FIFA 12 Discussion Thread

drekkard said:
The world cup game was the one in which I experienced more diversity in scoring, last pass was a joy (too easy, though) and stats were more than subtle (you could tell the difference between Torres and Klose, for example). It wans't what I would call a sim in any aspect, but what strikes me is that practically all the things that I loved from it (not many) were totally stripped away in the next Fifa iteration. That's what I can't understand.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly. I won't harp on about the WC game after this post as it might go a bit off topic, but yeah, I'm anticipating FIFA12 to be another continuation from 11 rather than anything like the WC2010 build. But I too had greater diversity from scoring, the directional chest control (which was amazingly stripped out of FIFA11) was the cause of some brilliant moments, and the game allowed me to play in whatever style and pace, against the AI at any rate, that I wanted to play at. Sure, there were balancing issues with pacey or strong players that could be abused online, but offline I chose to play the game the way I'd want to see it played in real life, and it somehow rewarded me for that. I'm still rather stunned that David Rutter and the rest of the team didn't play the WC game and think to himself that there's the core of a more fluid, playable game there. All it needed were certain aspects toning down, little bits tweaked here and there, and I think the WC game could have developed into a brilliant FIFA11.

Oh well, that game's long gone now, but I'm expecting to see 12 as just another continuation of the Rutter dev team's 'vision' whereby overpowered, physical players repeatedly run into each other and exchange possession in the middle of the park literally every 2 seconds. What a dream.
 
romagnoli said:
Putting cynicism and defeatism aside for a moment! I appreciate that the gameplay needs to change at the same time in order for this to work, but I do feel that a lot of the problem is that the game doesn't really show people how to play football, directly or indirectly. Even the penalty system is bloody easy to use, but people don't bother to learn, so they complain that it's broken and that itneeds changing back. A proper tutorial mode would have sorted everyone out, no problem.
Click to expand...

Football games in general have this problem. Not enough ingame and in depth tutorials helping you through with baby steps like PES used to do on the PS2. EA have released videos on the new penalty system but it seems nobody bothers to watch them.

Your right, the problem is people don't really know how to play the game and instead just pick upon bad habits, also it's the mentality of players there days just want a simple, easy game and don't want to even tie their own shoelaces.
 
So, would it make sense for EA to try and package a proper tutorial mode as a flashy, authentic EA Football Academy, that teaches you about the sport as much as the game? And then use that as leverage to introduce the sorts of utterly fundamental aspects of the game like passing inaccuracy and dribbling that can't just turn in any direction repeatedly until the defender gives up, or weaker footedness? I posted a much bigger thing on the topic in the gamechanger area and am looking to put it in the feedback area soon, but I've only had two responses so far. It's the sort of thing that could be really beneficial to the series if done properly, but it couldalso be boring and too much like going back to school if it's just loads of lessons thrown together. Combining it with the EA online leaderboards so people can compare scores in each challenge, and giving out VP attribute boosts based on how well you do, is the sort of thing that makes it EA and EA Football Club friendly.
 
Tutorials are a waste of the already very limited DVD space* and should be available separately from the DVD such as youtube/origin or whatever IMO, glad to hear from Rutter that's what they're doing this year and the only included tutorial will be for the new defending system.

*obviously not an issue for PS3 but I don't have a PS3 so it's not relevant to me :)
 
@ Rom,

I loved the PES training challenges. That and editing was how I spent my first 2 weeks with a new PES game!

I also think it would be a great way to introduce manual controls to people (even if I'm not a manual player myself). Bronze star is assisted, Silver star is semi and Gold star is manual. I think it would need good incentives though. FIFA used to have a shop to buy extra kits and balls, didn't they? Don't know how much space the vids would take up, but SD versions in a smaller window in the menu's can't be too much surely?

A little element that I really like in 11 (there is one!) are the friends leaderboards in the main menu's. Arena goals (distance and time), winningstreaks, etc are all fun to view imo. Still haven't managed to beat whoever it is with distance and time for the arena goal. Adding the training challenge scores would be great, and maybe enough to not have to re-create the FIFA shop as some sort of incentive.

