Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

smacksim

Members
  • Content Count

    293
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

About smacksim

  • Rank
    Amateur

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. First off, my chips are perfectly fine and don't need any sauce, thank you very much I don't mind that you don't agree with me or that I guessed incorrectly about your reasoning. It just reminded me of one of my chief complaints with the game and its loyal band of merry followers (myself included). As to your reasoning for no difficulty levels: Oh come on. Do you code? Having difficulty levels wouldn't be all that tough. I would like SI to comment on why they have never implemented them, and I'll place my bets on it having to do with realism rather than difficulty implementing. And, its just not a high priority. Ordinarily I'd agree with the no-diff-levels approach for this type of game, seeing as there are (or should be) opportunities to increase difficulty already in the game by choosing difficult sides, making 'house rules' against using the Player Search, etc.., but this isn't an ordinary situation: As the game is, its simply too poorly documented or tutorial-ized and lacking in tactics feedback for the average user to make reasonable headway in improving their overall game. The guesswork of Neonlights and WWFan in the Tactics section highlights the nearly impenetrable matrix of calculations that determine how tactics operate in the match engine. This isn't to say that it can't be done; That a lot of solid study of the game and digestion of online discussion will not allow one to improve. I'm suggesting that its simply too much to expect the average user to have the time or patience for that, and that consequently something should be done about it. Ideally, I agree with you: Make the game easier to comprehend in these departments. A 'Match Analysis Engine' to point out to the user that their 'Forward Runs often and Hold the Ball Up commands are conflicting' (for example) would greatly benefit in this department. But ask a coder which is easier to do for a data-driven game: Make difficulty levels OR make data-analysis and delivery tools for the end user. I can tell you which I think would get done first! About what you can't be bothered replying to, but which you think is 'nonsense': The topic is what we each think would improve the game. We don't have to agree. I'd certainly enjoy hearing about why you disagree though
  2. Because its so focused on 'realism'? Some day I'll do a full review of FM for some strategy game sites, and one of the things I'll be 'whining' about will be the focus on 'realism', often at the expense of either sense or fun. Don't get me wrong; I think FM2006 is one of the best strategy games I've ever played, but I think some priorities need sorting out. For instance, its 'realistic' to have scouts at a club. But if you're going to implement this, they should be either realistic or usefully fun, and hopefully both, when they are currently neither. How can one suggest that "We have to have scouts because to just use a player list wouldn't be realistic" and then keep the Player Search feature anyways? There are a lot of anachronisms and broken bits in the game that either should be wiped clean in 2007 or 2008, or actually made useful. 1. Scouts (should do something useful and/or realistic). 2. Manager Profile (should do something useful and/or realistic). 3. Tactics should be made useful without consulting an (unavailable) Rosetta Stone of slider translations. 4. Tactics should be realistic, but most importantly, FUN to use. IE, they should be the tactical element in a strategy game, not the mystery meat in a simulation game. 5. Tactical gameplay should give some feedback to the player about what is working and what is not. Don't tell me that one should: a. "Watch the matches in Full, then you'll see" or b. "Analyse the match/player stats correctly, then you'll know" because as a former coach and longtime strategist I must say to these suggestions "Phooey!. Since we don't know how to change our player's behaviors with the mystery sliders, we can't gradually approach a fine-tuning of tactics. The strategic learning curve here is disturbingly absent." 6. Improve the 'Notes' feature so that: a. You don't have to click twice just to make a note or look one up. This, and note organization, should be handled auto-magically by our invisible computerized secretaries. Notes on players should appear when you have a screen open with said players, and notes should be available to be kept automatically (Click to make a note of every Key Pass made during the match, for example). b. Notes and training can work in conjunction to create a useful and 'pretty' html journal or blog to be read while away from the game and shared online to boost SI's profile and profits. c. Did I mention that Notes should be made more useful? 7. My personal suggestion is to add both difficulty levels and a bit more 'gaminess' to the game such as: a. Fictional uses for your salary would add long-term goals for the computer game player and make the game a little more competetive between people, which would increase its popularity severalfold. b. Fictional 'bust-ups' and other shennanigans at a club or between clubs, with press, or whatever. 8. Some day, make a 3D graphics engine, even if this means selling your 'engine' to a current game and partnering. The year you do this, hire a new Management for your own company and buy stock, 'cause your **** will sell like the crack we all know it is already, those of us who don't need the 'pretty factor' to enjoy it. Tha's a few.
×
×
  • Create New...