FIFA 12 Discussion Thread

[kobayashi]

Sadly you haven't addressed the comparisons you made which I pointed out fall flat on your face.

COD isn't damaged by the different types of players whether played with random players or friends. If someone wants to play tactically it brings no disadvantage on their part to do so. Neither does playing as a 'Rambo' run 'n' gun merc.

However if you want to play FIFA with a simulation approach against a random opponent you are going to be on the weaker foot from the get go, what with the opponent using assisted controls and constant pressure and if they are a real wanker abusing cheap AI routines to score stuff like cutback goals or lobbed shots or via lofted through balls.

Well no, because on the grand scheme of things EA aren't damaged by their preference to arcade like gameplay, I'd say most players especially like my mate i always play against at uni who is the classic example of a fifa player. He couldn't care less how realistic or unrealistic the game balance is, he just plays and adapts to what makes you win (Cheap pressure, lofted through ball). Most players are the same!

Yes the sim fans like us are unhappy! but we represent a very small percentage of FIFA's target market. That's the thing which i think your missing mate.

I understand your point if us Sim fans were a crucial part of EA's success but tbh it seems as if there are more more girls who have no idea about football that play FIFA than the whole sim community put together mate. I find it crazy how many girls who don't even know who Xavi or Iniesta are play this game

EA need to solve this situation as its clearly creating a division. Activision dont. The only time I have heard of people complaining about COD multiplayer is due to screaming Yanks or hardcoded cheats/exploits which are usually patched out.

Casual or not it makes no difference to Call of Duty. It sadly makes a huge difference to the FIFA franchise. Apples and Oranges.

Billy please don't lose cite of that I'm in your corner, i want EA to sort this whole 'divide' out too but this point i made is me looking at it for EA point of view![/I] I'm putting myself in EA's shoes. Yes they do need to sort out this 'division' but the thing is. FIFA 11 like sincover pointed out, sold 12 million units! It's their biggest earner, yes! That crap FIFA 11 is making them huge money so there just isn't a problem buisness wise for them to make drastic changes that we want.

That where my point about them heading after COD comes from! THAT'S their intention!

 

[kobayashi]

Look here:
http://files.shareholder.com/downlo...473/Q4 FY Press Release with Press Tables.pdf

Fifa 11 has sold over 12 million units worldwide, that is already in the vicinity of COD sales. In general FIFA is EA's biggest selling franchise, eclipsing it's second biggest franchise, Battlefield.

EA makes shit tonnes of money with FIFA every year, in fact, it is one of the main reasons that the entire company is turning a $150 mil profit.

Want to wager a guess at how many of those 12+ million players are 'sim' players?

Go to the EA website and look at the manual thread, look around here as well. Wouldn't say it's more than 1000 people!

 

[sincover]

Go to the EA website and look at the manual thread, look around here as well. Wouldn't say it's more than 1000 people!

Exactly, I'm agreeing with you. It's sad but true. EA has tasted increasing success in the casual market, why would they ever risk alienating that market?

 

[nerf]

I don't think that we can really say one thing re: simulation:

What we want is a choice to let the casuals have their arcade game and let us have our game. that's perfectly viable

And then say the exact opposite re: control settings:

Everyone should be playing the same way and getting the same experience from the game if you ask me.

They can't please everyone. For a particularly small and contrary sub-section of that 'everyone', it might be wise to promote choice. If EA want my 5 year old nephew and my 59 year old father to like their product - and why wouldn't they - then simplifying controls is #1 on the list. This becomes especially the case when the uniquely broad appeal of the sport offers such potential to sell to non-gamers.

Different control settings might well fragment the userbase, true, but from EA's POV, accessibility is key to making that userbase larger in the first place - which far outweighs your dissatisfaction.

Plus it's no different to a driving game with things like auto-braking, auto-gears, traction control, racing line...

Frankly, we could perhaps be pleased that non-fully-assisted options are available at all, unlike a few years ago. Personally speaking, the option to turn off assists has increased the longevity of the game exponentially for me.

Make the game be more about the football, and we shouldn't need to worry about what control settings anyone else has.

 

[Jamezinho]

I hear what you're saying nerf, but PES was always known for being very accessible yet very deep. They managed this with a single control system. Konami found a balance.

The comparison to driving games and assists doesn't work either. I'm a massive fan of driving games - they're all I play at the moment - and I love my simulation racing games, but I can drive much quicker without assists than I can with. Any hardcore racing game fan will tell you that. The inverse is true in Fifa.

The reason people play manual Fifa is to give themselves a challenge because the football experience is lifeless. If EA work on getting the basics of football right and add depth, they can move towards a one-for-all control configuration and the holy grail of 'easy to learn, hard to master', something all games should aim for.

 

[BillyBoy]

Well no, because on the grand scheme of things EA aren't damaged by their preference to arcade like gameplay, I'd say most players especially like my mate i always play against at uni who is the classic example of a fifa player. He couldn't care less how realistic or unrealistic the game balance is, he just plays and adapts to what makes you win (Cheap pressure, lofted through ball). Most players are the same!

Yes the sim fans like us are unhappy! but we represent a very small percentage of FIFA's target market. That's the thing which i think your missing mate.

I understand your point if us Sim fans were a crucial part of EA's success but tbh it seems as if there are more more girls who have no idea about football that play FIFA than the whole sim community put together mate. I find it crazy how many girls who don't even know who Xavi or Iniesta are play this game



Billy please don't lose cite of that I'm in your corner, i want EA to sort this whole 'divide' out too but this point i made is me looking at it for EA point of view![/I] I'm putting myself in EA's shoes. Yes they do need to sort out this 'division' but the thing is. FIFA 11 like sincover pointed out, sold 12 million units! It's their biggest earner, yes! That crap FIFA 11 is making them huge money so there just isn't a problem buisness wise for them to make drastic changes that we want.

That where my point about them heading after COD comes from! THAT'S their intention!

Oh I know you are in the same corner as me Klashman/Kobayashi. I agree with the fair majority of your posts. Its just this comparison that I believe in the end is fruitless.

Yes EA would like to monetize their FIFA franchise in the same manner as Activision has done with COD. But thats where the similarities end. I don't believe its EA's intention to do anything else. Online modes are always going to bring in a varied of subsection of people with different tastes and opinions. Its up to the developer in the end on how they deal with catering all these different viewpoints.

And Jamez I fully agree with your posts. Unity is the way forward not further division through innumerable choices. In that way i'm grateful that Konami offer only one method of play as you said, a semi-assisted stats based system with a manual modifier. If they can just improve on this I would be more than happy.

Maybe if EA done the same and defaulted to a semi based system with improved stat based individuality and instead of offering full manual options gave us a manual button like PES which can be used in any situation from throw-ins to shots.

 

[BillyBoy]

I hear what you're saying nerf, but PES was always known for being very accessible yet very deep. They managed this with a single control system. Konami found a balance.

The comparison to driving games and assists doesn't work either. I'm a massive fan of driving games - they're all I play at the moment - and I love my simulation racing games, but I can drive much quicker without assists than I can with. Any hardcore racing game fan will tell you that. The inverse is true in Fifa.

The reason people play manual Fifa is to give themselves a challenge because the football experience is lifeless. If EA work on getting the basics of football right and add depth, they can move towards a one-for-all control configuration and the holy grail of 'easy to learn, hard to master', something all games should aim for.

This.

Give me a Logitech G27 wheel and turn off all the assists in GT5 and I will beat any best lap I previously done with everything on like traction/stability control. That includes online.

Your right about the 'easy to learn, hard to master' philosophy. This would give us in part the depth we crave for which makes a game last from mere weeks to many months.

 

[Jamezinho]

Maybe if EA done the same and defaulted to a semi based system with improved stat based individuality and instead of offering full manual options gave us a manual button like PES which can be used in any situation from throw-ins to shots.

EA more or less have a captive audience these days so they could afford to make such a move. They could follow the PES model and the userbase would adjust, just as PES players did last year. What else are the Fifa fans going to do? There's only two football games on the market and many refuse to pay PES (which already offers such a control system).

People would adjust and get over it, with the Fifa series taking a step forward as a result.

 

[nerf]

The comparison to driving games and assists doesn't work either. I'm a massive fan of driving games - they're all I play at the moment - and I love my simulation racing games, but I can drive much quicker without assists than I can with. Any hardcore racing game fan will tell you that. The inverse is true in Fifa.

Yes, ideally Manual would somehow allow you to do things better than with assisted. But there's also the pure enjoyment factor, not just ability level. Being a mediocre driver, if in F12010 I turn off auto-gears/ABS/TC, I spend all my time worrying about trying to keep the car from spinning, rather than revelling in the fun parts such as shaving laptime and overtaking/defending. With those assists on, I enjoy the game a lot more. With those assists off, you enjoy your game a lot more. The choice enhances both our experiences.

The reason people play manual Fifa is to give themselves a challenge because the football experience is lifeless.