As for licenses, I would imagine the online players would love to have to have that so that they can play some decent random people. ;)

But as you say, it comes down to the fundamentals of gameplay, if the game isn't rewarding more insight and knowledge of the game and football then a challenge training (similar to the scenario's imo) just don't have enough to keep me interested. And ofcourse I would rather they spent more time on the basics then giving them a great marketing pitch to waste time on for 12!
 
The current tutorials are undeniably a complete waste of space. They tell you exactly what you couldalready gleanfrom the manual. What's the pointing making a video explaining the absolute basics?

Having an interactive tutorial that actually tells you about football, rather than just listing the contents of the manual, AND that presents you with challenges with some sort of reward or sense of competition, is a completely different beast altogether.
 
romagnoli said:
The thing is that WC2010 is indeed seen as arcadey, whereas EA think the FIFA series is realistic. But what the WC game offered to a greater extent than FIFA 10 or 11 is balance. It wasn't perfect of course, but it was more open to good passing play and simple dribbling. I loved using Croatia and Belgium in that game on semi controls.
Click to expand...

I think what frequently goes missing in this forum is that people have different perspectives on what "realistic" implies. For many outside this forum, maybe even the vast majority, "realism" has to do with aesthetics; i.e. does the game look real? If FIFA is playing on a monitor in a store, someone passing by might observe "wow, that looks so real" - and that's what realism is to most people. I think there can be little argument that for the casual fan (the vast majority), judging from this perspective FIFA is by far the most realistic football game ever.

Then there's us, who judge football games from an entirely different perspective, for which "realism" is defined less by visual fidelity and more by the degree to which fundamentals, tactics, and the essence of the sport are captured.

Is either way of judging realism more correct than the other? No. They're just different points of view.

So, while damning EA for calling FIFA realistic is not only a waste of time, because you're speaking of two entirely different dimensions of the game, it does little to aid our goal, which I'd argue isn't just about realism (because again that can entail many different things), but more specifically it's about a desire for better representation and increased emphasis on the fundamentals, strategies, etc. of the sport.

You are blinded by bias if you don't think FIFA isn't the most realistic football game ever... from a certain point of view. It's only from our minority point of view (that in which fundamentals etc. takes precedence), that FIFA is less realistic. Ultimately, then, I would argue that we should cease with this endless debate over realism, and concentrate more on what we really care about: the fundamentals and underlying spirit of the game. Because, as the tiny minority, we have absolutely no chance at winning this realism argument - but we can win an argument that focuses on fundamentals, strategy, tactics, etc., and that's how we need to frame the discussion.
 
romagnoli said:
WC2010 did have better dribbling as well. Agile players like Modric and Krasic were very useful. Pace and strength were still too important though.

I was wondering if maybe FIFA could afford to be bolder in reshaping itself if it had a proper tutorial mode. Like GT5's licenses (though not to the point where you need a license to play certain modes), or the old training challenges in PS2 PES but with online leaderboards and VP attribute boosts as incentives to the user. Maybe even getting some real footballers/coaches to do some commentary/vid clips for each topic, like GT5 with NASCAR and Rally driving?

The idea would be to teach people how to play football, as much as how to play FIFA. The problem with the game now is that people are left to their own devices to learn how to play. The game isn't realistic so people learn bad habits like exploits / holding terrible defensive lines because that's what the AI does. But EA can't change the game to play that differently because it'd be too different to what the fanbase knows. So the game never gains enough depth.
Click to expand...

I'm just not sure I buy this theory, that a) EA can't change the game because it'd be too different, and b) that changing the game wouldn't be enough in itself to eliminate, or at least sufficiently decrease, bad habits.

First, regarding a), I would say that EA have changed the game before, drastically, so there's no reason to believe they can't further. The defensive changes this year are pretty big, and just by removing auto-tackle people should be forced to defend differently than in 11. Introducing 360 dribbling was a massive change, and people adapted, just as we're learning to adapt to the new physicality in FIFA. Hell, not that long ago there was no trick stick, or close dribble or jockey feature, but people learn and adapt.

Second, why not let's first put the horse in front of the cart and see if the cart follows? In other words, why not correct the issues that lead to bad habits, or reward bad habits, and see how people do before deciding whether or not they need to be educated on how to play "correctly". I see no point in having an extensive tutorial system if gameplay rewards tactics and strategies that it shouldn't. You can show the kids all you want of the "right" way to play, but if so-and-so exploit exists that gets the job done better, the efforts are for naught. So I say focus on eliminating the bad habits through gameplay changes.

