Random Idea: Speech Bubbles for Players

[RT--]

Actually, re-reading tedder_road's posts, I'm not sure that I understood the distinction he's making.

I don't think the ME works in a way that it 'deliberately' makes players make mistakes such as playing passes which get intercepted or shooting off target - that's all done dynamically. A player tries to make a pass and depending on a lot of variables, it will either get to his intended target or not - there's no pre-determined outcome.

[SCIAG]

I understand what you're saying. When a player makes a mistake that would be counted as one in the stats, it comes up with some sort of indication (I think commentary would be the best bet). If, however, a player is running with the ball and it is left behind due to a flaw in the code rather than a conscious decision to code an error, no message comes up.

[outtasync]

I think the only form of feedback we can get is through assistant's advice and the motivation panel.

Normally you see things in the motivation panel like "playing with confidence", "deserves his goal" etc, so maybe we can see "frustrated at his latest mistake" or "vows to work harder after mistake". That way I'd know my player is trying to make amends instead of deliberately being an arse when he screws up, so I wouldn't have to throw my keyboard at the screen.

[Insert_Goal_Here]

Give me strength Lord. I knew some of you lot were a few bricks short of a wall but come on, this is really, really easy to understand. Pay attention Elrithral in particular.

A player error : when a player does something in a match that causes a serious negative outcome for his team, or could have led to a serious negative outcome for his team.

Examples of player errors: A badly misplaced pass that instead finds an opponent in a critical part of the pitch, a mistimed header that lets the ball through for an attacker, a mistimed challenge causing the defender to stumble that leaves the attacker unmarked and in on goal, a terrible clearance, a goalie throwing the ball into his own net.

These are all things that players do because the match engine has deliberately decided that a player has made a mistake. The Match Engine is coded to simulate players making horrible mistakes.

Things that are not player errors: Missed shots, routinely missed passes, clearances that go out for a throw-in, giving away possession through dwelling on the ball, being weak and losing out in a tackle or a challenged header.

There is a THIRD kind of error. The error that occurs because the match engine has a bug in the code. Prior to patch 10.1.1, an example would be this bug that was fixed :

"Made keeper hoof bobbly ball clear when dangerous to try to control it"

This was something the keeper was doing because the Match Engine had a bug in the code. The coders of the Match Engine do not want the keeper to attempt to control the ball when it's bouncing around all over the place, but he was doing it anyway. A player error has been generated, but it's one that occured because the match engine had a fault in it.

So you've got players making two kinds of mistake.

What I am asking for is the match engine to reveal to us when it has made a mistake ON PURPOSE. And therefore, when a terrible mistake happens and the match engine says NOTHING, what can we infer? That the match engine has generated that mistake, BY MISTAKE! This helps us to understand when the players are doing something wrong because they are humans (or simulated humans) who make mistakes from time to time, or if it's our tactics or in fact a bug in the game. I think this would help us to understand a bit more about the match engine, about our players and would also help a lot with testing, surely?

If you don't get it now, I am done trying to help you!

Nobody's going to help you. Let alone Him (whether he exists or not is another question entirely).

You know nothing about the other posters, bar what they have posted. A user's posts are no indication of their intelligence.

Perhaps some user's didn't immediately understand what you were trying to say because you didn't explain it properly the first time around, therefore making it not really really easy to understand.

You mentioned speech bubbles which immediately rendered the rest of the thread and your posts throughout the duration of your time on these forums pointless IMO (but i don't expect you to care).

As for my opinion on whether it should be implemented into the game: No.

[tonif]

Normally you see things in the motivation panel like "playing with confidence", "deserves his goal" etc, so maybe we can see "frustrated at his latest mistake" or "vows to work harder after mistake". That way I'd know my player is trying to make amends instead of deliberately being an arse when he screws up, so I wouldn't have to throw my keyboard at the screen.

You're missing the point entirely, with due respect.

[_Asprilla_]

I dont think this would ever happen - why would SI want to flag all of the bugs to users of the game - imagine these forums then?! lol

[SCIAG]

I dont think this would ever happen - why would SI want to flag all of the bugs to users of the game - imagine these forums then?! lol

They're not doing that though, they're flagging things which aren't bugs

[tonif]

They're not doing that though, they're flagging things which aren't bugs

Yeah...but...by flagging things that aren't bugs, testers can easily spot the things that are bugs.

[FM_Since_Its_Birth]

*head explodes*

The phrase going around in circles springs to mind!!

[stevedaytona]

Yeah...but...by flagging things that aren't bugs, testers can easily spot the things that are bugs.

I'm sure SI would never think of doing that in the testing phase

How can the ME possibly differentiate between player mistakes that are errors in code and player mistakes that are not errors in code?

If only it were that easy.

[SCIAG]

How can the ME possibly differentiate between player mistakes that are errors in code and player mistakes that are not errors in code?

It already does so. How else is it supposed to record the "mistakes/leading to goals" statistic?

[tonif]

How can the ME possibly differentiate between player mistakes that are errors in code and player mistakes that are not errors in code?

Believe you me, the ME 'knows' exactly which are player's mistakes, simply because the ME chooses to, deliberately, put them there, mostly at random.

[mdbussen]

rather more helpful would be a much more comprehensive and detailed match report. If the match report said that a player had a poor touch or shanked the shot with his weaker foot we would have a much better idea of what is worth complaining about

[tonif]

rather more helpful would be a much more comprehensive and detailed match report. If the match report said that a player had a poor touch or shanked the shot with his weaker foot we would have a much better idea of what is worth complaining about

It already does that. If you read the match report carefully, you will notice that, every pass, every interception, every shot, every tackle, every save, etc., has been documented, including player's mistakes.

[v InterfectoR v]

I like this idea

[mdbussen]

It already does that. If you read the match report carefully, you will notice that, every pass, every interception, every shot, every tackle, every save, etc., has been documented, including player's mistakes.

really? i will have to look back at this when I get a chance but I don't remember there being a very impressive level of detail in the match reports...

[gunner86]

It already does so. How else is it supposed to record the "mistakes/leading to goals" statistic?

Well said.

I think this is exactly the point of the OP. Mistakes, to the most part are intentionally added to the ME. However, there are mistakes made by players that are not intentional of the ME (player running the wrong way, shooting backwards etc) these are because of bugs etc. The ME does not realise these are bugs because it is missing code, programming error etc.

That said, the ME knows when it has intentionally added a player mistake. What the OP is asking for is a visual reresentation of which mistakes are added intentionally, that way all other mistakes are unintentional and thus caused by bugs.

[Scott1990]

Good idea! Maybe have personalized speech bubbles too:

Wayne Rooney can have one where he solicits prostitution while on the pitch.

Jermaine Pennant's speech bubbles should be misspelled because he's illiterate

Ashley Cole should only have one possible speech bubble where he says "$$$$$$$$$$$$"

Joey Barton can laugh maliciously whenever he makes a sliding tackle

Alan Smith has to talk in the third person and say "Alan Smith... he can pop up anywhere" whenever he touches the ball

[tonif]

Well said.

I think this is exactly the point of the OP. Mistakes, to the most part are intentionally added to the ME. However, there are mistakes made by players that are not intentional of the ME (player running the wrong way, shooting backwards etc) these are because of bugs etc. The ME does not realise these are bugs because it is missing code, programming error etc.

That said, the ME knows when it has intentionally added a player mistake. What the OP is asking for is a visual reresentation of which mistakes are added intentionally, that way all other mistakes are unintentional and thus caused by bugs.

:thup: Finally, someone else managed to 'decode' the OP's idea

[FM1000]

:thup: Finally, someone else managed to 'decode' the OP's idea

It only took 70 posts

[tonif]

Good idea! Maybe have personalized speech bubbles too:

Wayne Rooney can have one where he solicits prostitution while on the pitch.

