I Think the Game Needs Storylines

Once while managing West Ham I had a board takeover about 6 months into my reign. It had been speculated about for a while before it happened, with Steve Clarke (wtf) being considered the new owners preference to replace me. I was third in the league (expected mid table) and yet once the takeover went through I lost my job, and shortly afterwards they did indeed hire Steve Clarke as manager. He came in, bought 3 LBs, ignored the great prospects I had signed, and just narrowly avoided relegation. I was so angry!

This really made me long for better interaction and storytelling within the game. For example, I was talking **** to Clarke at every opportunity I could, insulting his team and managerial ability etc. I was genuinely bitter about losing my job after all. However apart from being told that my comments were "the latest in a long running feud between the two managers" I struggled to get much satisfaction from this. I felt that with slightly more options I could have got him relegated that season, and I am still bitter about this to this day.

So...

A slightly outrageous idea that I have had would be to ditch most of the current media in the game, and redesign it around "storylines" and a "media department" It sounds silly but let me explain it better using my example above. Suppose we are at the stage where the board takeover is being rumoured. This would become a "storyline" for both my manager character and my club. When Steve Clarke gets linked, he is also then involved. At this point, the questions at any press conferences I am in will always be relevant to, or have undertones relating to my current storylines. For example, they may be direct with me "Do you think you will keep your job" or less direct/more sly: "The performance against x was great, do you think the players are trying to show their support for you?" My answers will have 2 effects:

1. Morale effects on the players depending on their personalities, pretty much how it works currently

2. Move the storyline forward and determine the "pressure rating" of the story on the people and club it relates to.

Perhaps I say, "Yes, the players want me to stay." I have now brought my players into the storyline and they are now subject to its pressure rating (if I were to have said "No the players are focused on football solely" then the opposite would be true.) Now, when we lose, there will be added pressure on the players who now have to have their motivations speculated about. Mishandling a story, or allowing too many factors to become involved could seriously damage your team, and you would have to seek a resolution (or in this example wait for one.) Inversely, if I handle the story well by continuing to win, for example, then confidence will rise, and more importantly in this case my players would begin to favour me, which could lead to the all important "overwhelming support for you" message when you don't get sacked by the new chairman.

Suppose I get the sack and Steve Clarke takes over. At this point the storyline would involve Me, Steve Clarke, and the club (which he is now managing). Steve Clarke can choose not to be drawn on it, or say there is nothing going on, in which case I could make the same decision and the storyline would lay dormant, perhaps only being resurrected slyly by the media were we to play against other.

However I am bitter about losing my job, so I want to insult him. So I say that he is the wrong man for the job. If he loses his first match, the pressure rating of the story will increase. The media may focus on one particularly bad performer and question whether he preferred playing for me, to try and get that player involved in the story. If Clarke allows himself to be drawn in some way, that player could become a component of the story and be subject to its pressure rating. Perhaps I criticise a signing he makes and if he gets drawn on the question that player could become part of the story. If I choose a high rep player the media will be more favourable to getting him involved. That would be a rule about the media: They will try and bring as many factors into the storyline as possible, especially high rep ones, in order to sell the stories.

Now, suppose I get a job quite quickly and soon enough have to play Steve Clarke’s West Ham. If the pressure rating of the story is high, this should be a BIG game! The media should be all over it. If I beat him convincingly it should be able to make his job impossible. I want to be able to ruin his career for ****ing with me!

Obviously I could lose out too, particularly if there was some sort of “credibility rating” or “media image/description” that would have different effects in game. For example if I get sacked and then start talking smack at Steve Clarke, if he continues to win and deflect my comments then my credibility rating (the tendency of the media to report me positively) would drop, and/or I would have a media image or description of something like “bitter ex-manager.” For example when you read a story that begins “Love rat Ashley Cole.....” it makes your mind up for you as to whether he is the good guy or the bad guy in the story. Having a low credibility rating or negative media image could lead to it being harder for a manager to get a job, or for a player to get a chance with a club.

Some other examples of how stories would work:

Player complains to media he wants more first team football. This is now a storyline involving him and the club. If the media ask you about it you can brush it off, fine the player and hope he doesn't say anything else to make the storyline reappear. Alternatively, you may say that you don't think he has earned a spot in the team. You have challenged him and are now an active part of the storyline. If you play him and he plays well then you can go back on your earlier statement (and lose credibility or be viewed as fickle) or challenge him further, raising the pressure of the storyline.

You miss out on a signing to a rival The media ask you if you are upset that player x joined your rivals when you also had a bid accepted. You could give the non-commital "in the middle opition" and hope they drop the interest (if it is a high rep player they may be hungry for the story), or you could say "No he will be a flop" or "Yes he is an amazing player" as the two extreme choices. Choosing anything but the middle option would begin the storyline. For example if I say that they paid too much money for him then a storyline begins involving me, player x and the manager of my rivals. If player x does well, then the media will question me and I could perhaps lose credibility or become a "Stingy Manager." Perhaps if I signed a different high rep player, they may try and get him involved in the story by comparing the two signings. If I let him get involved then he will subject to the pressure rating of the story, and it could go wrong.

Also imagine the following, and what would motivate you in each of these situations.

Player gets injured from a bad tackle

Player wants to leave

Player sold against his will

etc

In all situations you could not commit, and thus give them no story, but you could also choose to say things to effect the pressure and reputation of the other clubs and players in the game.

A club's image will generally be affected by all of the storylines which involve at least 1 of their employees.

Managers and players image will only be affected by storylines which they are an active part of.

Pressure, as I imagine it is already, it contagious. It would be possible to have 1 or 2 players acting as conduits for extreme pressure by virtue of the storylines they are in, even if nobody else at their club is in one.

The average reputation of the components of the storyline determines the initial "media interest." This would be relative to your standing in the football world, and the size of the media that cover you. If more than one component of the storyline keeps it going with extremely committed answers then the media interest will at least stay stable.

If your credibility becomes low then there is a higher chance that the media will report you and the things you say in a negative way, even getting to the point where they openly mock you.

Fans have memory. They will remember managers that have insulted their club (Rafa at Chelsea) or tried to destabilise their players. If you annoy too many fans in your country then you could become a hate icon, as the media have a large market for negative stories about you. Think John Terry and Ashley Cole.

Not a complete idea by any stretch, but I'm hoping that the way it uses terms of pressure and reputation makes it at least slightly familiar. Thoughts? Media interaction on the whole is very shallow at the moment, I think something like this would be revolutionary for the series.

While I agree that press conferences and individual interactions do need a major overhaul the level of detail here would probably drastically slow the game. Your interwoven story lines would not just be calculated for you but also for every AI manager, club, and player in the game. Your suggestions would be a fantastic addition to the game immersion, but I would rather have more leagues playable at a decent speed then slower gameplay for the sake of interaction with other characters in the game.

I do think that there need to be more varied items that you get asked about, and the feuds between people should be little more prominent than it already is.

Sorry to hear about you losing you job dude!

You seem to take the media aspect of football too seriously.

My opinion is that tabloid journalism is utter rubbish, a stain on football and society, and should be eradicated. Managers and players can do without the unnecessary attention IMO, and those who actively play themselves up in the media (i.e. H.Redknapp) are merely disguising their weaknesses in actual football ability.

I like what you are suggesting here. I definitely think that the media side of the game requires constant improvement, and something like what you suggest could really liven it up. My only objection is that it all seems very complicated.

What's the short version of this post?

I quite like the gist of your idea, but agree that it may be too complicated to implement fully. I think meeting halfway could be an option. I think certainly manager feuds could be a little more visible, as could the engine potentially recognising games that are looking particularly 'spicy'.

As if anyone could hate Steve Clarke.

I like the idea personally. Whether we agree or not regarding what and how the media act in this country (particularly), they are an integral part of sport now, whether we like it or not.

As you say, Cole, Terry, Mourinho etc etc. Hell, look at England managers as a prime case of how the media can directly affect you and your job. Thumbs up from me

I would be all for a complete rebuild of the media-press section of the game, because right now I'm answering the exact same questions about the exact same player every other press conference. Mostly I send the assman because "Yes, Scantlebury is great, the fans are great, etc." gets old after being asked about him for 7 years straight. And I LOVE the player.

I DO like reading the player biographies that develop over the player's career, it makes me feel like they were part of something good (even after I let them go on a free and they retire when no one picks them up.)

I think there should deffinetly be random events that happen and you have to make a choice on how to deal with the situation.

For example a fight happens in the training field and you have to decide wether to punish one or both etc.

Having played a lot of Crusader Kings 2 this last year, this topic brought to mind the "events" you have in that game which can affect your rulers fate/stats. I wonder if similar events or stories could trigger on certain event ie. a board takeover at end of season occurs when the team is slightly underperforming, triggering a "Save Your Job" event that could throw up unique questions in press conferences ("Potential new owner has been linked with Harry Redknapp for the job if he takes over, how does that affect you and your team?") or players who like 'Arry suddenly not trying so hard or sowing dissent in the changing room, which would keep things fresh and would make the gameworld seem more real by reacting to current events with unique responses rather than the same stock questions.

Even better: give fans the chance to use those event tools to create more in-game scenarios. SI have the mechanics of the game pretty much down at this point (with some refinements here and there), but that's what the last iteration felt like to me - mechanical. It lacked that draw that previous games had, so maybe it was just me getting jaded by the game and finding another game (CK2) to obsess over.

Please no, I don't want a football RPG, media stuff are the worst part of the game, I'd like to see them deleted not made more important.

A well-thought out idea for sure, and I agree that the game has kind of reached a crucial point with this. Either the game immerses you more into this with much more in the way of options, variation and intelligence, or pull back completely from it. As it stands now, the repetition and limitations of the media-handling is just plain annoying - personally I tend to flick through answers very quickly selecting mostly the same answers in calm mode, it's just an irritation. Personally, I'd prefer less of it as I'm not sure I'd ever be convinced by the rpg aspect and don't think it's worth slowing the game down and taking away from developments in more intrinsic elements of the game.

I think the whole media idea in the game is a joke. The questions are too repetitive, boring and don't give enough options for the manager to give, in many cases, a sensible answer. Just the same garbage, week in week out. I never attend the press conferences and don't respond to the same rubbish from journalists - like responding to dumb quotes from opposition managers.

The chairman/club spokesperson never gets involved in ANY conversations with the media - the latter often been the liaison between club and supporters. The whole thing should be taken out of the game or at least give you the option to switch it off all together.

I've often wondered what happens if every time you go to a press conference, the first question is asked, and no matter what the question is, you storm out?

Having played a lot of Crusader Kings 2 this last year, this topic brought to mind the "events" you have in that game which can affect your rulers fate/stats. I wonder if similar events or stories could trigger on certain event ie. a board takeover at end of season occurs when the team is slightly underperforming, triggering a "Save Your Job" event that could throw up unique questions in press conferences ("Potential new owner has been linked with Harry Redknapp for the job if he takes over, how does that affect you and your team?") or players who like 'Arry suddenly not trying so hard or sowing dissent in the changing room, which would keep things fresh and would make the gameworld seem more real by reacting to current events with unique responses rather than the same stock questions.

This sounds very interesting! Its definitely too late to implement into FM 14, though...

This is an amazing idea,would love to see it implemented, problem is most FM players can barely run 5+ nations without the game slowing down!

Maybe you could have an option to "disable storylines" on slower computers? Just a thought....

Definitely will add a bit more realism to the game. I know a lot of people only like to focus on the football, the game. But controversies, stories, rumors, gossips this is what makes football so interesting these days.

I must admit to being sceptical when I saw the title of this thread, but I like the idea. It'd be important not to take it too far though, as that'd get tedious, but in terms of immersion this would be a nice step to take. We've all had rivals on FM save games, but the feud never feels genuine. This sort of feature, which would link together different interactions and events would help to rectify that.

I've often wondered what happens if every time you go to a press conference, the first question is asked, and no matter what the question is, you storm out?

I tried it once and ll you get are the same dumb questions but the reporters usually now have a dislike of you and are unfriendly. Also, if SI made these things real you

would not be allowed to duck out of PL post match interviews (unless of course you where Alex Ferguson)

I tried it once and ll you get are the same dumb questions but the reporters usually now have a dislike of you and are unfriendly. Also, if SI made these things real you

would not be allowed to duck out of PL post match interviews (unless of course you where Alex Ferguson)

you know, because I am "new" to competitive international football, I've never actually seen a high-level coach go nuts in a press-conference. Do you think those might be on youtube for viewing? Must run off and look.