FIFA 12's defensive changes are a great example. In 11, defending was a joke, and promoted all sorts of exploits, especially against the CPU. Teaching players not to rush in for tackles through tutorials would have been pointless, and so EA have gone about addressing the issue in the correct fashion, through gameplay changes. Will they be enough? I don't know. But that's for a different discussion.

As I said in the GC forum, it's not that I dislike the idea of a more advanced tutorial system per se, but that I would rather see the resources spent on improvements/changes to gameplay (and CM!) rather than attempting to teach fundamentals before the game properly promotes and rewards said fundamentals.
 
The point is that EA themselves were referring to WC2010 as being less realistic, while the FIFA games (10 & 11) were described as more realistic. That's what's being talked about in this particular case. I don't see why they'd think WC2010 was less realistic than FIFA 10 in any sense, other than perhaps that EA were quantifying 'harder to express yourself' with realism in that instance.

We can only worry ourselves with quantifying exactly what we mean by realism, or sim vs arcade, or depth, so many times. We know what we mean and EA know what we mean within the context of the discussion being held at the time, unless you just say '**** YOU EA MAKE THE GAME MORE REALISTIC'. The terminology only really an issue when people from different sides of the fence interact.
 
Ultimately though max, they had a year where the big thing was changing the passing, where EA themselves showed us a big old video of players hitting first time passes and the ball going in all sorts of directions, and what did we get? Passes that are just slower, but in the exact same direction.

I'll agree with the defensive changes being pretty big (which is why they're adding an interactive tutorial for it!), but ultimately that's because it's an immediately apparent, in-your-face change that everyone will notice straight away. They have of course left the old defending system in there as an option if you can't get on with it though - fingers crossed that's not going to make its way online.

So are EA refusing to make changes like what we were expecting with Pro Passing because they don't think the user base will be able to understand why certain passes are on/off target? Or do they not have the capacity to understand how to make such changes effectively in the first place? After all, the changes EA make are changes that aren't really isolated to sports, let alone football in particular. 360 movement, fluid animations, removing the pressure button, the impact engine... which changes have EA made recently that couldn't have been made by Naughty Dog, or the EA NHL devs, or any other high budget studio?

By constantly making big changes in isolated areas, all EA are doing is trying to balance the big changes we ask for against all the other areas of the game that need fixing. There's so much emphasis on tech for specific areas that the overall experience doesn't actually feel significantly different, or better, once you get past the novelty value of those two or three big hitters.

As far as creating a training centre and improving the gameplay is concerned, I'm not asking for one and then the other, because that demonstrably won't happen - a tutorial without a change means nothing, and a change without a tutorial leads to a dumbed down change.

I'm not asking for one to lead the other - I don't see one as the horse and one as the cart. Both need to lead each other simultaneously, otherwise I'm not sure we'll see much of either at all. And to me, there's no point in a better Career mode if the gameplay doesn't mirror your improvements from the Championship or lower to the Premiership.
 
Last edited:
I'm not 100% disagreeing by the way - it could well be a bad idea in the long run. But EA are never going to just work on CM without adding something else, and I'd far sooner they worked on making the gameplay far deeper for the post-November period, than on something like EA Football Club or Live Season 3.0 or the next Ultimate Team. I'd far sooner they used the non-gameplay team's spare resource that isn't going on CM for something beneficial to the game as a whole.
 
Are you making the assumption or the assertion that EA aren't changing gameplay for concerns of increasing difficulty levels too much?

I ask because my assumption has been that EA aren't making changes, not because of concerns over difficulty levels or because they aren't competent enough, but rather simply because they'd rather not rock the boat when sales are through the roof, and they'd prefer to focus on the biggest bang-for-the-buck marketing strategies; it's not that they are afraid of change, rather they just have no reason to change their MO.

Now if you were to tell me that you know that EA are afraid of adding depth out of fear that the fanbase wouldn't be able to adapt, and that adding a deep tutorial system is a solution to both the gap in difficulty and appeasing EA's fears, then I'd say hell yeah, do it.

All I'm saying is just make the damn changes and let people figure it out for themselves. Kids these days are pretty good at figuring out what works and what doesn't in games, and I'd bet that a game that emphasized fundamentals to a greater degree would naturally train gamers if done well.

And then again, if we're talking about dev resources that definitely won't, or can't, be used for gameplay or CM, then I couldn't care less whether they develop a tutorial system or not.
 
It's a bit of both. They've often said, particularly in terms of assisted, that they don't want to make changes because they have to consider people of all ability levels. They have said before that the reason they were reluctant to make the passing too directionally inaccurate was because they don't want to intimidate less skilled users. That was in Canada, over a year ago, and despite all the efforts Rod and I and others have made, there doesn't seem to be any change to pro passing from where we were last year. There's still time but I'm skeptical.

So it's assumptions and assertions adding together at the moment. The thing is that we don't want difficulty levels to go up - we just want the balance of what's easy and what's harder to change to something more in keeping with the sport. But I'm not convinced that this is getting through, simply because the only iteration we've had with the gameplay devs has been sending stuff to them in the hope they'll read it, the webcast and the hands-on.
 
Right, and if it's just a re-balancing that needs to take place, then EA shouldn't be so concerned with increased difficulty levels in the first place. For example, what they should be doing is make defending more skill-based(which they are doing, just maybe not enough) and to balance that, increase directional error in passing (which I guess they aren't doing). So while tackling becomes more challenging, interceptions rise and everything (hopefully) is balanced out.

But I get what you're saying about this not getting through. And while frankly I have doubts about the need of a tutorial mode or whatever, if it's something that will get the devs to change their approach, then I'm all for it. So, go make it happen.
 
Well I'll push it a bit more, but I won't go overboard. I do think you're right with what you say, particularly that it's something that would be quite a lot of work to implement, and I'm sure that'll be the first thing EA think when the idea is put to them. It's easier to show them the high workload than the high return. Maybe we should see how the interactive tutorial could be used as I've suggested, and go from there.

Maybe the best way to go about showing them that they dont have to fear the game becoming too hard is to go the slider route, try and convince EA to put the depth in there even if the sliders initially water them down, and then try and show them how the game should be balanced by using the right settings. There's no easy way to go about it, but that seems most plausible.
 
If anybody was wondering about how EA's buzz-talk regarding the upcoming iteration of this sports title has affected the general gamer who only buys triple A games that have a mass marketing campaign behind them, of which many would include those games that go as far as to advertise on the side of public transport, then the 'impact engine' is apparently a very appealing addition. When quizzed if they knew what the impact engine even was, the aforementioned person declined to offer any kind of real analysis as to what it could offer but sounded nonetheless hyped regardless.

It is good to know that throwing powerful marketing terms like 'impact engine' around each year is indeed doing the job for EA even if nobody knows lickidy-split about how well it looks like it functions.
 
romagnoli said:
Having an interactive tutorial that actually tells you about football, rather than just listing the contents of the manual, AND that presents you with challenges with some sort of reward or sense of competition, is a completely different beast altogether.
Click to expand...

Agree with this, though the reality is that when you play 99% of all players online, they would still ignore this in favour of a tactic that they feel would near guarantee them a good chance of winning. A lot of online players, in all games, seem to base their online experience according to how 'good' they are at the game against other people, which is why so many seem obsessed with stats, win/loss ratios etc. Competetive play against real people makes a lot of people ignore the spirit of how any game should be played for the sake of fun, and go all out for the win.

If anything, the people who will play football in as much a 'proper' way as they can, will already be aware of the basic fundamentals of the game. Those who don't care will still carry on to get a cheap win.

That said, I'd like tutorial challenges to enable you to get better against the AI for example, a bit like in the old PES games, as has already been said.

On a different note, all this talk about the new defensive system sounds encouraging, but what about offline against the AI? We'll have to wait for the demo I guess, but it'll be interesting if the new way of defending alters the AI at all, or whether it'll still blindly sprint into you in packs of 2-3 defenders. I'm anticipating this will still happen against the AI, I think it does this in 10 and 11 precisely because the game doesn't have the ability to defend in a more intelligent way.
 
That's why the gameplay changes are meant to be brought in at the same time. I completely agree that just attaching such a thing to FIFA 11 is a waste of time. When people suddenly find that lob throughballs and finesse shots aren't guaranteed to work, they need to know why.

