FM16 tactics screen discussion

[MBarbaric]

@dagenham_dave

i was speaking about the donut that flips the boxes on the pitch.

[Dagenham_Dave]

@dagenham_dave

i was speaking about the donut that flips the boxes on the pitch.

Ah right ok. Yes, that does seem a somewhat pointless addition.

[eric1000]

and what if thats false, incorrect or misunderstood?

How does that help anyone?

How do professional reviews that are paid for help anyone? At least user reviews are an indication of how the person actually feels about the game and not how much his review fills his wallet.

[eric1000]

Just a thought here. If the boxes ( which most here appear to agree make the eyes bleed because of a high ugly stat ) were transparent, the area that is now given over to the player number could instead house a kit icon that contained a smaller number ( if the number were needed at all ) while the rest of the info remained in it's relative position. This would satisfy those that prefer the shirts while keeping the boxes for the functionality.

[ctfm2012]

at the very least what they can do is give users the option to choose which interface they would like to use for their tactics. It should have been that way with previous versions, the game is constantly morphing year by year. SI needs to make the application more robust for users from an interactive point of view. Give users 3 layouts to use and if users still don't like what has been offered to them make the application more robust where users can setup their own interface for the tactics.

Every time tactics interface gets a remake it takes time for people to get use to it which hinders their play style from previous versions. Players should be able to pickup from where they last left of with instead of a new interface year in year out and taking time to learn it. The application causes players to chew up more time on what new system is in place when instead it should be second nature to them. Yes we do need improvements but what i'm seeing here in the last few versions is that tactics screen has not given players more interactive flexibility on setting it up the way they want. Instead it's a forced change which they have to adapt to.

[RTHerringbone]

At the very least, that would require twice as much work on the interface. Supporting two UIs would mean twice the amount of support too. Bug reports would need to stipulate which UI you are using, because fixing one wouldn't necessarily fix the other. I just don't see it happening.

[Cougar2010]

How do professional reviews that are paid for help anyone? At least user reviews are an indication of how the person actually feels about the game and not how much his review fills his wallet.

That doesn't answer my question, it just dodges it.

[Dagenham_Dave]

At least user reviews are an indication of how the person actually feels about the game and not how much his review fills his wallet.

Yes, but the flip side of this is that many negative user reviews - particularly the vitriolic kind - are constructed by people who have no understanding of how the game works and are merely ranting at not being able to just pick a team and watch them win every week.

[Guest]

How do professional reviews that are paid for help anyone? At least user reviews are an indication of how the person actually feels about the game and not how much his review fills his wallet.

I amazed that educated people still believe this rubbish.

[fabioke]

Er, I watched the video where he clicked on the thing and it opened up and showed what info was on the screen.

EDIT - Unless we're talking about two completely different things, but I'm talking about this...

I think in saves where I have a settled formation that doesn't need much tinkering, if any, I'll use this to pick the team most matches. Nice wee addition.

Good job Miles and dave for posting this, I'm definitely going to give this a chance. Making a video with explanations gives a much better vibe IMHO.

If this was coupled with the announcement I'm quite sure that the outrage would never have happened.

This years announcement's style was not my cup of tea.

[Katarian]

Watching that video does make it look better then FM15, certainly in terms of usability if not aesthetics. Though to be honest it wasn't the pitch that annoyed me most in FM15 it was the rest of the screen and low res screenshots just make it seem even worse on FM16.

[vpaulus]

I wasn't amazed with tactic screen presented earlier this week. Yesterday I watched Miles video and I found it quite interesting. I understand and appreciate the concept, however something he said just wasn't right "We changed from shirts to boxes because we needed extra space for extra functionality". . I have come up with very quick mockup (2 hours in Photoshop/Illustrator), hopefully to demonstrate that you can still incorporate shirts within tactic screen. No offence, but these boxes are just awful, especially fading out black stripes...bleh. So to keep it short, in bullet points

• I kept exact dimensions of your boxes
  
• Replaced poor grapefruit slice with easy to understand, clear to read bar
  
• Left side of the number - space reserved for icons (yellow cards, injury)
  
• Bottom part of the box - I feel distinction between position and role should not be presented by hyphen. I came up with slightly lighter background - Easier on the eyes, clearer.
  
• I tried not to mess with colours too much, although I think chosen colours for goalkeeper, defence, midfield, attack (bottom part of the box) are unfortunate, especially midfield and attack (dull grey and washed out purple)
  
• I noticed pitch dimensions are out of proportions, so I placed proportional pitch in. Not the greatest image, I know. I just copy-pasted from Google search, serves the purpose.
  
• I am not sure about divider between player name and position/role. It is green bar for all players except Nightingale and Barcham - sort of yellowish for these two. What does it represent exactly?
  

Obviously it is just a very quick mockup, not finished work by any means. Hope it helps somebody in SI creative department Looking forward to FM16!

[kingjericho]

I still can't see how any of these improvements are better than what we had in FM14. That thing was perfect.

In a perfect world we would have the new tactics screen for the touch and mobile versions, and the old tactics screen for the full mode.

I haven't seen this point raised above, but I always selected my starting lineup in the tactics screen, choosing the players with a right click. Now I can't do that.

Sometimes simplicity is the best way to go, and for all SI could have changed they probably changed one of the best things they had in that screen.

[Dagenham_Dave]

• I am not sure about divider between player name and position/role. It is green bar for all players except Nightingale and Barcham - sort of yellowish for these two. What does it represent exactly?
  

Same as it was on FM14, the player's suitability for the core position, as opposed to suitability for the role within that position.

[craiigman]

I wasn't amazed with tactic screen presented earlier this week. Yesterday I watched Miles video and I found it quite interesting. I understand and appreciate the concept, however something he said just wasn't right "We changed from shirts to boxes because we needed extra space for extra functionality". Cmon Miles, this is just pure laziness . I have come up with very quick mockup (2 hours in Photoshop/Illustrator), hopefully to demonstrate that you can still incorporate shirts within tactic screen. No offence, but these boxes are just awful, especially fading out black stripes...bleh. So to keep it short, in bullet points

• I kept exact dimensions of your boxes
  
• Replaced poor grapefruit slice with easy to understand, clear to read bar
  
• Left side of the number - space reserved for icons (yellow cards, injury)
  
• Bottom part of the box - I feel distinction between position and role should not be presented by hyphen. I came up with slightly lighter background - Easier on the eyes, clearer.
  
• I tried not to mess with colours too much, although I think chosen colours for goalkeeper, defence, midfield, attack (bottom part of the box) are unfortunate, especially midfield and attack (dull grey and washed out purple)
  
• I noticed pitch dimensions are out of proportions, so I placed proportional pitch in. Not the greatest image, I know. I just copy-pasted from Google search, serves the purpose.
  
• I am not sure about divider between player name and position/role. It is green bar for all players except Nightingale and Barcham - sort of yellowish for these two. What does it represent exactly?
  

Obviously it is just a very quick mockup, not finished work by any means. Hope it helps somebody in SI creative department Looking forward to FM16!

In 2 hours you've done better than the whole SI team could come up with. This honestly looks soo much better it's crazy.

[cwvink]

How I miss the FM14 tactics screen. It showed all the relevant information, in contrast to the FM15 version. Please, SI, add condition percentages to the player boxes in FM16.

[themadsheep2001]

In 2 hours you've done better than the whole SI team could come up with. This honestly looks soo much better it's crazy.

Well, no he hasnt (though kudos to him for the mock up). Because its a screen mock up, and not a fully functioning interface.....

[vpaulus]

Thanks mate. About "not fully functioning interface" - well, i stooped the video and pressed PrintScreen Based on information revealed, I created something that proves Miles theory of omitting shirts (on Tactical screen) wrong. Please dispel the doubts and let us know what are the other functions of "player box" within "fully functional interface". All I could see in the video, is an ability to left-click and right-click on the box (to be clear, I am talking about "upper" part of the box, not the one with drop down position/role part). Basically it is an interaction indicator, it doesn't expand itself. It provides links to others screens, models or layers. It could be pink rectangle or any graphic element with number and condition bar loading at the top. We are talking pure aesthetics mate . OR...I might be totally wrong and further interactions will be reviled soon.

[themadsheep2001]

Thanks mate. About "not fully functioning interface" - well, i stooped the video and pressed PrintScreen Based on information revealed, I created something that proves Miles theory of omitting shirts (on Tactical screen) wrong. Please dispel the doubts and let us know what are the other functions of "player box" within "fully functional interface". All I could see in the video, is an ability to left-click and right-click on the box (to be clear, I am talking about "upper" part of the box, not the one with drop down position/role part). Basically it is an interaction indicator, it doesn't expand itself. It provides links to others screens, models or layers. It could be pink rectangle or any graphic element with number and condition bar loading at the top. We are talking pure aesthetics mate . OR...I might be totally wrong and further interactions will be reviled soon.

Given that the change is about functionality, it would be wrong to talk about stopping it at one particular point and then talking about pure aesthetics. There will be more to come.

[vpaulus]

Ok, cool. So let's talk functionality. If we stick to presented graphics, basically we have 3 possible interactions here:

A - clicking on the number - Possibly linking to squad registration.

B - clicking on the grapefruit - Links to training?

C - clicking on the name - Squad? Personal info?

I honestly can't see any other possible functions. Considering user experience, I think it would be become really hard to navigate between these 3 buttons within such a small box.

[BoxToBox]

Ok, cool. So let's talk functionality. If we stick to presented graphics, basically we have 3 possible interactions here:

A - clicking on the number - Possibly linking to squad registration.

B - clicking on the grapefruit - Links to training?

C - clicking on the name - Squad? Personal info?

I honestly can't see any other possible functions. Considering user experience, I think it would be become really hard to navigate between these 3 buttons within such a small box.

Clicking on the "WM-Su" is an interaction too, and can be used to change roles.

[postman123]

will fm 15 downloaded tactics work with 16

[craiigman]

Well, no he hasnt (though kudos to him for the mock up). Because its a screen mock up, and not a fully functioning interface.....

Unless SI are using an engine that is being held together with duct tape and WD40, making the change really shouldn't be that difficult. The point is, it can't be that difficult to come up with something that looks decent while having the same functionality. Also I have watched the video, it does nothing different than what FM15 done..

[vpaulus]

Clicking on the "WM-Su" is an interaction too, and can be used to change roles.

Sure thing, I am talking about upper part of the box. Might be worth reading few earlier posts.

[themadsheep2001]

Unless SI are using an engine that is being held together with duck tape and WD40, making the change really shouldn't be that difficult. The point is, it can't be that difficult to come up with something that looks decent while having the same functionality. Also I have watched the video, it does nothing different than what FM15 done..

The engine has nothing to do with the interface. you say that, without having any idea what needs to go into the interface. How about actually waiting till you use it before deciding, or at least have far more facts?

Outside the video, Miles did actually talk about why that choice was made. I'd look at those tweets first.

[craiigman]

The engine has nothing to do with the interface. you say that, without having any idea what needs to go into the interface. How about actually waiting till you use it before deciding, or at least have far more facts?

UI is as much about looks as it is functionality though. Other wise websites would just be basic HTML, and we wouldn't have good ascetically pleasing websites. Also as the guy who made the mock-up says, the pitch isn't even proportionate. Just seems lazy not to have come up with something better.

Also what's the point of asking for feedback on stuff but then saying "it's our way, deal with it"..

[themadsheep2001]

UI is as much about looks as it is functionality though. Other wise websites would just be basic HTML, and we wouldn't have good ascetically pleasing websites. Also as the guy who made the mock-up says, the pitch isn't even proportionate. Just seems lazy not to have come up with something better.

Also what's the point of asking for feedback on stuff but then saying "it's our way, deal with it"..

I'd argue you'd be hard pressed to offer feedback on its usage without actually being able to use it.

There is also a balance between functionality and aesthetics.

You should also probably steer clear of calling SI lazy, when they did actually try it with the shirts....

[BoxToBox]

Sure thing, I am talking about upper part of the box. Might be worth reading few earlier posts.

Right, didn't see that bit, fair enough then.

[vpaulus]

I'd argue you'd be hard pressed to offer feedback on its usage without actually being able to use it.

There is also a balance between functionality and aesthetics.

You should also probably steer clear of calling SI lazy, when they did actually try it with the shirts....

• Of course, what I wrote before: "OR...I might be totally wrong and further interactions will be reviled soon."
  
• I would like to hear something else than learned marketing speech please.
  
• All right, maybe bit of the spark was missing then
  

Mate, I am middle aged man, who woke up early today and thought: "Why not to help the boys with some different idea". I am not pressing my issues here, I will buy the game nevertheless, so don't worry. I have been doing graphic design for a living for a long time now, believe me, I am not looking for your appreciation. I thought constructive criticism was always welcomed here, now however, I have to say, you are not doing very good job mate.

[themadsheep2001]

• Of course, what I wrote before: "OR...I might be totally wrong and further interactions will be reviled soon."
  
• I would like to here something else than learned marketing speech please.
  
• All right, maybe bit of the spark was missing then
  

Mate, I am middle aged man, who woke up early today and thought: "Why not to help the boys with some different idea". I am not pressing my issues here, I will buy the game nevertheless, so don't worry. I have been doing graphic design for a living for a long time now, believe me, I am not looking for your appreciation. I thought constructive criticism was always welcomed here, now however, I have to say, you are not doing very good job mate.

You can be constructive without calling someone lazy (we take an extremely dim view of that). Or referring to someone's points as "learned marketing speech" (functionality vs aesthetics is always a ongoing conflict in any design process, something I dealt with as an engineer). I was also referring to craiigman in the first instance

[vpaulus]

You can be constructive without calling someone lazy. Or referring to someone's points as "learned marketing speech" (functionality vs aesthetics is always a ongoing conflict in any design process, something I dealt with as an engineer).

It is indeed, isn't it? Please, let me (us) know what functionality magic you have hidden in 100px x 70px box! I am dead serious here, far from being ironic. All I know, I kept all presented (so far) features there... Looking forward to next videos/screenshots!

As for laziness part - cmon, just look at the feedback... Is there single person here who actually likes new design? (Again, I am talking about pure visual experience and right side of the Tactic Screen). I can't believe there is one.

[talhak]

that's looks really awesome; great job vpaulus & thanks for providing a proof that functionality and aesthetics can be perfectly together. As I said earlier, SI will regret from this choice and design a tactics screen both functional and aesthetic. Maybe for FM17, who knows.

[themadsheep2001]

that's looks really awesome; great job vpaulus & thanks for providing a proof that functionality and aesthetics can be perfectly together. As I said earlier, SI will regret from this choice and design a tactics screen both functional and aesthetic. Maybe for FM17, who knows.

It's nicely drawn concept, not a working design and therefore not proof.

[srvngrc]

It's a good idea to show more info on tactic screen but this one seems very bad. Maybe a different design could be better.

[talhak]

It's nicely drawn concept, not a working design and therefore not proof.

it is a only an image; so how do you expect a working concept!? it can be perfectly turned to practice.

[themadsheep2001]

it is a only an image; so how do you expect a working concept!? it can be perfectly turned to practice.

Which is exactly why it is not proof. and there is zero certainty it being turned into practice. The only way you could know would be to make it into a custom skin when the game comes out.

[talhak]

Which is exactly why it is not proof. and there is zero certainty it being turned into practice. The only way you could know would be to make it into a custom skin when the game comes out.

there are always many many custom skins every year; it is not a hard job. As it is always said in IT; everything can be implemented - the idea is the key.

[themadsheep2001]

there are always many many custom skins every year; it is not a hard job. As it is always said in IT; everything can be implemented - the idea is the key.

The reality of that saying isn't true though.

[Maystor]

As far as aesthetics go, it looks hilariously bad. Like really awful. Reminds me of aftermarket car stereos all of which look like they belong in a space ship interior. Apparently it's impossible to make one that sounds good and looks decent. Not that I'm seeing any real new functionality here either. You could change player roles and duties from tactics screen in FM15 as well. Am I missing something here?

[talhak]

The reality of that saying isn't true though.

From my experiences, it is very true. This is what academic papers about software engineering say. The implementation/coding is not an issue for experts.

[Kriss]

Am I missing something here?

Yes, but I doubt you'll find out what until release.

[RTHerringbone]

Made the mistake of thinking that this thread might have become less boring by now.

[Maystor]

Yes, but I doubt you'll find out what until release.

Okay. But do people not know you can change player roles and duties on FM15 tactic screen as well? I watched the video and still I don't see how does it explain why the UI HAS to look the way it currently does. You could still have the same functionality without the hideous blocks.

[MBarbaric]

Okay. But do people not know you can change player roles and duties on FM15 tactic screen as well? I watched the video and still I don't see how does it explain why the UI HAS to look the way it currently does. You could still have the same functionality without the hideous blocks.

aparently not. according to Miles at least. whichever, it seems we are stuck on this and we will have to wait and see what more this screen offers. i seriusly doubt everything was revealed. the clue is in the donut button next to button to expand the view of the squad horizontaly (this button is mostly done for tablets/small lap tops i guess because monitors will be able to show much more horizontaly). so the, donut button, as shown in miles' video reveals only match sharpness and condition. thing that you can already see on the left side therefore i'd guess there should be much more there that wasn't shown in the video.

what i am disappointed mostly is that there is no visual indication to what each role and player instructions does on the pitch. something that in overall tactics screen is done much better and rightly so.

bottom line, it looks ugly but we will really need to see how that works before any further judgment.

[eric1000]

I amazed that educated people still believe this rubbish.

IGN need I say more?

As an example look at IGN's review of the last Duke Nukem game. They at first gave it a 9 and said it was brilliant. When the game released however and the sheer size of the player backlash against that piece of crap became evident IGN were forced to backtrack to try to salvage what was left of any reputation they had. The 9 review was quickly removed and replaced with one giving just 4.5 and calling the game rubbish. The only naïve people are the ones that think this doesn't happen. it isn't just the software industry though, it happens everywhere, after all which was the last ad for say, beauty products did you believe? or are you convinced that face cream really does make you look younger?

[13xForever]

After watching the twitter video i think the quick access to player instructions will be a benefit to me, i am getting more warmed to the new look

[Guest]

IGN need I say more?

As an example look at IGN's review of the last Duke Nukem game. They at first gave it a 9 and said it was brilliant. When the game released however and the sheer size of the player backlash against that piece of crap became evident IGN were forced to backtrack to try to salvage what was left of any reputation they had. The 9 review was quickly removed and replaced with one giving just 4.5 and calling the game rubbish. The only naïve people are the ones that think this doesn't happen. it isn't just the software industry though, it happens everywhere, after all which was the last ad for say, beauty products did you believe? or are you convinced that face cream really does make you look younger?

They also gave FM09 a 2 or 3, were they paid by another company to give a bad review or was it just a poor review based on a single person's opinion?

There are also these annoying things called bribery & corruption laws that if what you say were true would have been used to bring down a few corrupt individuals who are paying an independent review company to inflate a review with the plan being increased profits for everyone. btw that very much different than going to Saatchi & Saatchi to get them to produce an ad campaign for your face cream.

Edit: Duke Nukem review score from IGN is shown 5.5 with a mediocre descriptive, where did you get the 4.5 information from?

[Woodiex3]

I've watched the teaser video there was nothing in there showing me why the shirt had to go for a box (when you scale the boxes to fit).

player number - was in 2015

payer name - was in 2015

pie chart - was a star symbol in 2015

player roll now left clickable - was right clickable in 2015

right click options - same as 2015

so why does this box need to be.

after the poor feed back of the initial 2015 release they tease this screen *shakes head*.

Ive already pre-ordered today and looking forward to the game and the ME frustration

the mock up above looks so much better. *thumbs up*.

side note i hope that 20 year new stadium issue isnt in this version.

[yonko]

https://twitter.com/FootballManager/status/642374311827734529

Worth watching..

Discuss..

Cool video and it's nice for Miles to try and explain things....especially liked the "accidental" showing of individual player instructions screen....but it doesn't make me like the new tactics screen design. As I said before, I didn't have problems with the functionality of the tactics screen with the shirts in FM14. FM15 went backwards for me with the exception of the vertical shifting depending on the role/duty. For FM16 they should've just gone back to FM14 design with the vertical shifting based on roles from FM15 and it would've been an instant winner!

They are creating all this trouble basically just for presumably added functionality which is useless. Most people don't care about role suitability as it's useless and pointless and certainly wouldn't sacrifice good design (with shirts instead of squares) for it.

Needless to say, I probably would still try the game (demo) and probably would still buy it because I'm addicted to it since 1993 but I just don't like the new tactics screen design and want SI to know it.

[eric1000]

They also gave FM09 a 2 or 3, were they paid by another company to give a bad review or was it just a poor review based on a single person's opinion?

There are also these annoying things called bribery & corruption laws that if what you say were true would have been used to bring down a few corrupt individuals who are paying an independent review company to inflate a review with the plan being increased profits for everyone. btw that very much different than going to Saatchi & Saatchi to get them to produce an ad campaign for your face cream.

Edit: Duke Nukem review score from IGN is shown 5.5 with a mediocre descriptive, where did you get the 4.5 information from?

Not at all. IGN are well known for also giving unfair reviews to games when they don't get paid.

The Duke nukem review must have gone up. It was 9 before and for about a week after release and was then slashed as players gave them hell over it.

Also, not talking about ad agencies but magazines like vogue etc. that routinely get paid for good reviews of products. There was an expose on uk tv about it where they tested the claims and called out the big mags over it. All they got was a series of no comments I think it was the panorama program some time ago.

FM 2009 was pretty bad though, I only have 133 hours on that according to steam whilw the rest since are well above a thousand with FM 2014 being the most played so far.

2nd edit: http://www.p4rgaming.com/ex-ign-employee-leaks-list-of-review-scores-for-games-that-arent-even-close-to-release-like-gta-v/