A media idea. (Something I've always wanted).

Hey, you may have seen me post around different forums and I'd like to say hello and thank you for reading this post.

Onto the main subject, for a while now I've been bored of ALWAYS having to click the answer you want to give the media, sometimes the same thing. Now during a real conference, the manager usually never says the same thing week in/out so maybe could SI somehow implement a box that let's you answer the questions personally, to a newspaper or conference after/before a game.

Example

Q: What do you think of your teams performance today?

Then you could type up your own thing like

''Well, I thought our performance was a steady, slow but effective performance and I'd like to thank the opposition for a great game''.

Opinions?

I don't think the AI is advanced enough to do that.

I thought about this idea before but personally i feel it wouldn't be possible and it would take alot of work to get this correct as they need to involve different responses for things and everyone will have different things to say on the game.

I know it will be really difficult but couldn't they have a huge list of key words that let's the media understand what the main response is.

I think it would be a great idea but i think that Si already work hard enough and this would just make things more awkward and harder plus there could be a lot of bugs in the game and the database would be larger.

Originally posted by Aldokemp(H):

I think it would be a great idea but i think that Si already work hard enough and this would just make things more awkward and harder plus there could be a lot of bugs in the game and the database would be larger.

I know but surely they could try find a way for later games (I know it can't be in FM09). It wouldn't make the database that large, just a bit that recognises main key words like 'great' and 'poor'.

It’s a reasonable idea, and one I've long entertained. But given peoples atrocious spelling it might be a better idea to have a drop down tick box menu to give the ‘Tone’ of the reply, rather than searching the text for keywords. Contrary to Insomniac Ronnie’s assertion that it wouldn’t increase the size of database significantly, it would. A word search would require the addition of expansive dictionaries in all of the supported languages, and could slow the processing down as it searches for matches throughout the whole text. Additionally, the context might not be obvious to a search program. If someone were to write 'That wasn't too bad, could have been better, but I'm satisfied' the search could latch onto the word 'bad' without understanding the context of its use, and think it a negative comment. It would be impossible to protect against this as sentences can be composed in nigh on infinite combinations of words. Finally, those of us with larger vocabularies shouldn’t be disenfranchised and have to re-enter comments because we used Abysmal instead of Poor.

A tick box for Tone of Voice, that ranges through emotional (Angry, victorious, overjoyed etc.) and other possibilities (sarcastic, diplomatic, humorous, flippant etc.) wouldn’t necessitate the search function, but instead directly plug into whatever the responses from media, managers and players would be.

And like every idea on the forums, it should be an option. Give people the chance to either go with a standard formulaic response, or if they have time and inclination to fill out a text box and tick a tone, allow them that.

Though I would like a small word search included. One that recognises expletives and text speak. So that any manager using such language to the press is fined and given a touchline ban. The schadenfreude would be delicious.

Originally posted by Cavenagh:

It’s a reasonable idea, and one I've long entertained. But given peoples atrocious spelling it might be a better idea to have a drop down tick box menu to give the ‘Tone’ of the reply, rather than searching the text for keywords. Contrary to Insomniac Ronnie’s assertion that it wouldn’t increase the size of database significantly, it would. A word search would require the addition of expansive dictionaries in all of the supported languages, and could slow the processing down as it searches for matches throughout the whole text. Additionally, the context might not be obvious to a search program. If someone were to write 'That wasn't too bad, could have been better, but I'm satisfied' the search could latch onto the word 'bad' without understanding the context of its use, and think it a negative comment. It would be impossible to protect against this as sentences can be composed in nigh on infinite combinations of words. Finally, those of us with larger vocabularies shouldn’t be disenfranchised and have to re-enter comments because we used Abysmal instead of Poor.

A tick box for Tone of Voice, that ranges through emotional (Angry, victorious, overjoyed etc.) and other possibilities (sarcastic, diplomatic, humorous, flippant etc.) wouldn’t necessitate the search function, but instead directly plug into whatever the responses from media, managers and players would be.

And like every idea on the forums, it should be an option. Give people the chance to either go with a standard formulaic response, or if they have time and inclination to fill out a text box and tick a tone, allow them that.

Though I would like a small word search included. One that recognises expletives and text speak. So that any manager using such language to the press is fined and given a touchline ban. The schadenfreude would be delicious.

That is one problem, the search could mix it words but it wouldn't be as bad as some of the confidence bugs there is right now would it? I also love your idea of the tick box's with tone of voice etc, and if you have the tone of voice it gives you different tick boxes to choose from instead of the same 5 week in/out. Great post Cavenagh

Originally posted by Insomniac Ronnie:

I know it will be really difficult but couldn't they have a huge list of key words that let's the media understand what the main response is.

The problem there is that you'd just get a load of complaints because people's team talk didn't have the effect they intended because the way the game interprets certain keywords might not marry with the user's meaning on that specific occasion.

It would be far too complex and unnecessary, in my opinion. I feel a much, much, much wider range of options to choose from would be better. And so as to avoid the problem described above, it should be much more clear what the different options mean. Having said that, we shouldn't be allowed to just know what effect they will have because no manager ever truly knows what their team talk will do.

I would just prefer a larger list to choose from so you didn't have to say the same thing over and over (which for me at the moment is no comment.

Which is hopefully something SI are working on.