At the same time it'd be useful if the feature explained concepts that the football 'purists' would get something from. I guarantee there are things about playing particular roles that we here don't know and could learn from, or indeed aspects of gameplay that we don't fully grasp.

A manual tutorial would be pretty sweet too...
 
mfmaxpower said:
All I'm saying is just make the damn changes and let people figure it out for themselves.
Click to expand...

Like Romi and i said. gamers these days don't want to figure it out for themselves, they want the game to do everything for them really. When gamers want to win, they don't want to spend time understanding football to further their skill, just find any shortcut to get them the win.

Many people couldn't care less about the gameplay balance, they just .. play! However the game is made and use whatever they can to get an advantage.. A tutorial ingame with gamer points and trophies on offer explaining all the functions in the game and how thinking football will help you is a good idea. it will also give EA more reason to add depth so people will actually see it!
 
Sliders are a good call, but there needs to be context to what they do. For example I don't want to just ramp up pro passing - I want to tell it to be less about power and more about direction.

@Klash - the other thing about having a tutorial that shows the depth to the game is that it actually spells out what EA would have done to make the game deep. So as well as having actual benefit, it's an opportunity for EA to say 'look what we've done', so the work they put into the gameplay is more readily appreciated. A lot of the depth in GT5 and other such titles would be missed by the average gamer if they didn't say 'look, we've got slipstreaming' and 'look, if you roll the body then you improve your cornering' etc.
 
You should suggest to Rutter that since EA no longer provides paper manuals with the game, that they can maybe use some of those savings on your in-game tutorial idea.
 
Yeah but what sliders should they add? I think it would be best if we helped them out so that they add meaningful sliders.

Here are some that their NHL game has that might be good (added a couple):

General
  • Attribute effect (used to exaggerate difference between players)
  • Fatigue (how much effect does low fatigue do)
  • Recover (time it takes for short time stamina to recover)
  • Ball control (low = more chances of bad touches, high = how it is now)
  • Acceleration time (do you reach top speed in 1 sec or longer)

Passing:
  • Speed (adjustment of average passing speed)
  • Accuracy (general accuracy of passes)
  • Reception Ease (mistakes in receiving a pass, more frequent or less frequent)

Shooting:
  • Shot Accuracy (how sensitive the accuracy error in shots are)
  • Power (global adjustment of average shot power)

Keepers:
  • Reaction time (e.g. time it take for the keeper to react to a shot)

Maybe people that play NBA2K know if they have any good sliders too that might work in FIFA.
 
Gab_ said:
Yeah but what sliders should they add? I think it would be best if we helped them out so that they add meaningful sliders.

Here are some that their NHL game has that might be good (added a couple):

General
  • Attribute effect (used to exaggerate difference between players)
  • Fatigue (how much effect does low fatigue do)
  • Recover (time it takes for short time stamina to recover)
  • Ball control (low = more chances of bad touches, high = how it is now)
  • Acceleration time (do you reach top speed in 1 sec or longer)

Passing:
  • Speed (adjustment of average passing speed)
  • Accuracy (general accuracy of passes)
  • Reception Ease (mistakes in receiving a pass, more frequent or less frequent)

Shooting:
  • Shot Accuracy (how sensitive the accuracy error in shots are)
  • Power (global adjustment of average shot power)

Keepers:
  • Reaction time (e.g. time it take for the keeper to react to a shot)

Maybe people that play NBA2K know if they have any good sliders too that might work in FIFA.
Click to expand...

Good sugestions Gab. But first they should make the stats worth something in fifa, and some of them seems to be useless, specially when the AI is playing. The passes for exemple, no matter which team is playing (a 5 star or a 2 star) that the AI will have always more than 85% of pass accuracy.

But anyway, there are my suggestions for sliders, also based on NHL game. Some of them are self comprehensible. If they can make all the stats working properly and don´t make sliders overrule the stats it could work.

