Matthew Le God

Future Stadium names = Districts

300 posts in this topic

Has been added as a feature suggestion and will be considered in the grand scheme of things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's also the namings for "stadium" that need to be used... Like Estadio for Spanish-speaking countries, Stadio for Italian-speaking countries, Stade [du/de la/d'] for French-speaking countries, Stadion for various countries (Holland, Poland, Romania...), the suffix -Arena (i.e. Veltins-Arena), Arena (i.e. BayArena), -Stadion (Millerntor-Stadion) and so on for German-speaking countries, and so on...

I'd also like to see the odd stadium named after non-footballing reasons - for example, Stade Louis II or Parc des Princes in France.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lol oh God what if Brighton moved to Queens Park Park?!

that'd be the last thing we need xD

but good idea overall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='CooCooKaJoo']Lol oh God what if Brighton moved to Queens Park Park?!

that'd be the last thing we need xD

but good idea overall[/QUOTE]

Or if Park Ji-Sung became a Manchester United legend... Or Bruce Arena became a legend...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And one more - it would be nice if we could name new stadia. While some will start raging about how managers don't do that, it is purely a cosmetic thing but the manager may have other ideas. Alternatively, the fans could pick various names based on the legendary-ness of their legends or whatnot, and you could pick. Or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I haven't seen too many people complaining about their managers being involved in the finances of transfer negotiations so I'm sure they won't start raging ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
great one dude ;)
But don't make problems in transation because in Portugal we only use Arena (never used but still couting), Stadium, and Field

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What about like I know Arsenal have done a few times and Spurs were going to do, move area (as they were planning to move into East London for the Olympic Stadium), could that be implemented into the game somehow?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I didn't expect to see this thread again. That is quite a bump! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The only problem with that we now seeing staduims names being whoever sponsors name IE Arsenals and Man City's and we can see be more in future as clubs look for more money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='sebbie']The only problem with that we now seeing staduims names being whoever sponsors name IE Arsenals and Man City's and we can see be more in future as clubs look for more money.[/QUOTE]

Yes, but it is depth and variety that is the key. Most would accept that corporate sponsors' names could not be included, but to have locations rather than just player names would stop new stadium names becoming so tired so quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
of course it could. As they have listed as Sponorship of Staduim in current one, would just mean i suppose could not use real life companies names then that would not be to much problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But for example, there are some cases, when the stadium would probably be the same for all eternity.

Benfica. Estádio da Luz (Stadium of Light). It was built a new one in 2004... and the name remain the same. I think we should have a option, that, if we want, the stadium would remain with the same name.

And there are other examples. Nou Camp. these are mythical stadium that would probably be named the same even if they were demolish and built again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What i would like to see is when my team announces a new stadium, i would like a list of stadium names to choose from along with an option to type in a stadium name if i dont like the list available.

It would also be nice to have stadium sponsorships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are many different naming conventions for stadia and venues so I don't think we could rule any out(not to mention moving into non-football stadiums like the Olympic one). Are they even allowed to use company names in game or are there licensing issues?
Presuming no overlap will be allowed how will this affect teams that are extremely close together, will they just get far less options(making this pointless)? London could be very problematic with so many teams (league and non-league).
I'd rather they focused on other parts of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
keep it simple... just give the option for us to give the name we want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Lem']I'd rather they focused on other parts of the game.[/QUOTE]Let SI worry about prioritising issues.

To me, the stadium name is really just a nickname - cosmetic, but can be as unrealistic as you want. Of course, there's the issue of AI-controlled teams and their naming schemes...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='x42bn6']Let SI worry about prioritising issues.

To me, the stadium name is really just a nickname - cosmetic, but can be as unrealistic as you want. Of course, there's the issue of AI-controlled teams and their naming schemes...[/QUOTE]
Sure, they can waste time adding a pointless new feature, or spend that time wisely refining a current one. I know what I'd prefer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Lem']Sure, they can waste time adding a pointless new feature, or spend that time wisely refining a current one. I know what I'd prefer.[/QUOTE]Firstly, it's not pointless, as it adds to the level of realism and improves the user's experience as it is more immersive.

Secondly, no software company has everyone working on the same things. Some companies even have a "minor works" team specially-designed for these things - low-risk, low-effort tasks when other teams focus on the larger and more important tasks - since covering a lot of bugs is as important as covering important bugs.

Thirdly, the "impact" of a feature/defect/improvement is never the only factor in determining priority - effort, dependencies and difficulty, amongst others, are other factors used to judge the priority of a feature/defect/improvement. If it isn't a high-impact change but is quick, isn't dependent on anything (or much), and isn't difficult, then that is a good argument to promote it to the front of the queue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='x42bn6']Firstly, it's not pointless, as it adds to the level of realism and improves the user's experience as it is more immersive.

Secondly, no software company has everyone working on the same things. Some companies even have a "minor works" team specially-designed for these things - low-risk, low-effort tasks when other teams focus on the larger and more important tasks - since covering a lot of bugs is as important as covering important bugs.

Thirdly, the "impact" of a feature/defect/improvement is never the only factor in determining priority - effort, dependencies and difficulty, amongst others, are other factors used to judge the priority of a feature/defect/improvement. If it isn't a high-impact change but is quick, isn't dependent on anything (or much), and isn't difficult, then that is a good argument to promote it to the front of the queue.[/QUOTE]

It's a cosmetic feature that adds nothing to gameplay at all. Sure it's idealistically nice, as are many, many other ideas, but in real terms it would be hardly noticeable in a game. It's difficult to say how quick and easy something is to implement, or what issues it may have caused(depending on how detailed it is).
We bemoan any new features that don't work correctly or any bugs that already exist, but then suggest these pointless things to bloat the game. The question to ask is if it is worth it or not, and if the game was in desperate need of new features and had people to spare then I'd agree they should do it - but currently the time and resources could (and really should) be better spent elsewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Lem']Sure, they can waste time adding a pointless new feature, or spend that time wisely refining a current one. I know what I'd prefer.[/QUOTE]

Both ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Lem']It's a cosmetic feature that adds nothing to gameplay at all. Sure it's idealistically nice, as are many, many other ideas, but in real terms it would be hardly noticeable in a game.[/quote]

Hardly? The name of your stadium appears in all home matches, and many other emails. Being able to choose allows a user to "impose their personality" on the club - extremely important for some who enjoy long-term games, as it helps them become immersed with their club and the game. There's a reason why this feature is quite popular - look at this thread!

[quote name='Lem']It's difficult to say how quick and easy something is to implement, or what issues it may have caused(depending on how detailed it is).[/quote]

As a customer, you have even less knowledge. This is something SI decide. All users need to do is fill up SI's TODO list with feature requests and bug fixes, from the important to the trivial. Then SI will prioritise accordingly. But you need to fill up that TODO list!

[quote name='Lem']We bemoan any new features that don't work correctly or any bugs that already exist, but then suggest these pointless things to bloat the game.[/quote]

It's not pointless.

Why can we not demand a game that is largely bug-free and has lots of features that help immerse users into their game?

[quote name='Lem']The question to ask is if it is worth it or not,[/quote]

Yes - but it's a question for SI, since we do not know the cost (financially and in terms of developer effort). It's nothing us customers need to worry about.

[quote name='Lem']and if the game was in desperate need of new features[/quote]

Every iteration will have new features. A game is always in desperate need of new features, in some sense.

[quote name='Lem']and had people to spare then I'd agree they should do it - but currently the time and resources could (and really should) be better spent elsewhere.[/QUOTE]

Do you have intimate knowledge about how SI's developer teams are structured and work? Are you aware of the financial constraints placed on the team, the management's vision and the developers' capabilities?

Of course you don't. Therefore to claim that "time and resources could be better spent elsewhere" is ludicrous. You don't know what "time and resources" is in the first place!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well... to be fair, [I]any[/I] amount of time and resources spent on a feature he doesn't care for is de facto a waste from his perspective, it's only a matter of [I]how much[/I] it will interfere with other things he potentially cares more for. I think it's perfectly fine for everyone to have an opinion on the direction of the game, and that naturally includes criticism of efforts put towards things they do not like/want. I see nothing wrong with voicing concern with the introduction of features you do not like when there are still others that do not improve/are introduced at the rate you'd like. Presumably consumer opinion plays a role as well in how things are prioritized.

Personally, I want better stadium names ASAP. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Scab']Well... to be fair, [I]any[/I] amount of time and resources spent on a feature he doesn't care for is de facto a waste from his perspective, it's only a matter of [I]how much[/I] it will interfere with other things he potentially cares more for. I think it's perfectly fine for everyone to have an opinion on the direction of the game, and that naturally includes criticism of efforts put towards things they do not like/want. I see nothing wrong with voicing concern with the introduction of features you do not like when there are still others that do not improve/are introduced at the rate you'd like. Presumably consumer opinion plays a role as well in how things are prioritized.[/quote]

It's still a false dilemma, however, because the proper argument put forward to SI is "We want Lem's awesome feature [b]and[/b] better stadium names." In other words, we should be asking for both - not one over the other or vice-versa.

Users should only judge feature requests on this forum on the merits of it alone, rather than against other features they are interested in. If a feature sounds good, we should ask it to be put in. If it sounds tedious to do but is good anyway, we should ask to put it in.

Who knows - maybe SI have done a lot of work in this area and this is just a trivial addon, so it is actually a really easy thing to do - a good argument for sticking it at the front of the queue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not sure if it's been said before but what would be good too, is if in the news item for the stadium being completed/named, it told you the names of some of the stands.

So for example Liverpool could move to a new stadium called 'Stanley Park' with 'The Bill Shankly Stand'. Then the further you get into the game, retired players could have stands named after them or possibly managers who've been very successful at that club.

What do we think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='TheInvisibleMan']Not sure if it's been said before but what would be good too, is if in the news item for the stadium being completed/named, it told you the names of some of the stands.

So for example Liverpool could move to a new stadium called 'Stanley Park' with 'The Bill Shankly Stand'. Then the further you get into the game, retired players could have stands named after them or possibly managers who've been very successful at that club.

What do we think?[/QUOTE]

Yes. I mentioned something similar in the requests thread - start off with the North, South, East, West stands to begin with, then rename them at certain points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thankfully we've had our ground named after our district for years....

Hillsborough

And here's a random fact...

The first football ground in the world to have a cantilever stand running the full length of the pitch!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='hirsty1867']The first football ground in the world to have a cantilever stand running the full length of the pitch!!![/QUOTE]

Ooh, [url=http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=central+avenue,+billingham&hl=en&ll=54.599644,-1.281806&spn=0.001868,0.005284&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=15.634187,43.286133&vpsrc=6&t=h&z=18]Synthonia's[/url] cantilever stand (predating Sheff Wed's by two years) must surely push it close?

#ChampioningYourLocalSideLikeABoss

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='tom_numbers']Ooh, [url=http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=central+avenue,+billingham&hl=en&ll=54.599644,-1.281806&spn=0.001868,0.005284&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=15.634187,43.286133&vpsrc=6&t=h&z=18]Synthonia's[/url] cantilever stand (predating Sheff Wed's by two years) must surely push it close?

#ChampioningYourLocalSideLikeABoss[/QUOTE]

I said football ground, not a stadium with a running track.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it should definitely happen, though I hope it doesn't. I do yearn for the day that Aldershot name the successor to the Rec after me, even if it is unrealistic!

With small sides it could be a bit complicated I guess, Whitley Bay accidentally playing at the Shields Arena would send some on the warpath...

I'm happy with chairman naming the stadiums after themselves though, their ego usually extends that far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='evad3d']I think it should definitely happen, though I hope it doesn't. I do yearn for the day that Aldershot name the successor to the Rec after me, even if it is unrealistic!

