Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Pingdinho

  1. It comes down to where the line between simulation and game is drawn. I am not arguing any particular point really; I'm just saying that audio commentary might be too far over that line.
  2. I suppose if SI are keen to simulate the experience of being a football manager, they would never include commentary, Managers don't hear it, a TV audience does.
  3. Currently got a player out with a bruised ego from a harsh team talk.
  4. So many people demanding more information. Some might judge that to be a good teaser. I tend to agree with this. They gave out the release date on 17th August (I think). That's roughly a 12 week lead time on a game that is always released once every 52 weeks. Its now about 6.5 weeks until release. I mean; how far in advance is it even sensible to start spilling details on an annual release that we know is coming anyway? Especially given that the current iteration is still so popular and has so much time still being invested into it. Personally, I'm content to let the marketing machine play out and see how I feel about it at the end. I expect it will be very unlikely I will care about their strategy. I am just very keen to know what FM17 will bring, and genuinely don't care how they tell me. I really liked Miles' video for FM15. I also liked the drip-feed from twitter for FM16. Its all just interesting information for me. Obviously, I'd like to know as soon as possible, but then that's hardly a revelation. For this teaser; I was a bit underwhelmed at first as I had built it up so much. My own fault. But it was when people started breaking it down and posting screenshots that I think the real teaser came out.
  5. I see no problem with icing a cake well if you plan to spend hundreds of hours looking at it.
  6. SI deny it is rigged. But that's exactly what they would say if it was rigged isn't it?!
  7. This thread inspired me to more or less stop praising my players and I have seen a noticeable improvement in performance so far. I'm much more demanding now, without being unreasonable, and always telling them to not be complacent. I also have stopped praising player performance in individual chats. Seems to work. My squad is very determined and pretty professional so that may have something to do with it.
  8. Sorry for the late reply to this, I managed to get some time to run FM in full screen mode. There appear to be no issues at all with the RAM usage of Desktop Window Manager (it's on 8.1 Mb as I type). So this is workable and things seem much more stable, but it's a bit annoying to have FM minimise every time I click on my other monitor. Hopefully FM17 won't have the same issue.
  9. So I guess cautious would be like "good win today, you played well" whereas, say, passionate would be "that was amazing, what a victory, you are all world-beaters!"
  10. I don't know if it is my imagination but I seem to get less feedback going to their heads if I praise with a cautious demeanour. Does anyone know if that's true?
  11. I guess I always assumed that came under anticipation or concentration or some combination of those. You may be right ... I agree it is fake; but to me, that is the point. The attributes are an abstraction that paint a pattern that you can then do what you like with. I would have absolutely no objection to the system you propose being an option. I just find the numbers quick and easy to work with and they make more sense to me.
  12. This is the great thing about FM; as you can see the answer is 'you can use PIs if you want, but you also don't have to - it's up to you'. I never really used them much if at all until recently. The golden rule seems to be if you aren't sure what something does, leave it alone. But most of the instructions are fairly common sense. If you want a player to get further forward, then set that instruction. If you want them to shoot less, tell them to shoot less. But as others have said, I think that fine level of tactical tweaking isn't something you necessarily want to do until you feel more comfortable with the broader stuff. But hey; you're the boss! If you want to experiment and keen to learn about it, I say go for it. Just make sure you observe the results
  13. Unless he has good acceleration but poor reactions. Do we have a reactions test as well? I'm not trying to be funny or anything, but I just don't see the point of hiding this stuff in a system that makes life harder. The game is hard enough already!
  14. The main problem I have with this is for scouting. How would your scout possibly know how fast a player runs 100 m in, or how much they can bench press? When a scout says 'they have 17 passing' all they mean is that 'their passing is very good in comparison to other players, but isn't quite perfect'. The numbers are shorthand and allows the user fill in the spaces in do the comparisons however suits them best. This is a good point. To follow on from the example, personally I prefer a player with high acceleration to a player with high pace. A 100 m time would be completely useless to me. I like the visualization, but that is just a different way of displaying an attribute number. Also you would need dynamic categories that reflect the relative ability of a player compared to their peers.
  15. I have encountered a rather annoying bug in my FM16 save; I won the Europa League but somehow my club never got entered into the Champions League. I was wondering if anyone could tell me if and how I can edit the game to move my club into the competition so I can rectify the situation? Thanks!
  16. For the golden generations isn't that just like in real life where a nation happens by chance to get a group of top players all playing at the same time? Randomness is clumpy so if this is not happening in the game are you saying that the game is perhaps not random enough in how it produces newgens? I like the idea of random events though. You do get a few things like newgen players suddenly getting drastic personality changes, either positive or negative, due to 'off field events' but these aren't really described so perhaps that is an area that could be expanded?
  17. That would certainly make the role you want easier to find. Something like as you click on instructions, a list of roles that include that instruction is progressively filtered down? Or a series of ranked best matches for the selected instructions?
  18. I totally agree that you cannot focus on a single attribute. All I really meant was that coming up with, say, solely having a system of textual descriptions that describe combinations of attributes for me would be more confusing than seeing the numbers. With numbers then picture of the player is clearer and more comparable to another player. I'm not against a good system that describes a player as a kind of textual summary. In fact; I'd love that. But not instead of the attributes. Having both would in fact make both ways easier to understand. @Maaka - I wasn't too clear. I meant the game doesn't relate the attributes to real world metrics. Obviously, as you say, that would be possible to do.
  19. I would prefer to stick with attribute numbers. I get the idea of changing them, but it seems like so much hard work for the user. You can very easily understand and compare numbers. And they are still an abstraction. Like, Pace 15 doesn't really mean anything and you can't relate that to a real-world metric. However you know very quickly that it is faster than Pace 12 and slower than Pace 17. Maybe that's just how I think; but it requires less mental gymnastics and is less confusing. Take the example of how your club facilities are graded. Is 'top' better than 'superb'? Probably. Maybe. To be honest; I can't remember and I've looked it up several times. Its too fuzzy for me.
  20. Yep, done that. Washed my feet in vinegar afterwards too. Didn't even flinch. What else ya got?
  21. Well don't I feel stupid now ... ! Funny how these basic things somehow escape you in this game sometimes!
  22. Someone more knowledgeable than me about the match engine, please feel free to correct me, but the problem is that you are much smarter and more flexible than the AI. Allowing total freedom to minutely tweak every aspect of tactics adds a level of complexity and granularity that a human brain can handle much better than an AI, or at least the AI as it currently is in FM. Limiting the options makes a level playing field between the human and the AI and reduces the risk of human players finding obscure exploits. Also the roles as they are set up cover a wide range of player roles. I wonder if given the freedom to adjust anything and everything how many people would come up with something that was significantly different from what we already have. And if it was different, whether it actually made any sense. But let us not forget that actually there is quite a degree of customization available in the player roles. If the instructions that you are trying to apply don't exist in the role you think they should be in, have a look at the other roles – some are pretty flexible. For instance, Wide Midfielder gives quite a wide range of options in player instructions if I recall and you can create a lot of variety there. Anyway; what I'm trying to say really is that the options might seem too limited (I'm not entirely convinced by that, personally) but that if they are limited then that is for a very good reason. It is really easy to say to a software developer 'let me do what I want'; it is insanely difficult for that software developer to give you that.
  23. If you are into developing young players then an older player with a good personality can be a handy to have around for tutoring.
  24. I'm tempted by Hull. It should be a challenge to keep them up and there is plenty of scope to build up the squad.
  • Create New...