GENERAL:
GAME SPEED - general game speed
GOALIES (CPU/USER) - weaker or stronger goalies
INGAME FATIGUE (CPU/USER) - stamina effect during the game
FATIGUE EFFECT (CPU/USER) - how worse the player will be with low stamina
SEASON FATIGUE (CPU/USER) - stamina effect after the game
INJURY OCCORENCY (CPU/USER) - injury occorency inside the game
PLAYER ACCELERATION (CPU/USER)
BALL CONTROL (CPU/USER) - better or worse control of the ball when dribling and running with the ball

RULES:
FOUL FREQUENCY (could be set to random to depend on the referee)
PENALTY FREQUENCY (could be set to random to depend on the referee)
CARDS FREQUENCY (could be set to random to depend on the referee)
HAND BALL (on / off / on with no penalties)

PASS:
SHORT PASS ACCURACY (CPU/USER)
SHORT PASS SPEED (CPU/USER)
LONG PASS ACCURACY (CPU/USER)
LONG PASS SPEED (CPU/USER)
THROUGH PASS ACCURACY (CPU/USER)
RECEPTION EASE - better or worse reception of passes

SHOT:
SHOT ACCURACY (CPU/USER)
SHOT POWER (CPU/USER)
HEADER ACCURACY (CPU/USER)
FK ACCURACY (CPU/USER)

DEFENSE:
AGGRESSIVENESS (CPU/USER) - how aggresive will be the defenders marking the ball carrier
TACKLING EFFECTIVENES (CPU/USER)
SLIDE TACKLE EFFECTIVENES (CPU/USER)
 
For the sake of comparison, these are the sliders available to edit in NBA 2K11, (each slider ranges from 0-100);

OFFENSE (User / CPU)
Inside Shot Success
Close Shot Success
Mid-Range Success
3-Pt Success
Layup Success
Dunk Success
Dunk In Traffic Success
Pass Accuracy
Alley Oop Success
Contact Shot Success

DEFENSE (User / CPU)
Driving Contact Shot Frequency
Inside Contact Shot Frequency
Help Defense Strength
Steal Success

ATTRIBUTES (User / CPU)
Quickness
Vertical
Strength
Stamina
Durability
Hustle
Ball Handling
Hands
Dunking Ability
On Ball Defense
Stealing
Blocking
Offensive Awareness
Defensive Awareness
Offensive Rebounding
Defensive Rebounding
Clutch Factor
Consistency
Fatigue Rate
Injury Frequency
Injury Severity

TENDENCIES (User / CPU)
Take Inside Shots
Take Close Shots
Take Mid-Range Shots
Take 3-PT Shots
Attack The Basket
Look For Post Players
Throw Alley Oops
Attempt Dunks
Attempt Putbacks
Throw Flashy Passes
Commit Fouls
Play Passing Lanes
Go For On Ball Steals
Contest Shots
Backdoor Cuts
 
One of the big big things in Nba 2k11 is Tendencies, as you see in Stuart's list. Tendencies should be brought to the game if we want players and teams to behave differently in the game. It can be done, as 2k shows...and it works quite well in the nba game, and you can edit things and see how teams or players do different things.

There would be player tendencies and team tendencies. And that would totally piss on the current personality+.

Though, given the poor overall state of the game, I'd say let's work on the basic fundamentals of movement and ball control first, and let behaviours out until this is done decently. Then, and only then, let's add personality.
 
romagnoli said:
The point is that EA themselves were referring to WC2010 as being less realistic, while the FIFA games (10 & 11) were described as more realistic. That's what's being talked about in this particular case. I don't see why they'd think WC2010 was less realistic than FIFA 10 in any sense, other than perhaps that EA were quantifying 'harder to express yourself' with realism in that instance.
Click to expand...

WC is less realistic, naturally "in my opinion"

All of the parts that made it "realistic" were emphatically the parts that made the game exploitable and very repetitive quickly.

With regard to tutorials, they wont work. A new mode wont work. The only way to do it is to make it a pre requisite to VP development. Much like I said in the GC forum, people "get" why you need to know how to do kick ups before you can hocus pocus at will.

There is already a development philosophy in VP's on and off line. What this needs is to be developed organically, possibly limiting who, where you can play until you have shown an appreciation and a level of maturity. Thats not to say you need to be ace a football, just understand and feel rewarded for whatever job your having to do on the pitch.

Basically I think its a great idea, just needs more talk and a way to introduce it in a unobtrusive way that feels "part" of the VP development process.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom