Jump to content

Football Manager 2022 Headline Features - In The Studio Part 2


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 323
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

1 hour ago, Freakiie said:

The biggest obstacle to better AI is that... it's really damn hard to do!

Thanks for posting this, and I heartily agree. We're still waiting on that AI breakthrough that has been "just around the corner" for the last quarter-century. A couple of years ago, in one of these threads, someone mentioned Google's Go-playing system that was a genuine AI breakthrough, but neglected to mention that it required millions of dollars worth of custom hardware to run. I'm aware of a lot of current development work in AI, but almost all of it is cloud-based running on large-scale server architectures - still expensive and requiring a permanent Internet connection to run the client.

It's hard to see where easily-implemented and easily-affordable improvements in AI might come from.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, warlock said:

It's hard to see where easily-implemented and easily-affordable improvements in AI might come from

I see them in my sleep :-) and that's the only place that happens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 13/10/2021 at 00:53, jimbo22 said:

In the 3D engine the "under the hood" changes will be visible through animation of the players. In 2D, id guess, we wont see much of a difference if at all (apart from what the under the hood does to player movement/interaction) Graphically it will be very similar to last year. Someone with more knowledge of the changes may come along and correct me. 

To a 2D user its gonna have no effect, cos you can't really animate a disc to stumble, pivot or bend over. The challenge in the past has been to reflect what's happening in the match engine in the visual space, so that people understand something has happened. The new 3d animation is working off a better base which allows SI to illustrate what is happening in the match engine more accurately. It gives them more room to show animations like mistakes, poor first touches, exhaustion. These were all things we had to assume happened to explain quirks in the visual translation of the game before.

So to all your 2D users out there, keep on using that imagination of yours :-) or wait for the 3D replays.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, XaW said:

Pays to put it into context...

He just left that comment for 15 min and didn't elaborate so  that's why I commented about it. Still didn't provide much info but whatever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably would have been better had Miles said, “Improved dynamic rivalries” instead of saying new feature when in fact it’s already in the game, But it did need tweaking so that’s a positive to me! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Improved dynamic rivalries is a fantastic thing. The previous implementation wasnt realistic, and has gradually been left behind over the course of the last few iterations of the game with no further improvement

Id love to manage a team long-term Dafuge Challenge style and develop long term "competitive rivals" as the years go by!

I'd previously gone off the "non league to glory" style of play in favour of a more realistic Journeyman, but these kind of improvements certainly make it more engaging and worth considering.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if goalkeepers will actually give away fouls and penalties (and potentially red cards/injs) or if for another year we have to close out eyes and pretend this doesn't happen in real life. (I'd guess if a team gives away 12 penalties in a season at least 2 would be keepers coming out).

You could play a whole season with 12 named subs allowed on the bench and there's still be no point naming a substitute keeper with the above missing from the game since forever.

Lets not even get me started on the omission of player brawls/square ups being a missing part and excludes the user from the immersion in matches. (Legal reasons - just use the newgens??)

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/10/2021 at 17:18, janrzm said:

 

I feel like the biggest obstacle to improved AI transfers is that it may prevent a whole bunch of people being more successful than they currently are. 

Personally, I want the game as hard as possible, but I feel those of us who think that way would be in a firm minority. Lots are just happy to not think too deeply about things and are equally happy winning the Champions League with Rotherham Utd after 4 seasons in charge.....If think about how easy it is the achieve some form of success in the game vs reality, its ridiculously out alignment. AI managers need to be much smarter, tactically and in their recruitment and squad management, but I doubt we'll ever see it. 

Which I don’t  really understand considering that there are other games out here that does this better and comes with better graphics. It’s like ordering a double cheeseburger but then decide to take the other piece of meat off when you could have just ordered a regular cheeseburger.

 

I hope that’s not the case of SI not making the game more challenging. To appease a audience. They have no problem telling people not to buy their game if they don’t like something…

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 11/10/2021 at 11:07, CFuller said:

I know what I'm about to say is very pedantic and not really relevant to the discussion... but 22 is just the year number. It's not the 22nd version of FM by SI, it's the 18th version - or the 30th, if you're including Championship Manager.

That's not pedantic, pedantic would be me telling you that there are 35 versions ;) :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Neil Brock unpinned and featured this topic
On 13/10/2021 at 19:12, Rashidi said:

To a 2D user its gonna have no effect, cos you can't really animate a disc to stumble, pivot or bend over. The challenge in the past has been to reflect what's happening in the match engine in the visual space, so that people understand something has happened. The new 3d animation is working off a better base which allows SI to illustrate what is happening in the match engine more accurately. It gives them more room to show animations like mistakes, poor first touches, exhaustion. These were all things we had to assume happened to explain quirks in the visual translation of the game before.

So to all your 2D users out there, keep on using that imagination of yours :-) or wait for the 3D replays.

I'm excited to see new animations in action. Are players, either on purpose (higher skill) or by mistake, capable of "animation cancel" or will they be locked into an animation/action until it's finished (and thus affecting possible and ongoing events)?

Edited by nimbleshadow
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 07/10/2021 at 20:34, jimbo22 said:

Last year Scout meetings sounded a great idea but it was really poorly implemented. Getting continuous recommendations for player that you simply cannot afford made the feature a complete waste of time and another one that was skipped after the first few. Hopefully this staff meeting isnt the same. Looking at the little we seen in the video it looks like the current information you get in a "meeting" rather than your inbox. Time will tell on that though.

 

 

Or being recommended players that totally breached the club philosophy eg being recommended 35 year olds where your board have pretty much insisted you don't sign players over 28.

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Swindon69 said:

Or being recommended players that totally breached the club philosophy eg being recommended 35 year olds where your board have pretty much insisted you don't sign players over 28.

Those rules are never absolutes. E.g. they are always preferred or favoured. So it doesnt mean you arent allowed to sign players over the age of 28, just that most shouldnt be over 28.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/10/2021 at 23:18, janrzm said:

 

I feel like the biggest obstacle to improved AI transfers is that it may prevent a whole bunch of people being more successful than they currently are. 

Personally, I want the game as hard as possible, but I feel those of us who think that way would be in a firm minority. Lots are just happy to not think too deeply about things and are equally happy winning the Champions League with Rotherham Utd after 4 seasons in charge.....If think about how easy it is the achieve some form of success in the game vs reality, its ridiculously out alignment. AI managers need to be much smarter, tactically and in their recruitment and squad management, but I doubt we'll ever see it. 

The irony of course is that they then oft conclude being "so good at the game that it must artificially punish them to keep things interesting" -- precisely because of such achivements obviously outperforming any of the game's AI managers to such extents. If people were punished more frequently, they would question some of their decisions. However, as that's not a requirement, they never do, instead questioning the game. (Of course, improved AI would lead to added conspiracies all the same, as now the AI would keep more matches individually and seasons long-term closer affairs). It's kind of a damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Still. There's a new host of data analysis now introduced. Speaking of which, does it further only "spoon-feed" the human player or does the AI use it in some form all the same? I've been advocating for improved feedback for a very long-time, including xG and the like. However, that also must go in tandem with AI improvements. There was a time when those in "charge" of such decisions had actually acknowledged this, e.g. Paul Collyer himself. In very early iterations, SI didn't even do much match analysis whatosever, as it would unbalance the game world in favor of the human player. Which is/was against SI design ethos -- the human player is wholly coincidental to the game world, not the very special one centre piece of it all. 
'

On 13/10/2021 at 13:54, Freakiie said:

People act as if SI implementing better AI would literally be altering a couple variables in the code and "BAM, AI BE GOOD!", but that's complete nonsense. There's a reason that difficulty in strategy games generally involves a combination of nerfing the player and giving the AI unfair advantages, instead off just "making a better AI".


I'm currently playing Wrath Of The Righteous, an RPG based on the Pathfinder tabletop. Whilst the game deals in difficulty options that change the composition of enemy mobs -- and make them use their abilities differently: The game indeed also has options that indeed just nerf/boost enemy stats. In parts, this is actually a necessity. The Pathfinder RPG system (based on Dungeons & Dragons 3rdish edition) in itself is anything but balanced. It allows character builds that wouldn't be able to hit a cow's arse on the one end of the spectrum. Whereas on the other end there are builds possible that are completely OP (which long-term players of the tabletop are naturally familiar with). Thus, to simplify, the hardest difficulty settings make it incredibly harder to hit enemies, etc. Whilst there is a pop-up warning if you would pick such a difficulty, many players chose these options regardless. They then complain that enemies would be "impossible" to hit -- perhaps because "hard/er" difficulties in modern games else tend to be what "don't hurt me" mode was during the Doom1  era, but who knows. ;) 

Anyway, FM itself too is aynthing but balanced. In fact, FM is hilariously unbalanced. Whilst it's claims to simulate a sports/job all about shifting the odds someThere are reports every single year how players would be sacked early on almost every other save even with half-decent sides of their level. Whereas others consistently get crap teams competing for European spots on every new save immediately. And all of this largely based on tactical picks! The reasons for this naturally are manyfold:

- A tactical UI that without much further ado (or warning) allows tactics that are absolutely crap and/or toothless (including the classic of sticking 10 burly men behind the ball and letting them boot the ball upfield to a lone forward -- wish him luck he may need it even in the game engine). Perhaps worse yet: Same as this tactical UI easily allowing contradictions / bad picks that may not even be immediately apparent, as it's such a puzzle box of design

- An AI that is limited as it cannot specifically react to any tactic pick in particular

- An engine that is not quite 100% real football yet, thus always has either flat out flaws to "exploit" or at least a bias towards certain kind of tactics 

SI won't ever deal in difficulties as such, however they may look like. They also don't seem to be overly fussed, unless somebody gets a crap team winning the league immediately. However, even improving just the engine as well  as tacitcal UI may one day lead to a more "level" playing field all itself -- no less as the AI may "suffer" from that tactical UI all the same.

Edited by Svenc
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 13/10/2021 at 14:54, Freakiie said:

The biggest obstacle to better AI is that... it's really damn hard to do!

People act as if SI implementing better AI would literally be altering a couple variables in the code and "BAM, AI BE GOOD!", but that's complete nonsense. There's a reason that difficulty in strategy games generally involves a combination of nerfing the player and giving the AI unfair advantages, instead off just "making a better AI".

On top of that, better AI would most likely mean more processes it goes through before making a decision, which would mean a ton of extra processing because there's countless decisions made by the AI over the course of the game. Heck, I've played a couple strategy games with modded improved AI and the performance loss was absurd. In a game with way less decisions from the AI this might not be that bad when an AI's move goes from split seconds to a couple seconds, but imagine if AI decisions in FM were slowed down, it would massively increase processing time.

There's definitely more than a few quirks in the AI that can be looked (and SI is looking at them), that could probably be adjusted without complicating things too much, but an improvement in the AI to the degree where it is even somewhat challenging to long time FM players is just completely unrealistic.

If only there were more computing power available for the game to use......

They are literally keeping this running on bricks, more computing is literally the last thing they are short of

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...