think that could be encouraging, and we'll have to judge on what happens with 12 rather than the past.
EA Sports needs to change the slogan from 'it's in the game' to 'it's in the game and we'll bother to make it fun as well this time'.
Placebo
Ԁlɐɔǝqo
It's a bullshit role for a bullshit development focus, nothing will change, 6 months after 11's release they just released a shitty update that fixes next to nothing of any relevance and yet again career mode is left buggy, broken, ignored.
groovemaster
Non-League
- 26 July 2004
Fairly low key announcement of the details surrounding the next main game update. Quoted below from Rom Broad who put this up late last night on page 70 of the original patch thread in the official forums:
I have to say while fixing the trigger glitch is going to be a suprise to nobody the other two are fairly random. I think a lot of people would have liked to have seen say player growth fixed (or at least showing it works properly) etc.
Also I'd be keen to find out whether the BAP AI improvements also translate into improvements in AI in general in all game modes? Is it too optimistic to assume my striker will not be make runs to the wing every 2 minutes now?!?
I didn't post the UT information because that mode a cynical cash grab and it seems get way to much attention, disproportionately so in relation to the time/effort/improvement that goes into the full game.
Riche
I have to say while fixing the trigger glitch is going to be a suprise to nobody the other two are fairly random. I think a lot of people would have liked to have seen say player growth fixed (or at least showing it works properly) etc.
Also I'd be keen to find out whether the BAP AI improvements also translate into improvements in AI in general in all game modes? Is it too optimistic to assume my striker will not be make runs to the wing every 2 minutes now?!?
I didn't post the UT information because that mode a cynical cash grab and it seems get way to much attention, disproportionately so in relation to the time/effort/improvement that goes into the full game.
Riche
Last edited:
lancers
League 1
No word on a fix for the constant freezing on the PS3? I don't think it is my disc or my machine since none of my other games freeze. This problem is with offline play in all modes. The game freezes for a few seconds then proceeds normally but it is a PITA.
nerf
Forming triangles
Placebo, I think you need to check your blood pressure
I doubt it. They probably just changed which difficulty level they are controlled by in BAP mode. Probably changed a single variable from 1 to 4...Also I'd be keen to find out whether the BAP AI improvements also translate into improvements in AI in general in all game modes? Is it too optimistic to assume my striker will not be make runs to the wing every 2 minutes now?!?
romagnoli
Misses Retri
- 7 August 2004
That's what I assumed. Each of the fixes seems fairly low in terms of required effort, which is why they've gone in. Anything more complex was not going to get a look in.
I must confess i usually play on full manual but yesterday i played a game on assisted v my friend and to me it seems fairly obvious that when they're programming and tweaking the game the focus is very much on how assisted works.
On assisted the issue of being tackled easily isn't half as bad IMO.
My main issue with manual is how easily you can be tackled when attempting to pass which often means that rather than having the ability to power up the pass and aim you will be tackled in that extra half a second it takes to do this. If you're within 8 yards of an opposition player you feel so overly pressured because of how easy it is to be tackled. So basically when i'm in the final third unless somebody is in clear space running down the wing or looking to make a run through the middle i will lose the ball more oftent than not because i can't do anything before i'm tackled. A lot of the time i end up completely screwing up passes by not being able to apply the desired amount of power to pass or being able to aim them well enough, which is something i find easy enough normally, before my opponent goes in for the tackle. It is more prevalent in passes below 10 yards which end up going nowhere (seriously why are they harder to achieve than 25 yard passes?).
Anyway so i put it on assisted and because of the fact you basically have to press the pass button once and it does the work for you you end up feeling that you have so much more time. You don't feel pressured at all and the stupid tackling system doesn't seem half as bad (though it's still easy obviously) because everything is instantaneous and you don't really have to fear the opposition half as much. It's so easy.
The amount of tackles in my assisted game didn't seem that bad compared to the tackle fest that often overshadows my manual games (10 min half, usually 50ish tackles for me alone). I know manual should be harder and that's why i use it but the ease of tackling really ruins the basic elements of manual (i.e the passing game) and makes the game end up looking really scrappy. I can only think that the devs don't really care about how elements of their game which work on assisted undermine manual. If you have learned how to pass on manual it shouldn't be the annoyance it is just because they refuse to tone down tackling.
Seriously does anybody else find it difficult in the opposition's half using manual? I just don't feel like i have enough control.
On assisted the issue of being tackled easily isn't half as bad IMO.
My main issue with manual is how easily you can be tackled when attempting to pass which often means that rather than having the ability to power up the pass and aim you will be tackled in that extra half a second it takes to do this. If you're within 8 yards of an opposition player you feel so overly pressured because of how easy it is to be tackled. So basically when i'm in the final third unless somebody is in clear space running down the wing or looking to make a run through the middle i will lose the ball more oftent than not because i can't do anything before i'm tackled. A lot of the time i end up completely screwing up passes by not being able to apply the desired amount of power to pass or being able to aim them well enough, which is something i find easy enough normally, before my opponent goes in for the tackle. It is more prevalent in passes below 10 yards which end up going nowhere (seriously why are they harder to achieve than 25 yard passes?).
Anyway so i put it on assisted and because of the fact you basically have to press the pass button once and it does the work for you you end up feeling that you have so much more time. You don't feel pressured at all and the stupid tackling system doesn't seem half as bad (though it's still easy obviously) because everything is instantaneous and you don't really have to fear the opposition half as much. It's so easy.
The amount of tackles in my assisted game didn't seem that bad compared to the tackle fest that often overshadows my manual games (10 min half, usually 50ish tackles for me alone). I know manual should be harder and that's why i use it but the ease of tackling really ruins the basic elements of manual (i.e the passing game) and makes the game end up looking really scrappy. I can only think that the devs don't really care about how elements of their game which work on assisted undermine manual. If you have learned how to pass on manual it shouldn't be the annoyance it is just because they refuse to tone down tackling.
Seriously does anybody else find it difficult in the opposition's half using manual? I just don't feel like i have enough control.
Last edited:
Placebo
Ԁlɐɔǝqo
Placebo, I think you need to check your blood pressure
My blood pressure's fine thank you.
Sorry if everyone else thinks it's perfectly acceptable we wait 6 months for an update and it fixes fuck all.
Totally agree with you there. I'm really enjoying assisted this year compared to previous years. It does feel stat-based somewhat and definitely enjoying.
Tackling system should be changed to being non-automated, as they're extremely easy they way they are now. You do nothing but keep the one button pressed and let the game do everything for you. Something they really need to get rid of.
Defending should be an art. I know lots of people will complain if it isn't automated anymore, as happened in PES, because you'll have to work to win that ball and people got used to lazy defending.
Tbh though, I never imagined I'll get the "one more game" feeling from Fifa. But this year, and for the first time in my many Fifa playing years, I do, even though I did enjoy Fifa 08 but for different reasons.
I hope Fifa only gets better and stop stripping good things off.
nerf
Forming triangles
It's difficult, sure. But far less boring.
It's not acceptable at all, it's rubbish, but... did you expect any better? I didn't
Placebo
Ԁlɐɔǝqo
It's not acceptable at all, it's rubbish, but... did you expect any better? I didn't
No, but it doesn't mean I'm not going to bitch about it when they release the "details"
lancers
League 1
I prefer playing on manual though I suck at it but it plays you get one touch on the ball then you better get rid of it kind of football. Most of the time if I cannot make a run down the wing I either pass back and try again or throw it in the box. Not much else you can really do. Assisted passing feels a bit like cheating.
mfmaxpower
International
- 29 July 2010
While it's a good idea in theory (your suggestion in the second paragraph that is) again I would prefer more control than what you describe. As you indicated in your first paragraph, we have been given little reason to have confidence in EA's formulas or concepts of player ratings, so relying on their opinion of what growth should be like for a box-to-box midfielder or deep lying playmaker is putting more faith in the devs than I'd prefer to do at this point.
As such, and considering that there is a range of preferences for how much control people would prefer over their game, ideally we would have a system that allows for varying degrees of user input. Having a more flexible and customizable CM should be a goal.
Taking your idea, what you could do is have three levels of control for player development:
a) At the uppermost level - say the default level - the game would allocate XP as it sees fit (i.e. the game would determine what type of player, like box-to-box CM, and develop player accordingly.) This is your most basic auto growth setting that requires no user-input and is basically a continuation of what exists currently. As this setting allows for no user participation, obviously its effectiveness is entirely reliant on the formula's determining XP accrual and allotment.
b) The second level would be like what you've described, in which you have the ability to generally direct a player's "training" while the game is responsible for specific XP allotment. This level of control is designed for those CM players who would like some say in player development while maintaining a certain level of restriction on what they can and cannot do for realism's sake (but again being somewhat subject to the whims of what the game code considers to be realistic.)
c) The last option would be something more along the lines of full manual control, as existed in FIFA before the devs so cruelly and pointlessly gave it the ax after 09's MM. This option would appease those players who don't give a toss about realistic development or who simply enjoy micro-managing everything about their club. An option for full control over XP allotment would also act as a sort of fail-safe: a back-up plan in case you're not happy with the system the devs design.
*** Regarding option "c" (aka the manual option) while I have no issues with having total control over player development - as you put it perfectly: "whoever wants to be realistic can be realistic manually" - a nice idea might be to institute a form of player potential caps that restrict individual attribute maximums and thus overalls too. As I understand it, each player has a specific OVR cap in FIFA and growth speed (i.e. speed of XP accrual), however previously when manual growth was an option you were limited by only your imagination. Placing some form of development caps on players might strike the right balance between full user control on the direction of player development and a level of realism. In conjunction with total OVR caps, their could also be per season caps, so you couldn't pump excessive amounts of XP into sprint speed in one season. Or rather than capping a player's growth over a career (their max OVR), maybe just have per season caps. In either case, while I don't particularly like a system that limits me in HOW I train my player, I think limiting me in how FAR I can train my player makes sense. [And continuing the theme of providing more options, you might as well give the option to turn off growth caps, again for those players who don't give a toss about realism.]
Following these suggestions for varying levels of user participation in player development, the biggest issues I imagine would be:
1) First, how exactly would option "b" (semi-auto growth) work? Would you have users choose a very general type of player - a template - from a limited set of options, or would you allow the user to select general attribute "clusters" for a player to focus his training on? If it's the former, would you, and how would you, prevent strikers from developing in a defensive template or a CDM training as a winger (i.e. how do you decide which templates are available as options for each player)? Could you change a player's training focus throughout the season? If it's the latter option - training clusters of attributes rather than being bound by pre-defined templates - how many clusters would there be and which attributes would be included in which clusters? Could clusters overlap?
How the "semi" option is designed - most importantly how much and what type of user-input is included - would determine whether someone like myself would choose the semi or the full manual option. How do you make this option appealing to both those players who would like as much control as possible while also appealing to those who wish for more "realistic" outcomes?
2) Next most important is determining how XP is accrued. (In truth, XP accrual is probably the most important aspect of all, seeing as it could break the entire player growth feature by itself (see MM 09 or CM 11), but I placed figuring-out the semi option of user input first since it is most relevant to the current discussion.) Nevertheless, I don't know what the hell is wrong with the math running growth in CM this year but I think we can all agree that something ain't right. Why are players developing so randomly? Why are young players developing so slowly? Why are some players decreasing? Figuring-out these issues is a top priority, as playing CM is a bit of a crap-shoot at the moment, and I'm sure this is at the top of the list for the devs. (Hopefully figuring this out won't be an excuse to do little else, i.e. "we had to make sacrifices elsewhere because this code needed to be re-written". Raise your hand if you've heard that one before.)
Ironing-out the current kinks in XP accrual is only the start. Then you gotta figure out if changes in the concept should be made as the feature progresses. For example, following the discussion of user-input, should we be given any say in how XP is accrued or at what speed? I have no particular interest in the former but I would like to see options for the latter, perhaps in the form of a slider, dictating how quickly players gain XP. Providing such an option would again succeed at both appeasing various player preferences for realism vs fantasy, while also providing an insurance policy in case the math behind XP leads to overly fast (MM 09) or overly slow (MM 10, arguably) XP accrual. Once again I see no reason why greater customization of how CM plays shouldn't be a goal, and the more options the better I say.
3) While issues 1) and 2) above are likely to be the two biggest issues, other issues remain, like what else should develop alongside attribute stats? What about weak-foot abilities? Skill moves? Work-rates? Traits? I say all of the above! As nerf has discussed previously, it is important that players become less about specific stats and more about something along the lines of the traits that have been introduced with Personality+. IMO every single player should have AT LEAST one trait from the start, and they should be able to gain or lose them as their careers progress. Nothing about a player should be static in CM (including boots!), while maybe there are other additions and enhancements people can think of to add to player profiles.
4) Another issue would be to re-introduce the concept of coaches into CM. As it pertains to player growth, I imagine this could relate to XP accrual speed, or have something to do with the options for training? Honestly, while I'm massively in favor of adding more features to CM, I have no specific vision as to how to re-introduce coaches into CM. I have seen it requested on the forums though and agree it should be considered at the least.
5) I know more issues remain but the only other relevant issue I can think of off the top of my head doesn't have to do with player growth per se but is essential: improving the way player information is displayed and tracked. For the former, that's a whole discussion in itself so I'll just say that it needs improving, and player stats and information needs to be presented so that it's easier on the eye and more quickly gives a summary of what that player is all about.
As for tracking player information, this is a massive issue in CM. Not only is player growth all sorts of screwed-up but EA have removed all relevant screens that allowed us to determine how players are evolving. We've gone from having the manual growth screen from MM 09 that gave us plus or minus numbers for every single attribute, to the player line graphs and different colored attributes to indicate a change in stat of last year, to simply being told whether a player's OVR has changed during a single season and vague "email" updates. Needless to say, MM/CM has been moving backwards in this area for a couple years now, and it's simply inexcusable that we are so cut-off from the development of our players - this regression alone has pretty much castrated the entire game mode. How the hell am I suppose to be managing a club when I am essentially clueless when it comes to what is going on with my players!?
While more detailed player tracking would not really be a new addition, considering that we were given more detailed info not just two years ago, an area that hasn't been fully explored is player growth potential. (I refuse to count last year's horrible effort with the line graph, which was too hard to discern any valuable info from and rarely was correct anyways.) Not only is it unsatisfactory that we have absolutely no idea what player growth potentials are, a big issue in particular for me is how no information is given to us regarding a player's potential prior to signing him, and a fantastic addition would be some form of scouting report.
In just another example of something the devs have removed from the game, you may remember that a template for basic scouting reports already existed from previous years by way of the information given to you when your scout "found" a new player for you to sign. We should be given similar information while browsing the transfer market, although improvements on the old "scouting reports" are needed, both in what it contains and its quality of presentation. I would also like to see a full-bodied image of the player (if he's wearing generic black boots, I ain't signing him! Ha!). Finally, it might be a good idea to re-introduce some form of scout upgrades, so that the better the scout you have, the more information you receive.
I'm not sure whether I left anything out but essentially these suggestions form the basis of what I consider to be the ideal player development system. While it is absolutely essential that the devs fix the current code determining XP accrual - or whatever they call the broken system currently determining who grows and who doesn't - it is equally important that EA provide us with more options for user-participation, in player development and CM in general.
*God I need a new hobby*
Last edited:
romagnoli
Misses Retri
- 7 August 2004
Good stuff max. My view is that you shouldn't be using position/role based templates. You should be able to train someone to play a different position, but you should be sculpting your own type of defensive midfielder. That's how you create new types of player, new roles - like the recent use of the central winger role (where your player in the hole pulls out to the flanks, rather than the striker doing so and losing that central pivot while the static no. 10 is picked up by defensive midfielders).
Nick Cave
Wrexham fan for my sins...
I'm still of the same opinion that issuing 'XP' points is a very poor way of implementing any kind of development in the game and though I'm not against anything being added as an "Option" I would still fail to see how this system would/did add anything to the feeling of involvement or emotional connection with my players.
I would however love to see a much more in-depth and adjustable training and coaching set up that could go some way to emulate the real world. This could include youth squads through to coaching and training staff, along with a proper scouting system. This is, I feel where the Dev team should be aiming to take the whole CM. In my opinion FIFA has the pick up and play fun factor already there, it's the realism that's sadly lacking, especially in the CM, which is where it's the most important aspect.
As for the "nothing guaranteed" term, I meant just that, issuing points for a guaranteed return or spending money to build your Terminator, for me is just not the way I want EA to go. I'd much rather do it through training and having the staff there to spot and develop the players abilities.
This could be then be altered and adapted to the users heart's content, you could even through the use of sliders, zip that 69 overall donkey to a Messi god in a season and a half if that's what you want.
From the outset this year EA said they wanted the CM mode to concentrate on the Managers side of the game. As such this is limited to staff and team management and not stadium building, ticket prices or any other facilities run by the Board or Chairman. Unfortunately EA also failed to give us the majority of the tools required to carry out this job, let alone do it with any real sense of realism. Those we are given, are for the most part poorly implemented and ill-conceived efforts from the previous title.
On the sliders this is something we as GC's have been very vocal on from the beginning and for me is the only real way forward I can see, given the seemingly massive diversity of end users the game covers and for the record I'm not Pro realism and Anti fun, I'm just after a better product that's as close to the real game as is possible, then make it adjustable and accessible so everyone can get what they want from it...
Last edited:
romagnoli
Misses Retri
- 7 August 2004
Had some good manual games against a French guy but then couldn't get another for love nor money.Not that I was offering either.
It really did highlight how the game needs to make close control and those attacker vs defender duels much more prominent. The best game was Spurs vs Dortmund, the game was very open so it was a lot easier to position yourself to take a player on or to be ready to react if he started moving towards you. But as we went on and played more games he started to be a lot more pressure happy, putting my body in the way worked less and less, and the little direction changes that served Modric so well stopped working as the pressurer could immediately wrap his leg around my player, taking the ball with him and bombing up the pitch to tackle the next of my players to receive the loose ball. Of course, he could see that it was working so he carried on doing it.
It really did highlight how the game needs to make close control and those attacker vs defender duels much more prominent. The best game was Spurs vs Dortmund, the game was very open so it was a lot easier to position yourself to take a player on or to be ready to react if he started moving towards you. But as we went on and played more games he started to be a lot more pressure happy, putting my body in the way worked less and less, and the little direction changes that served Modric so well stopped working as the pressurer could immediately wrap his leg around my player, taking the ball with him and bombing up the pitch to tackle the next of my players to receive the loose ball. Of course, he could see that it was working so he carried on doing it.
Last edited:
mfmaxpower
International
- 29 July 2010
The most rewarding FIFA 11 multi-player experience I've had occurred just the other night and surprisingly it did not include both of us using manual controls. Instead a close friend and myself, in an attempt to slow gameplay down and bring out the best in FIFA, both promised to do our best to not use the sprint button while defending. (The lone exception being if you were controlling the last defender and it was to try to prevent a clear goal scoring opportunity.)
Even though neither of us were perfect in this, it had a major impact on the game and was the most enjoyable and realistic round of FIFA matches I've had in recent memory. It forced us to play far more cautiously (i.e. realistically) when defending, being far more strategic in our use of jockeying, rather than just throwing our players after the ball as can seem typical. The game opened up, skill and technique flourished, ball handlers much more routinely held off defenders, and overall we had a blast.
I have also recently realized that manual controls are just not well suited for FIFA 11's gameplay - at least not for me - and causes too much frustration and exaggerates the worst of FIFA's ills (the defending, collisions, etc.). I am NOT saying FIFA and manual cannot be fun together, just it's not working for me in FIFA 11 in a single player setting.
To succeed at playing with manual, passing at least, one needs to really force the game to play slower, turning down certain realistic passing options and combinations that cannot be performed with the added delay in manual passing (but that work just fine using assisted). In my games - and I am ONLY talking about my single player vs the CPU games now, since I don't play online multiplayer and I have no friends who use manual passing - I am finding that manual passing causes me to play in a less realistic manner (avoiding realistic options and combos etc) just as much if not more than it forces me to play any more realistic.
I once considered manual to improve the single-player experience. I no longer think so, at least for me personally.
I love the concept behind manual passing but I just can't seem to enjoy it in FIFA 11 the way I used to (as recently at the WC game for example). The added delay in powering up passes (or the slower passing speed, depending on how look at it) this year is just not a good fit with gameplay for me. I applaud those of you who flourish at manual and enjoy using manual passing (it's really just passing settings I'm concerned with) - you are simply better FIFA players than me. If there was an "extra slow" gamespeed option, I would probably be loving manual passing too.
Last edited:
mfmaxpower
International
- 29 July 2010
Unless I'm reading you wrong, both our ideal systems for player development are more alike than different. The difference in our outlook to me seems to be that you have more faith in EA's ability to find the right balance between realism and fun than I do. I consider giving the user as much input as possible as a method to ensure that my level of enjoyment is more reliant on my own decisions rather than the devs.
And "XP" is just a general frame of reference term. Call it what you will but the game code running the features under the hood require a way to define real world dynamics in mathematical terms. Using "XP" is just a necessary evil incorporated into games so the human player is given the necessary feedback to make decisions and play the game. Like I said, call it what you want, but whether the growth system is fully auto, fully manual, or an adjustable training and coaching system like you suggest, either way experience is being earned behind the scenes that the game must then turn into changes in player attributes.
As for how having control over XP allotment enhanced the level of immersion for many of us, it's a pretty simple concept: user-input = immersion and connection; user-input into player development = connection and attachment to players and growth process. User-input and immersion are typically correlated - when you tend to have more of the former, you also tend to have more of the latter.
In any case, what you've described - "in-depth and adjustable training and coaching" - is more or less exactly what I'd like to see implemented; you're essentially describing option "b" from my earlier post. Only I consider it a good idea to have a backup plan, you know, in case EA makes a mess of things, again. And also because some fans will not be satisfied unless they have absolute control, and why not let people play the game the way they would like to when it's such a painless concession to make and has no bearing whatsoever on everyone else's experience.
My usual vague and rushed thoughts…
This pertains to CM presentation
- Main screen should be training mode where you can practice normally with reserves included. From there you should be able to
- "talk to a player" by selecting him, camera zooms into the player on the training ground, all the players relevant information displayed (performance stats look at form, player growth and everything else), be able to give the player specific instructions.
- "team talk", general formation and tactics somehow seamlessly blended in an interactive screen that doesn't take you out of the training ground.
- be able to set up a scrimmage game with a formation like your next opposition (or as you wish)
-Select from a subtle pop-up screen (like the current in-game ones)
- Next game
- League Table and Statistics
- the office (be able to review at least 10 games, take care of business, contracts, transfers and the like)
- whatever else.
This pertains to CM presentation
- Main screen should be training mode where you can practice normally with reserves included. From there you should be able to
- "talk to a player" by selecting him, camera zooms into the player on the training ground, all the players relevant information displayed (performance stats look at form, player growth and everything else), be able to give the player specific instructions.
- "team talk", general formation and tactics somehow seamlessly blended in an interactive screen that doesn't take you out of the training ground.
- be able to set up a scrimmage game with a formation like your next opposition (or as you wish)
-Select from a subtle pop-up screen (like the current in-game ones)
- Next game
- League Table and Statistics
- the office (be able to review at least 10 games, take care of business, contracts, transfers and the like)
- whatever else.
Last edited:
Nick Cave
Wrexham fan for my sins...
Our Ideals I'm sure are along the same lines as they are both based on the real world. This is where I'd like EA to set the goalposts, I'm certain this type of system is achievable. Parts of this are already there in other EA titles and in their nearest competitors product, though knowing EA as we do, how far short of this they land is anyone's guess...