Perhaps, but I would still want the challenge even if the football experience was not lifeless. When I played PES 5/6, I went out of my way to make the game more difficult/challenging through various gameplay rules and also editing the option file to make the Default ML players even less talented. I wouldn't have described those games as lifeless at the time, so I think it would be unfair to declare that the only motivation.

I just don't think the answer is the removal of choice. I think it's more a case of making the footballing decisions the important and deep part, like you say, rather than enforcing restrictions on controller setup, which can potentially negatively affect enjoyment.

 

[Northzzz]

To me the devs don't even understand the concept of choice. I believe that they think that the only reason people opt for manual semi or assisted is based on their skill level, not because they think the game plays better with a variety of different control inputs. As Billyboy said, online is always going to be a subsection of different tastes. At the moment Fifa employs many varieties of controls but doesn't even harbour a system where you can utilise these choices effectively.

I personally don't understand why there aren't lobbies in Fifa for online. If there were then we could see which teams the host/challenger has been using of late and choose whether to play them or not. Another advantage of lobbies in Fifa would be that we could create a custom set-up of the controller options we wish for us and our opponent to use. For instance if i wish to search for a match then why can i only search for assisted manual and semi games? If i wanted to use manual for everything but semi for passing then why can't i do this? Fifa employs solely having quick matches and quite frankly this is a feature i'm sick of seeing in games of late (COD does it). I find it a lazy way of doing things, as if to suggest and even enforce the concept that nobody really cares about what's going on as long as they get into a match quickly.

 

[Gab_]

I wonder what will happen, now with the impact engine, if you slide tackle a player that is already down. I mean if you slide tackle and hit his head for example. Should be a pretty serious injury if it actually works like that. Or if someone falls into the goal post head first.

 

[jonneymendoza]

in terms of fifa/PES. those games SHOULD be a sim IMO. cant understand why no one wants to develope a football sim.

Theirs plenty of racing sims and other sports genra's aimed at sims so im shocked and surprised there is not a single footy sim dispite football being more popular if not the most popular sport in the world.

i truelly believe that if FIFA/PES was pure sim. it would still sell millions.

 

[romagnoli]

I hear what you're saying nerf, but PES was always known for being very accessible yet very deep. They managed this with a single control system. Konami found a balance.

This is what I always say whenever people claim more depth/realism equals too hard for novices. I'd say trying to dribble without tricks against the homing pressure tackles is too hard even for veterans.

PES ultimately has that decade of single player experience behind it, whereas this FIFA was born in the multiplayer/online generation.

The comparison to driving games and assists doesn't work either. I'm a massive fan of driving games - they're all I play at the moment - and I love my simulation racing games, but I can drive much quicker without assists than I can with. Any hardcore racing game fan will tell you that. The inverse is true in Fifa.

Rod has been arguing this for over a year now. I think the only way to get closer to this sort of balance is to introduce manual-esque levels of player error when using assisted controls, but even then it's very hard because it's harder to gauge where you're pointing the left stick than it is to understand how many RPM you need to change gear at. There's a lot more feedback in racing games so you can tell when your tyres are losing their grip on the road, or you can hear exactly what happens when you squeeze the trigger too hard. In FIFA, you aim the stick, charge the power bar (which isn't a 100% perfect indicator of where the ball will go) and the only feedback you get is when it's too late and the pass/shot is made.

 

[PU6HY]

in terms of fifa/PES. those games SHOULD be a sim IMO. cant understand why no one wants to develope a football sim.

Theirs plenty of racing sims and other sports genra's aimed at sims so im shocked and surprised there is not a single footy sim dispite football being more popular if not the most popular sport in the world.

i truelly believe that if FIFA/PES was pure sim. it would still sell millions.

It would sell millions but probably not enough millions as kids won't be able to pick up and play. You know how I feel about assisted users who abuse the settings J but EA ain't going to cut off the hand that feeds them.

A dedicated, easy to access, separate manual / sim section needs to be setup. How hard can that be? There's something there now but it's fiddly to get in to. A straight into Manual section on the front menu. Simple.

 

[Jamezinho]

Rod has been arguing this for over a year now. I think the only way to get closer to this sort of balance is to introduce manual-esque levels of player error when using assisted controls, but even then it's very hard because it's harder to gauge where you're pointing the left stick than it is to understand how many RPM you need to change gear at. There's a lot more feedback in racing games so you can tell when your tyres are losing their grip on the road, or you can hear exactly what happens when you squeeze the trigger too hard. In FIFA, you aim the stick, charge the power bar (which isn't a 100% perfect indicator of where the ball will go) and the only feedback you get is when it's too late and the pass/shot is made.

Driving without assists adds to the individual feel of a racing car. Playing football without assists kills the individuality of a football player. That's the difference.

A human in control of a machine that behaves in a uniform and predictable manner compared to a human in control of a virtual human that should not behave in a uniform and predictable manner. The latter should have errors and variables built in, the former, shouldn't.

 

[Punzz]

Am I right in thinking with the inclusion of the impact engine there will be an infinite amount of animations that take place when players come together?

 

[StuartCulli]

In theory & from what the video suggests, yes.

 

[jonneymendoza]

It would sell millions but probably not enough millions as kids won't be able to pick up and play. You know how I feel about assisted users who abuse the settings J but EA ain't going to cut off the hand that feeds them.

A dedicated, easy to access, separate manual / sim section needs to be setup. How hard can that be? There's something there now but it's fiddly to get in to. A straight into Manual section on the front menu. Simple.

why does a game have to sell same numbers as COD in order to justify making the game?

very strange. Yea a dedicated manual/sim settings shouldnt be hard to do.

 

[kouroux]

Am I right in thinking with the inclusion of the impact engine there will be an infinite amount of animations that take place when players come together?

I think you're right but how will the developers make sure of the realism of each animations ?? The impact engine could become something totally unrealistic

 

[Suuuuupertalk]

Will the impact engine make player's legs break in half when performing sudden movements at supersonic speed?

 

[Jamezinho]

In theory & from what the video suggests, yes.

I'm intrigued to see this action. Bug-testing something of such complexity with an infinite number of outcomes could be interesting.

 

[glen]

why does a game have to sell same numbers as COD in order to justify making the game?

Cost of production quite simply. The whole support of a "free" on-line infrastructure, licensing, audio, teams, players, boots, kits.

Then you have things like cross platform porting (essentially doubling up some aspects of development).

Anything for next gen seems to be really expensive to make (XNA Live titles excluded) Was it GTA4 that reportedly cost over 100 million to make?!

 

[nerf]

I'm struggling to think how EA could empower Manual controls to enable you to play 'better' than with Assisted controls, beyond what is inherently there. How could they change this?

Surely the problem with assists is that there's no/insufficent error factor built into the game to begin with. Fix that, then would the control setup even be a problem?

 

[drekkard]

The best thing about the impact engine would be that you don't feel aware of it. That would mean that the reactions feel natural.

I really doubt EA has developed all this to make it feel natural. Probably it will need a lot of toning down from start, and players will fall to the ground all the time or bounce each other in the most spectacular ways, with corpses flying all the time.

I have the fear (having played the latest fifas) that the pitch end up like in Gone with the wind:
http://www.gildasattic.com/image66.gif

Really at times the amount of people on the floor is staggering in the game. I expect the impact engine to put down some more people already.

It would be great if there were a LOT of fouls being called simply by pressuring, but again people would moan about it so you will have to practically try to kill someone to receive a card, again. Hey, PES demo was like that, lots of fouls called, and then the final product missed it completely. So EA won't do it either as it would hurt the "arcade" fanbase.

That means that the impact engine is used as a "wow" factor, not as a core game functionality that drives the game closer to simulate the ratio of impact/fouls in the real game.

If I'm wrong here, then the engine could be proven a great addition, though I really doubt it.

 

[Rodelero]

Driving without assists adds to the individual feel of a racing car. Playing football without assists kills the individuality of a football player. That's the difference.

A human in control of a machine that behaves in a uniform and predictable manner compared to a human in control of a virtual human that should not behave in a uniform and predictable manner. The latter should have errors and variables built in, the former, shouldn't.

Not sure about this. You're right that the car analogy only goes so far: I used it a long time ago to show how an assisted system can work and not be something ridiculously advantageous to use. That's where the analogy ends. However, your points...

1) It makes a normative claim about how interactive the game should be
We're playing a video game where, to some extent, we must take control over the minds of football players. It is 'killing' the individuality of a football player to allow us to choose when to pass, or how to move. As interactivity increases, the ability to simulate individuality will decrease - but there is no correct way of doing it. It's no more right to want to play a game like FM, where you have absolutely no control over how the players operate, or to play a game where you have almost total control over what occurs. To some extent, you are going to take over the mentality of the player.

2) Manual is not an errorless predictable system
Manual is not defined as 'the ball goes where you point and press' anymore than assisted is defined in the way that FIFA makes it. The manual I want is one where I have the ability to tell my player what to try, and see what then happens given his various stats. That's the manual I want. To an extent this already exists, manual is not errorless in FIFA.



At the moment, FIFA has its assisted, semi, and manual systems, and to be honest all of them are pretty awful. Assisted is horribly constraining, it picks passes really poorly, but it's also very exploitable with certain types of play or pass. On the other end, manual is far too awkward to do certain things (v. short or v. long passes). Both systems lack individuality massively. It's a mess. It's got to the point where it would probably be better to remove the systems and rebuild them, than it would be to try to fix them.

PES proves that an assisted system can be infinitely better than FIFA's one. Manual offers something different, something some people like a lot, and something a lot of people have managed to overcome some of FIFA's biggest issues with. Manual has some advantages over PES's system: it offers a level of freedom which even PES doesn't manage. There is no ambiguity with manual over what I am attempting to do, and I can attempt to do nearly anything.

But manual can be a lot better. It can show more individuality, it can become harder in areas and easier in areas, and it can be a great element to the game.

 

[glen]

The car analogy is fairly moot.

F1 Cars have had most of the "assists" banned because they make the cars faster.....MotoGP on the other hand has a crude form of traction control and anti wheelie systems and the 800cc bikes are going generally faster than the old thou's.

 

[romagnoli]

Driving without assists adds to the individual feel of a racing car. Playing football without assists kills the individuality of a football player. That's the difference.

A human in control of a machine that behaves in a uniform and predictable manner compared to a human in control of a virtual human that should not behave in a uniform and predictable manner. The latter should have errors and variables built in, the former, shouldn't.

It's false to say that manual controls as a concept has this effect, just as it'd be wrong to look at FIFA's assisted controls and assume that's exactly how individual PES 2010's players feel (or indeed that PES 2011 has worse individuality because it's passing is semi-assisted).

A manual pass misses the desired direction and weight by just as much as assisted passing. The difference is that assisted passing sets that initial direction and weight much more accurately and instantaneously than manual passing*. It is your thumbs that fail to complete a pass in manual, but the 'error' is still there in equal measure. Assisted passing in FIFA removes that variable, but doesn't solve the individuality issue.

You could very easily make a manual game that gives you as much of a player by player feel as any other method - but you couldn't really attach it to the same gameplay as assisted/semi/manual as it stands. Plus a lot of manual players do simply want full control because they (wrongly) believe that to be more realistic.


*Yes I know assisted passing more curling options, but there's no reason why manual couldn't have the same.

 

[Jamezinho]

I'm struggling to think how EA could empower Manual controls to enable you to play 'better' than with Assisted controls, beyond what is inherently there. How could they change this?

Surely the problem with assists is that there's no/insufficent error factor built into the game to begin with. Fix that, then would the control setup even be a problem?

Manual is not an errorless predictable system

EA needs to introduce more individuality into the players, with variable first touch and human errors in-built. Only then would choice of control scheme become less important. But then, would there be any need for different levels of assists?

This just re-affirms my belief that a one-for-all control system is needed in Fifa, based on a semi-manual assist level with manual modifier. I've not seen a convincing case to the contrary.

 

[Jamezinho]

The car analogy is fairly moot.

F1 Cars have had most of the "assists" banned because they make the cars faster.....MotoGP on the other hand has a crude form of traction control and anti wheelie systems and the 800cc bikes are going generally faster than the old thou's.

The point maybe moot in real-life, but not from a racing game perspective.

As a regular online racer I can testify that driving without assists is quicker. What the assists do in racing games is help prevent mistakes and spin-outs, but a car can stop quicker without ABS, and can get off the line quicker without traction control provided the driver is skilled enough.

 

[glen]

The point maybe moot in real-life, but not from a racing game perspective.

As a regular online racer I can testify that driving without assists is quicker. What the assists do in racing games is help prevent mistakes and spin-outs, but a car can stop quicker without ABS, and can get off the line quicker without traction control provided the driver is skilled enough.

I used to do a lot of online racing, and in something like LFS or RFactor then on the whole you can go quicker in some cars and on some circuits.

I do take your point.

Even skilled drivers crash horrifically (in game there is a lot more flexibility in racing games and you have more control adjust-ability (you can go in to deep, or miss the apex etc). With something like FIFA where the twitch factor is very high there are certain circumstances where things like manual passing and more specifically the way it powers up makes it less realistic and less fun. Clearing it from the box after a corner is one frustrating issue due to the overly long power up cycle.