With small sides it could be a bit complicated I guess, Whitley Bay accidentally playing at the Shields Arena would send some on the warpath...

I'm happy with chairman naming the stadiums after themselves though, their ego usually extends that far.[/QUOTE]

the Madejski stadium anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Nik_Dut']one question...
what about football outside the great england ?[/QUOTE]
There's football outside of England , that cant be true . It would be like their was football before sky sports

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='SuperManager']the Madejski stadium anyone?[/QUOTE]

Exactly. The Darlington Arena, formerly the Reynolds Arena too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This would be very nice really!! But I still eant to see my name in the stadium of Benfica 8)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why not, for every city, have a combination of districts, famous historical figures, landmarks and for realism a few fake company names as if the stadium has been sponsered by them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For me it would seem an easy addition. Board could give you suggestions (famous player etc) and then you could have the option if you're highly respected to name it yourself. It wouldn't come up that often and essentially some function to validate your chosen name of stadium wasn't already in the stadia list.

I'd be happy with that. Long-term gamers would be happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I only skimmed quickly through the thread, but I saw someone mentioned football outside of Britain. I don't know is this has been discussed, but I really think stadium naming out to be more localised by country. At the very least English language within new stadium names (Stadium, Park etc.) should be translated into whatever the local tongue is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand that the SI team are reviewing this suggestion to potentially add to future FMs, but I wanted to post here since this is an idea I fully support.

First of all, I agree with the idea that the names should be chosen from a list of local districts which are entered by the club's researcher. The club that I support, Adelaide United FC, currently plays at Hindmarsh Stadium in South Australia, named for the federal district in which the stadium is located. On my FM11 game with the same club, though, a new stadium proposed in 2020 was assigned the name "Adelaide United FC Stadium", which I find to be a highly unlikely name; even "Adelaide Stadium" would have been preferred, I know of very few clubs which keep the "FC" tag in the name of the stadium. A simple wikipedia search is all it takes to see other South Australian districts which produce much more aesthetically-pleasing names, e.g: Boothby Stadium, Sturt Park, Kingston Arena etc. Surely a new data field for researchers would take up precious little of their time and effort, to create the much-desired reward of realistic stadia. At present, the system of naming stadiums after either the club or a legend of the club and appending the suffix "Stadium", "Park" or "Arena" is wholly one-dimensional and can be unrealistic depending on the scenario. Of course, many stadia in Spain, Portugal, South America and the like are named after well-known figures at the clubs who own them, and so the realism provided by stadium names can be appropriate or inappropriate depending on the region. Thus, further regionalisation is required when creating stadium names.

The application of regionalisation can occur in two main ways; first, the application of the national language to the stadium name, and, second, the use of the appropriate local custom in naming stadia. On the first point; regardless of which country a manager is inhabiting, the stadium will invariably be named first with the prefix (club name/legend's name) and then with the anglicised suffix (Stadium/Park/Arena). However, this reduces realism in scenarios where the national language is not english. For example, a stadium in France would be named Stade Marseille rather than Marseille Stadium and a club in Spain would be named Camp Alcorcon or Estadio Alcorcon rather than Alcorcon Park/Stadium. On the second point; a system could be implemented whereby stadium names are generated with a fixed likelihood of being named after a person or a place. As aforementioned, South American and Iberian nations tend to name their stadiums more after people than Western nations, and so a manager in Spain who finds his board building a new stadium should see a higher likelihood that the stadium will be named after a legend/the manager, in, of course, the local language and naming custom.

For example; Joe Bloggs manages Torquay in England. His board builds a new stadium. There is a 75% chance of it being named after a district on the list (Shiphay Park, Plainmoor Stadium etc.). There is a 25% chance of it being named after a legend or the manager (Joe Bloggs Stadium etc.). The local language is English, and the naming convention applies such that the prefix is the given name whilst the suffix is the noun denoting the stadium. In a parallel universe, Joe Bloggs chose to manage Alcorcon in Spain. His board builds a new stadium. There is a 75% chance of it being named after a legend or the manager (Camp Joe Bloggs, Estadio Presidente Fulano etc.) and a 25% chance of it being named after a district on the list (Camp Alcorcon, Estadio Mostoles etc.). Of course, the 75%/25% split is just a random example from my head, but I'd imagine the percentages could be weighted depending on the conventions of the country.

The idea behind all of this is that we simply see more realistic variation in the names assigned to stadia in FM. Of course, the discretion of the researcher would enable any unrealistic district or person names to be removed from the list of potential names (for example, Chelsea wouldn't play at Fulham Park) and no-one would want to see the possibility of earning a stadium with your name vanish, but these occasions should be the exception rather than the rule, and, in keeping with the intended realism of FM, stadiums should be named in the language of their nation and in the spirit of their traditional custom.

Aside from the implementation of the above, an increasing trend in today's footballing world is to see stadiums assigned sponsorship deals which result in the renaming of the stadium. Thus, when a new stadium is announced, alongside the usual message that "a stadium sponsorship deal worth X has been secured", this could be expanded to "a stadium sponsorship deal worth X has been secured with <insert randomly-generated businessy-sounding name like JetFair Ltd. or DealByte Co.> and the stadium will be known as JetFair Park/DealByte Stadium until 2014", with the board-assigned name of the stadium in brackets on the facilities page next to the official sponsored name in the style of Facilities > Stadium: Emirates Stadium (Highbury), with a board-request option to end the sponsorship deal to retain the original name of the stadium (maybe this could have an impact on crowd numbers as fans appreciate the move to reconnect with the stadium's traditional name).

In the short- to mid-term, I would like to see the suggestions involving districts, local language and naming custom introduced to FM, with the sponsorship suggestion an optional implementation if it proves a popular idea. I would appreciate feedback from forum-goers and SI representatives on this suggestion, though I appreciate it is already being looked into. :thup:

Thanks! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why not simply have the Board ask the manager to suggest a possible name for a new stadium during a meeting?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='shoome']Why not simply have the Board ask the manager to suggest a possible name for a new stadium during a meeting?[/QUOTE]

I disagree with the notion of asking the manager to suggest the name for the stadium. I understand that some people would like that option, but it is too far removed from reality IMO and would detract from the realism of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Adelaidean']I disagree with the notion of asking the manager to suggest the name for the stadium. I understand that some people would like that option, but it is too far removed from reality IMO and would detract from the realism of the game.[/QUOTE]It is purely a cosmetic thing with a negligible impact on gameplay. It is almost like switching skins. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='x42bn6']It is purely a cosmetic thing with a negligible impact on gameplay. It is almost like switching skins. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this idea.[/QUOTE]

By that logic, the user should also have control over the name of the club. It may be cosmetic, but in a game of fine details which strives for realism there must be lines drawn between what is realistic and what isn't. For those who wish to have control over the stadium name, there are editing programs to change it. However, the game demands that its base programming adheres to realism as close as possible, and those who wish to change cosmetic issues such as this may do so on their own whim.

The point I'm trying to make is that people who wish to have control over their stadium name already do through editing programs, so the game should stick to providing realism in this case since the difference is, as you say, purely cosmetic.

EDIT: The other thing is that it may be all very well for the user to type their chosen stadium name in if we assume your model, but what about the names of stadia that are created under AI control? The point of the system I outline in my post further up the page is to create a universal yet region-specific way of naming stadia throughout the entire game world which provides realism as well as allowing the opportunity for the user to receive a stadium named after them; the whole point of this thread is to change the way stadia are named by default, the idea of having users naming their own stadia is another issue altogether, really. People wanting to name their own stadia is one thing, but the issue at hand in the thread is people wanting to see realistic stadium names for [B]other clubs[/B] as well, rather than just seeing Chelsea move to Zola Park all the time. :)

Share this post


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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.