Jermaine Pennant's speech bubbles should be misspelled because he's illiterate

Ashley Cole should only have one possible speech bubble where he says "$$$$$$$$$$$$"

Joey Barton can laugh maliciously whenever he makes a sliding tackle

Alan Smith has to talk in the third person and say "Alan Smith... he can pop up anywhere" whenever he touches the ball

How about a speech bubble for Scott1990 saying (in the third person) "Scott1990...he can go off-topic whenever he feels like..."

[gunner86]

It only took 70 posts

Actually it only took me 45...

Just took me a further 25 to illustrate this.

[wwfan]

I'm not going to go too much into ME mechanics, but it works like this:

Players can make mistakes, such as overhit easy passes or scuff shots, because they have failed a decision or composure check, for example. What the OP would like is to know whether the action on the pitch is the result of such a 'failed check' (i.e. player x missed the target because he lost his composure at a vital moment (part of the ME mechanics)) or an actual bug (player failed to close down his man because there was an error in the code that prevented it).

Whereas the former, which is what the OP is asking for, is perfectly feasible, the latter, which he isn't talking about, quite patently isn't. For what it is worth, I think some kind of feedback about the former would be very beneficial.

[gunner86]

I'm not going to go too much into ME mechanics, but it works like this:

Players can make mistakes, such as overhit easy passes or scuff shots, because they have failed a decision or composure check, for example. What the OP would like is to know whether the action on the pitch is the result of such a 'failed check' (i.e. player x missed the target because he lost his composure at a vital moment (part of the ME mechanics)) or an actual bug (player failed to close down his man because there was an error in the code that prevented it).

Whereas the former, which is what the OP is asking for, is perfectly feasible, the latter, which he isn't talking about, quite patently isn't. For what it is worth, I think some kind of feedback about the former would be very beneficial.

I'm glad to see someone else on board. You say you don't want to go into the ME mechanics, but do you think there is a simple way for this to be implemented? and do you think it is something SI may consider?

[wwfan]

I think better feedback is something that is needed and this is one way of doing it. I'm sure it has already been noted.

[RT--]

Would an extra line of text commentary not do the trick, though?

"Player x takes a first time shot/

But it goes well wide/

He showed a lack of composure in front on goal, there"

[RT--]

Incidentally, why would a poor decision maker scuff a shot or overhit a short pass?

[Salvector]

Ah, have to admit, I'm not a fan of this idea.

[Insert_Goal_Here]

Good idea! Maybe have personalized speech bubbles too:

Wayne Rooney can have one where he solicits prostitution while on the pitch.

Jermaine Pennant's speech bubbles should be misspelled because he's illiterate

Ashley Cole should only have one possible speech bubble where he says "$$$$$$$$$$$$"

Joey Barton can laugh maliciously whenever he makes a sliding tackle

Alan Smith has to talk in the third person and say "Alan Smith... he can pop up anywhere" whenever he touches the ball

Good idea, similar to mine that i posted near the beginning, however you need to be aware that Cashley's speech bubble would be "££££££££££" unless he collects his wage packet in cash in USD and then goes to an exchange...

[Insert_Goal_Here]

I like this idea

I think the OP has created another account.

[wwfan]

Incidentally, why would a poor decision maker scuff a shot or overhit a short pass?

Chose to try and power it rather than place it. Chose to try and take it on his weaker foot instead of waiting half a second longer and hit it with his stronger. Chose to make a first time pass rather than control it first. Many possible reasons. It was only an illustration, not an absolute example.

Aye, extra commentary would be fine. Likewise, an Ass Man's report highlighting it.

[Insert_Goal_Here]

Chose to try and power it rather than place it. Chose to try and take it on his weaker foot instead of waiting half a second longer and hit it with his stronger. Chose to make a first time pass rather than control it first. Many possible reasons. It was only an illustration, not an absolute example.

Aye, extra commentary would be fine. Likewise, an Ass Man's report highlighting it.

Commentary maybe and although an Ass Man's report would work, wouldn't we be cluttered with far too much information if it was, say, a particulary error strewn match?

[RT--]

wwfan: Ah, fair enough - that makes sense. (I've always been curious how the decision making stat actually works, because it seems to necessitate some concept of what the 'right' decision is in a given situation - either that, I suppose, or it would have to influence the likelihood of an obviously bad decision being made)

Anyway, on the basis of what you've said, it doesn't seem like a huge stretch for the guys to communicate a few of the ME calculations in football speak, through commentary, feedback or any other mechanism.

[mdbussen]

wwfan: Ah, fair enough - that makes sense. (I've always been curious how the decision making stat actually works, because it seems to necessitate some concept of what the 'right' decision is in a given situation - either that, I suppose, or it would have to influence the likelihood of an obviously bad decision being made)

Anyway, on the basis of what you've said, it doesn't seem like a huge stretch for the guys to communicate a few of the ME calculations in football speak, through commentary, feedback or any other mechanism.

I don't want to open up a can of worms here but doesn't this imply that a player with poorer decision making may actually get a better result in a certain subset of cases?

for instance, although it may not be the "right" decision for a right-footed player to take the shot on with his left foot, a player with poorer decision making may try this and score whereas a player with better decision making may choose not to shoot and become dispossessed? Or does the "right" decision have knowledge of the better outcome?

my head hurts!

[wwfan]

Of course, but only if his technical ability compensates for his mental. Although it might be the wrong decision for a player (in terms of difficulty versus time available) to shoot powerfully with his wrong foot, his technical ability might still mean this results in a goal or a good save.

[tonif]

my head hurts!

Mine too! It's 1am here, time for dreamland...zzzzzz

P.S. I keep seeing speech bubbles all over the place, as soon as I close my eyes...

[Piethief100]

I understand the original idea - and I'm going to assume that the aim of the OP was to minimise the amount of non-intentional ME mistakes (by bug reports etc) and also to allow him to patch up his tactics if needed.

BUT would this actually make a difference? From what I've read on the countless threads discussing whether the result is pre-determined before a game (it isn't), the animations are just graphical representations of the calculation that the ME has already made. Every time a change is made to tactics the ME recalculates the score.

In respect to this situation, I think that this means that it doesn't matter if the ME makes an unintentional mistake that leads to a goal because the ME had already calculated (from your latest tactical tweaks) that you deserved to concede. So whether from an unintentional mistake, or a genuine opposition attacking move, you're going to concede speech bubbles or not.

Almost as hard to explain as the OP - hope I haven't confused people too much!

[Almondo]

I don't like it. And how long would it be, before people here say SI just put that there to hide that inadequecies of the ME?

Not the best idea, tbh. And seeing as this game is aimed at a younger generation, I don't think many parents would be happy about it either.

I'd give that about two minutes after the demo had been released

[Menion]

Tbh I like it Would make me feel better when im giving the player a lot of abuse for messing up. Could even have the manager ranting and storming along the side line when the player messes up.

[FM_Since_Its_Birth]

Its gonna turn into sensible soccer or something at this rate!!

[Menion]

Its gonna turn into sensible soccer or something at this rate!!

Haha would that be so bad? I think this game sometimes tries to be too serious. A little bit of needless fun (like the scout/coach reports on SI staff) make the game all that more enjoyable

[betterspud]

FWIW I understood the point straight from post 1! (Do I get some kind of prize? )

First, like many others, I don't think that a speech bubble is the right idea.

However, I do agree that some kind of feedback to highlight when the player has made a hash of it is necessary. I'm not entirely sure that extra lines of commentary would be the right way to go either. As it is, there are times when we get several lines of commentary in succession and it's difficult to both read and watch the pitch at the same time. Visual cues, on pitch would be better in some way.

Don't know the solution, but there's plenty of room for improvement in feedback.

[outtasync]

You're missing the point entirely, with due respect.

I'm not sure why expanding the motivation panel would be missing the point entirely. The OP is suggesting some form of feedback (speech bubbles) to let players acknowledge that they made a mistake, and this feedback could be shown through the motivation panel. Someone else mentioned the motivation panel as well so I don't know what you think the point is exactly :confused: