FM Pre-calculated (scripted)?

[Welshace]

1 minute ago, CaptainPlanet said:

 

I don't feel I'm derailing at all, and am just responding individually to points you've made. Coincidentally I think you have an uncanny habit of certain bad forum etiquette/behaviours too, but happy to put aside and move on.

The alternative is what people are suggesting, that the match engine recalcs every second instead of only on manager intervention. When a player decides to pass, it calculates right then and there who he passes to, why, and how well he executes it.

If that's too complex, too difficult to do, too much processing power, then fine that's understandable - and that could be the instant response every time someone asks this question.

But the responses are either hidden in ambiguity, or are from non-SI Staff confusing how it works and why that's how it works.

Here lays the problem.. what made that player decide to pass? what part of code do you want in game to make that player pass at that point?

[CaptainPlanet]

7 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

If you believe that there are significant numbers of people who would enjoy a football management simulation if and only if each result took at least ninety minutes to calculate, I suspect I'm not the one that needs to get out more...

 

You're going to be in for such a shock when you realise that most things you see on your television screen happened at least a second before you see them, much more than a second if you're on iPlayer or similar....

Back in the real world, that sort of thing's only annoying when someone else has a faster connection than you and you hear cheers  [or if you have to carefully avoid everything your friends might be saying about a match you've recorded]

I believe and know significant people who would enjoy a football match more watching it live than watching it an hour later.

I believe and know significant people who would enjoy FM if it calculated in real time and not before the game.

[enigmatic]

Just now, CaptainPlanet said:

I believe and know significant people who would enjoy a football match more watching it live than watching it an hour later.

I believe and know significant people who would enjoy FM if it calculated in real time and not before the game.

How many people do you know that watch every single match on FM for ninety minutes?

Because that's what you're asking for, or for match engines which calculate results differently according to whether you choose to watch on highlights mode or not which sounds even worse to me....

[Welshace]

1 minute ago, BezorgBier said:

 

That's the whole point of discussion. A one second delay doesn't matter but if a match, in this case a FM match is calculating the whole 45 half beforehand it's more comparable to a replay rather then a real-time simulation or something that comes close. Yes the engine changes based on AI or Player input, but for the sake of this discussions when those inputs are ruled out, it's a pre-calculated simulation rather then a real-time simulation or something that comes close to it. If the engine would change and calculate every second rather then have the match ready beforehand that makes a huge difference for some people and I get it if other people think such things are not a big deal but thats not the point of this whole discussion.

 

No one cares if you or other thinks this topic is irrelevant, it's about the facts. Is the engine changing every second or did it calculate beforehand? (leaving out every other input). Some people find this important and want to know which one it is. Again, no one cares about people thinking this discussion is irrelevant.

I think the point where we fall down here is what recalculation do you want to happen every second? based on what? I think i understand your sentiment.. i.e a player passes the ball --- recalc--- player shoots--recalc....  ?

but my question is what the pass is based on? what do you think the player is doing?

[Welshace]

3 minutes ago, CaptainPlanet said:

I believe and know significant people who would enjoy a football match more watching it live than watching it an hour later.

I believe and know significant people who would enjoy FM if it calculated in real time and not before the game.

Definitely with you on both of these points....   but I'm not sure what you mean by real time calculation in fm.. thats my problem i think...

[CaptainPlanet]

2 minutes ago, Welshace said:

Here lays the problem.. what made that player decide to pass? what part of code do you want in game to make that player pass at that point?

I'm just saying that's what people a lot of people think happens already, and what they expect to happen as part of watching the match in game.

They don't think they're watching a chance in the 3rd minute that's already been decided, they think it's actually running calculations in real time, not giving the illusion of it.

Like I said, if the response is "unfortunately it's not possible to do that" then fine, that's an acceptable and understandable responses. Albeit there are some PR negative connotations to being overly public about how the magic happens.

[CaptainPlanet]

3 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

How many people do you know that watch every single match on FM for ninety minutes?

Because that's what you're asking for, or for match engines which calculate results differently according to whether you choose to watch on highlights mode or not which sounds even worse to me....

I don't know how you're getting to either of those conclusions from what I've said.

10 in-game seconds behind the calculation and then showing you the highlight does feel different to people than it being 45 in-game minutes before showing you one.

[BezorgBier]

2 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

How many people do you know that watch every single match on FM for ninety minutes?

Because that's what you're asking for, or for match engines which calculate results differently according to whether you choose to watch on highlights mode or not which sounds even worse to me....

A alternative would be somewhat close to real-time simulation which is if the engine would calculate it a second before your watching it (or 2, 3 seconds) rather than knowing the engine already calculated the half of the match. I get it that pure LIVE would barely be doable if you want highlights since the game has to know when a highlight would occur but the alternative could be damn close if it would re-calculate every second but a bit before the player's perspective. Reactions like (why would this matter) or whatever won't be a valid response as every single individual is different and gets immersed by different aspects and facts. If this brings them closer to immersion.

[gxL2o62DcgGQ2RNW]

I imagine the technical difficulties would lie in making highlights, but making the actual simulation live seems simple enough, just add large waits so that what currently takes a second takes 45 minutes. That missed one on one would still be missed, and you'd know it at the same time as you do now. What would be gained?

[BezorgBier]

8 minutes ago, Welshace said:

I think the point where we fall down here is what recalculation do you want to happen every second? based on what? I think i understand your sentiment.. i.e a player passes the ball --- recalc--- player shoots--recalc....  ?

but my question is what the pass is based on? what do you think the player is doing?

Well exactly. '' player passes the ball --- recalc--- player shoots--recalc. '' , or atleast calculates the chances by attributes how good the pass is, how effective it is and how good the defender would be at defending or intercepting the pass. This would look way more like two FIFA players playing against each other or atleast the idea of it. I believe such a thing would be impossible with today's technology but it would be way more immersive if every player had a set of rules and attributes and play it out organically in real-time or close to real-time rather then pre-loading the half.

[Insert_Goal_Here]

I'm sorry if this has been repeated in the previous 100s of comments but surely the acid test would be to save prior to the match and replay the s ame game with the same tactics several times and also play the game with differing tactics, then you'll have an answer.

[BezorgBier]

2 minutes ago, gxL2o62DcgGQ2RNW said:

I imagine the technical difficulties would lie in making highlights, but making the actual simulation live seems simple enough, just add large waits so that what currently takes a second takes 45 minutes. That missed one on one would still be missed, and you'd know it at the same time as you do now. What would be gained?

Why do people keep replying with ''What does it matter?''. '' What is the difference?''. '' What would be gained"? Are you reading this topic or not? It's about the question OP asked how the engine works in this case for the sake of his immersion. What are the facts on how the engine is currently opperating. The discussion is not about why it would matter to some people or what opinions other people may have on such details.

 

For you it doesn't ruin your immersion knowing the engine pre-calulated the 45 minutes (ruling out the AI, player interventions). Good for you. For some people it does, period. Back to the facts...

[Welshace]

1 minute ago, BezorgBier said:

Well exactly. '' player passes the ball --- recalc--- player shoots--recalc. '' , or atleast calculates the chances by attributes how good the pass is, how effective it is and how good the defender would be at defending or intercepting the pass. This would look way more like two FIFA players playing against each other or atleast the idea of it. I believe such a thing would be impossible with today's technology but it would be way more immersive if every player had a set of rules and attributes and play it out organically in real-time or close to real-time rather then pre-loading the half.

My point in post being, there has to be a base to work from for a player to make a pass... why does a player pass a ball in game? because there is a tiny bit of code saying that's what happens... i don't understand what the alternative is, do you see? what makes the game say ' player a passes the ball' ?

 

The point about a players movements and choices being based upon a set of rules and attributes.. thats exactly what happens.. that is the calculation made, which then gets recalculated constantly throughout the game.

[Welshace]

2 minutes ago, BezorgBier said:

Why do people keep replying with ''What does it matter?''. '' What is the difference?''. '' What would be gained"? Are you reading this topic or not? It's about the question OP asked how the engine works in this case for the sake of his immersion. What are the facts on how the engine is currently opperating. The discussion is not about why it would matter to some people or what opinions other people may have on such details.

 

For you it doesn't ruin your immersion knowing the engine pre-calulated the 45 minutes (ruling out the AI, player interventions). Good for you. For some people it does, period. Back to the facts...

The facts were given a few posts down right at the beginning of this thread my friend... the conversation moved onto its merits and whether there is a better way or not... its how discussion works..

[CaptainPlanet]

5 minutes ago, Welshace said:

The point about a players movements and choices being based upon a set of rules and attributes.. thats exactly what happens.. that is the calculation made, which then gets recalculated constantly throughout the game.

Not necessarily constantly. If neither managers make any shouts, tactical or sub changes, it doesn't get recalculated at all.

The killer pass made by your player at the end of the first half (say 45:00), was decided if they'll make it or not before the game kicks off.

The knowledge that that calculation was made before the game started instead of 10 seconds before it's made, is what the point of discussion is, even if the outcome isn't any different.

Edited February 2, 2020 by CaptainPlanet

[BezorgBier]

1 minute ago, Welshace said:

My point in post being, there has to be a base to work from for a player to make a pass... why does a player pass a ball in game? because there is a tiny bit of code saying that's what happens... i don't understand what the alternative is, do you see? what makes the game say ' player a passes the ball' ?

 

The point about a players movements and choices being based upon a set of rules and attributes.. thats exactly what happens.. that is the calculation made, which then gets recalculated constantly throughout the game.

I get what you say. For this to happen you will need advanced AI. I believe some companies where working on such engines where AI learns and adapts. There is some very smart AI out there that could do this but our PC's won't be able to handle such things because those simulations would need a lot of processing power. But it is definitely doable to have AI make decisions in real-time based on attributes and set of rules they have been given beforehand and adapt on different scenario's resulting in different outcomes. With this technique even the engine doesn't know the outcome yet (in the end) since it's calculating and it could change somewhat organically.

I have read some more topics about this and there is indeed some marketing approach from SI stating the engine is calculating every second which clearly isn't true. There is one comment that it calculates every 1/4 a second on every player which comes out to be not really the case since it doesn't start te re-calculation on itself from what I have read so far. It starts this process only when a player or AI (manager) gave input and it changes it's outcome based on this input.

[enigmatic]

4 minutes ago, CaptainPlanet said:

I'm just saying that's what people a lot of people think happens already, and what they expect to happen as part of watching the match in game.

They don't think they're watching a chance in the 3rd minute that's already been decided, they think it's actually running calculations in real time, not giving the illusion of it.

Like I said, if the response is "unfortunately it's not possible to do that" then fine, that's an acceptable and understandable responses. Albeit there are some PR negative connotations to being overly public about how the magic happens.

Anyone with three brain cells to rub together has figured out that if the game is showing them a 'key highlight' in the third minute, it's already figured out that someone's taking a shot or conceding a penalty or something in that minute. 

 

4 minutes ago, CaptainPlanet said:

I don't know how you're getting to either of those conclusions from what I've said.

10 in-game seconds behind the calculation and then showing you the highlight does feel different to people than it being 45 in-game minutes before showing you one.

How? You, by your own admission, weren't sure when the highlights were calculated. Computers don't run on 'in game seconds', they run in real seconds. Yes, in theory you could slow the calculation down so that you couldn't know what was happening in the 43rd minute of a simulated football match until you'd waited for 43 minutes rather than simply having the choice to watch for 43 minutes if you wanted to.

But I'm afraid I simply refuse to believe that there are real people who would actually consider this a gameplay improvement

 

1 minute ago, BezorgBier said:

Well exactly. '' player passes the ball --- recalc--- player shoots--recalc. '' , or atleast calculates the chances by attributes how good the pass is, how effective it is and how good the defender would be at defending or intercepting the pass. This would look way more like two FIFA players playing against each other or atleast the idea of it. I believe such a thing would be impossible with today's technology but it would be way more immersive if every player had a set of rules and attributes and play it out organically in real-time or close to real-time rather then pre-loading the half.

I mean, the game does calculate the chance of a pass being good based on attributes for every single pass, and then recalculate how good the defender is at reacting to it based on which direction the passer's pass travels in and their attributes and their starting position. It just doesn't take ninety minutes to do it, which would be absurd.

[Welshace]

Just now, CaptainPlanet said:

Not necessarily constantly. If neither managers make any shouts, tactical or sub changes, it doesn't get recalculated at all.

The killer pass made by your player at the end of the first half (say 45:00), was decided if they'll make it or not before the game kicks off.

The knowledge that that calculation was made before the game started instead of 10 seconds before it's made, is what the point is.

Oh ok, not what I thought then.. a more philosophical question then a practical one then...  

I would still argue that this point, at least for me, is a moot one. It makes no difference to me that the exact same simulation was calculated two minutes ago or on the fly in front of me because thats the only difference... one of timing really, given that any changes I or the ai make recalculates anyway.

[CaptainPlanet]

3 minutes ago, Welshace said:

The facts were given a few posts down right at the beginning of this thread my friend... the conversation moved onto its merits and whether there is a better way or not... its how discussion works..

I do think the 'facts' in Sebs post are open to interpretation though, the main one being what the trigger is for a recalculation. Of which all of our follow up discussion has still been speculation.

[Welshace]

1 minute ago, CaptainPlanet said:

I do think the 'facts' in Sebs post are open to interpretation though, the main one being what the trigger is for a recalculation. Of which all of our follow up discussion has still been speculation.

Oh absolutely, but we both know SI are pretty ambiguous with the info they give us.. 

If the issue is what exactly triggers a recalculation, fair enough .. but for me, the changes that matter are those that a manager can influence on a pitch.. anything else can be left up to the initial simulation whcih takes into account everything from condition, weather, form, morale, height, weight, player relationships etc... 

[CaptainPlanet]

6 minutes ago, Welshace said:

I would still argue that this point, at least for me, is a moot one. It makes no difference to me that the exact same simulation was calculated two minutes ago or on the fly in front of me because thats the only difference... one of timing really, given that any changes I or the ai make recalculates anyway.

Okay, it makes no difference for you.

To others it does, because they want to feel it's being calculated in real time. Which is the point of the thread.

So an official response could be "That's not possible given current technology levels, but the way it's done now is the closest we can do that still gives the illusion of real time and you can still affect the outcome with subs, tactics shouts etc." and a personal response on the subject would be "I understand what you're saying, it doesn't make a difference to me personally, because it won't impact what I'm seeing and I'm happy that it feels real time enough"

[KUBI]

If you want a constant recalculation of every action after every action the game would look like a flipbook. 

If you don't like the idea and mechanics which are behind a simulation, you should not play a simulation. 

[CaptainPlanet]

2 minutes ago, KUBI said:

If you want a constant recalculation of every action after every action the game would look like a flipbook. 

If you don't like the idea and mechanics which are behind a simulation, you should not play a simulation. 

I get that.

I do think that first line would have been a more useful part to add to your initial response at the start of the thread though, instead of "it's not scripted at all" - when in reality, to a degree it is. Saying that it's not possible because it would slow the game down too much because of the level of complexity, people understand that.

[KUBI]

I recalculated my response and now it says: The word scripted is just wrong and misleading.

 

[StiffJa]

17 minutes ago, KUBI said:

I recalculated my response and now it says: The word scripted is just wrong and misleading.

 

 

So if we can't use the word scripted. Could you atleast shed some light for those that are asking the following question: '' How many re-calculations does the engine make? ''. Does it only make re-calculations on AI(manager) and player input, yes or no?

Pretty simple and straight forward to give a bit more information on this rather then being very ambiguous about it.

[turnip]

Having thought about my own answer on the last page, I probably should have said B) rather than C) - as in, some things are 'set' at the start of the match, but then game variables kick in.

The players kicking off a game probably have an idea of where they're going to kick it, or who they're going to kick it to, but let's say we run a game twice. The first time, from kick-off, Christian Benteke attempts to pass the ball back to James McArthur and gets it right, so the game calculates what happens from this point - James McArthur has the ball somewhere in midfield. The second time, Benteke's poor passing attribute means that he overhits it and it goes back to their goalkeeper, so the game calculates what happens from this point - Guaita has the ball in the Palace penalty area.

Hell, maybe on the third time we run the game, the [insert opposition team here]'s Goalkeeper decides to wander out to the edge of his box in time for the kick-off and Benteke scores from the halfway line with a chip?

 

As for what possible difference it can make to be watching a highlight versus watching something that's happening in real-time? As someone else said - the game has to know what to actually show you if you're not going to be watching the whole game, and simulating sections and then showing them to you after the fact is the best way of doing this. You can't affect anything during a highlight anyway (no real-life manager gives his defenders tactical instructions while they're defending), so it's all completely academic? Unless you're dressed in a tracksuit, sat in a home-made dugout in front of a 96" screen and screaming at your players with your best Sean Dyche mangled voice pretending it's all real-life... rather than sitting at your PC, Alt-Tabbing to Reddit after you press 'Continue Game'.

[Lucas]

Just a warning in this thread its come to our attention that some user is creating alias accounts in order to agree with themselves. 

It doesn't make the argument that it is "scripted" any more true, which it isn't.

[Snorks]

Looks like this has all come down to semantics and the use of the word "scripted'.

My take, on how the simulation works is:

Once you have finished your Team Talk and OIs, and hit the button (or space bar) to start the match, the 'game' calculates the outcome of every incident, I have heard it works on four decisions per second - a 'decision' in this case is the position, ball movement, ALL player attributes and movement and skill and weather, and countless other influencing factors such as team morale, player happiness, fitness levels etc etc etc. (I have heard there are more decisions per second but not convinced).

So, once you start the game, the software calculates an outcome for that half, with a huge number of variables used (4 times per second) and presents you with the highlights, or Key Highlights or the full 45 mins. An injury to a player in the fifth minute has been calculated and simmed anyway for his condition to drop by 10% - however, if you the manager sub him off, you have changed the parameters under which the simulation was calculated and the match will be recalculated as above, from that point. The outcome is now different as the conditions of the simulation have been changed.

Now, if, for example, you start the game and don;t change a thing, the AI manager changes nothing, and the half time score is 1-0. If you go back and recalculate without any changes to the conditions, the software would still likely produce a different result, or at least a different path to the same result, as there are so many variables built-in. Decisions made every 0.25 secs, equals, 240 decisions per minute, with 22 players on the field, that's 5280 per minute that would have to be identical to produce the exact same simulated result for the first minute of the match! For the first half alone, 237,600 variables that would all have to fall into the exact same place for the simulation to produce the exact same outcomes twice - this is before we or the AI manager makes any adjustments.

To argue that this is 'scripted' is a bit of a nonsense to be honest, albeit, that the graphics we see are selected highlights chosen on a threshold we have selected (Comprehensive/Key/Goals) from an already simmed event, or rather a pre-simulated chain of 237,600 events which then have to be converted into the graphical representation that we see.

However, to calculate that rate of decisions 'live' and present them in a graphical form that is acceptable to a 21st Century audience would be nigh on impossible unless   we are all happy to accept a slow-motion, or flip-book version of the graphics engine  for the full 90 minutes of the game.

So, watching it 'Live' 

 

or watching it pre-simulated:

 

 

I know which one i prefer.

Edited February 3, 2020 by Snorks

[craigcwwe]

Aren't they now up to 32 decisions per second in the ME?

[Snorks]

34 minutes ago, craigcwwe said:

Aren't they now up to 32 decisions per second in the ME?

I have heard that figure, but I wasn't certain of the source of that information - if true, then 1,900,800 decisions per half.

Mr Anderson is real!

[vukigepard]

4 hours ago, Welshace said:

Oh ok, not what I thought then.. a more philosophical question then a practical one then...  

I would still argue that this point, at least for me, is a moot one. It makes no difference to me that the exact same simulation was calculated two minutes ago or on the fly in front of me because thats the only difference... one of timing really, given that any changes I or the ai make recalculates anyway.

I think you guys are pushing this discussion in the wrong way. There's no question about it if game is calculated in advance or not, it physically has to be either way like you've said, and for that matter, that's okay. The real problem is how it is calculated in advance and there are 2 ways to go.  First one is to calculate it before it has even started, to take all parameters like weather, player fitness, attributes, tactics, add some randomness and you get a result that can change according to the changes you or the ai makes during the half, then translate it into match highlights. That is the easy way, and not nowhere near real simulation, you've got yourself a dice throwing simulator maybe. Second way is where, for example weather is not calculated directly into the result, but it is calculated into the percentage of success of a single decision (for example a dribble), and that decision adds on and is calculated in the mix with other decisions (and also add some randomness), and if the calculations click, you get a goal, or corner, or a free kick, or offside, or some event. It wouldn't make game much slower really, as there is the same or similar number of calculations, only problem is that  it would take much more work to make and much more programing, and also much more brainstorming about logical consequences and A LOT of tweaking to get in line with realistic football

There is a difference between these two methods, because in the first case, you are limited as there are no real logical consequences why are things happening the way they are as the result is directly calculated by throwing every parameter in and then recalculating the whole thing by changing that parameter), in the second case, you are changing one parameter, for which you hope it will change other parameters, which then effects other tied parameters, which lead to a different outcome of the result. Not easy, not simple to code, but the year is not 2002 anymore.

As for the argument why does it matter how it is calculated, when the end goal is the same, it does, because in the first case, it's result and stats simulation, in the second it's football simulation which then leads to results and stats being simulated as the consequence of football, not turned around, and that alone, changes what you can do, how much freedom you have and what do you do with it, and in the end, that changes the result. If i know that i can't make my tactic more effective due to the way something is coded and pre-determined, that's no fun anymore.

Edited February 3, 2020 by vukigepard

[gxL2o62DcgGQ2RNW]

1 hour ago, turnip said:

Having thought about my own answer on the last page, I probably should have said B) rather than C) - as in, some things are 'set' at the start of the match, but then game variables kick in.

The players kicking off a game probably have an idea of where they're going to kick it, or who they're going to kick it to, but let's say we run a game twice. The first time, from kick-off, Christian Benteke attempts to pass the ball back to James McArthur and gets it right, so the game calculates what happens from this point - James McArthur has the ball somewhere in midfield. The second time, Benteke's poor passing attribute means that he overhits it and it goes back to their goalkeeper, so the game calculates what happens from this point - Guaita has the ball in the Palace penalty area.

Hell, maybe on the third time we run the game, the [insert opposition team here]'s Goalkeeper decides to wander out to the edge of his box in time for the kick-off and Benteke scores from the halfway line with a chip?

 

As for what possible difference it can make to be watching a highlight versus watching something that's happening in real-time? As someone else said - the game has to know what to actually show you if you're not going to be watching the whole game, and simulating sections and then showing them to you after the fact is the best way of doing this. You can't affect anything during a highlight anyway (no real-life manager gives his defenders tactical instructions while they're defending), so it's all completely academic? Unless you're dressed in a tracksuit, sat in a home-made dugout in front of a 96" screen and screaming at your players with your best Sean Dyche mangled voice pretending it's all real-life... rather than sitting at your PC, Alt-Tabbing to Reddit after you press 'Continue Game'.

What happens if you run the same game again is a completely separate thing. The game is essentially probabilities stacked on top of probabilities, so naturally games can be extremely different. When you see the highlight of the game kicking off it's already over behind the scenes. When you or the AI manager make a change, a new .pkm (the format for storing an FM match) is made with a numbered suffix.

 

These are 11 .pkms from the same FM18 game. The result are, respectively, 5-2, 3-2, 2-2, 1-3, 0-2, 0-2, 0-2, 0-2, 0-3, 0-2 and 0-2. The last .pkm is made up of moments from all the others plus everything that happened after the last change. I'm sure that with more patience and effort one could make a more illustrative image of the timeline as it branches, but this makes me believe option C is the most accurate answer. Though I must retract my earlier remarks about only a half being decided, I believe that is actually incorrect, the entire match is simulated when you press kickoff. Though since you can't avoid halftime team talks, I don't think there is any way of avoiding the creating of at least 1 branch. (lowest I have seen is 2) 

[Bry]

6 hours ago, BezorgBier said:

Why do people keep replying with ''What does it matter?''. '' What is the difference?''. '' What would be gained"? Are you reading this topic or not? It's about the question OP asked how the engine works in this case for the sake of his immersion. What are the facts on how the engine is currently opperating. The discussion is not about why it would matter to some people or what opinions other people may have on such details.

 

For you it doesn't ruin your immersion knowing the engine pre-calulated the 45 minutes (ruling out the AI, player interventions). Good for you. For some people it does, period. Back to the facts...

I think asking “What’s the difference?” is a valid part of the discussion and don’t think this line of enquiry should be shut out.

If someone was watching a game on TV and didn’t know whether it was absolutely live or not, it wouldn’t make a difference to one’s immersion. It couldn’t, because the viewer doesn’t know either way.

Similarly, where this thread’s argument seems to keep tripping over itself is that it claims immersion is being affected. Yet the same people are saying they’re unsure how the game is calculated.

Well, someone’s immersion can’t be broken if they don’t yet know how it works, and I would suggest that if people can’t tell either way, then the game is doing a great job in suspending belief anyway.

Edited February 3, 2020 by Bry

[enigmatic]

7 hours ago, vukigepard said:

I think you guys are pushing this discussion in the wrong way. There's no question about it if game is calculated in advance or not, it physically has to be either way like you've said, and for that matter, that's okay. The real problem is how it is calculated in advance and there are 2 ways to go.  First one is to calculate it before it has even started, to take all parameters like weather, player fitness, attributes, tactics, add some randomness and you get a result that can change according to the changes you or the ai makes during the half, then translate it into match highlights. That is the easy way, and not nowhere near real simulation, you've got yourself a dice throwing simulator maybe. Second way is where, for example weather is not calculated directly into the result, but it is calculated into the percentage of success of a single decision (for example a dribble), and that decision adds on and is calculated in the mix with other decisions (and also add some randomness), and if the calculations click, you get a goal, or corner, or a free kick, or offside, or some event. It wouldn't make game much slower really, as there is the same or similar number of calculations, only problem is that  it would take much more work to make and much more programing, and also much more brainstorming about logical consequences and A LOT of tweaking to get in line with realistic football

There is a difference between these two methods, because in the first case, you are limited as there are no real logical consequences why are things happening the way they are as the result is directly calculated by throwing every parameter in and then recalculating the whole thing by changing that parameter), in the second case, you are changing one parameter, for which you hope it will change other parameters, which then effects other tied parameters, which lead to a different outcome of the result. Not easy, not simple to code, but the year is not 2002 anymore.

As for the argument why does it matter how it is calculated, when the end goal is the same, it does, because in the first case, it's result and stats simulation, in the second it's football simulation which then leads to results and stats being simulated as the consequence of football, not turned around, and that alone, changes what you can do, how much freedom you have and what do you do with it, and in the end, that changes the result. If i know that i can't make my tactic more effective due to the way something is coded and pre-determined, that's no fun anymore.

What on earth makes you think it isn't calculated that way? It's perfectly possible to calculate the success percentage of an individual dribble based on attributes and current minute fitness, attitude and weather before choosing whether to depict the individual dribble on screen. This is, in fact, how FM works and has done since they first introduced a 3D engine and possibly for several  generations before. it's not vintage Premier Manager or a gambling game showing you a few pre-cooked animation sequences based on a quick calculation of the relative strength of the teams plus luck.

That's the problem with going down the 'scripted' rabbit hole, we soon get this misunderstanding creeping in.

 

 

[vukigepard]

40 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

What on earth makes you think it isn't calculated that way? It's perfectly possible to calculate the success percentage of an individual dribble based on attributes and current minute fitness, attitude and weather before choosing whether to depict the individual dribble on screen. This is, in fact, how FM works and has done since they first introduced a 3D engine and possibly for several  generations before. it's not vintage Premier Manager or a gambling game showing you a few pre-cooked animation sequences based on a quick calculation of the relative strength of the teams plus luck.

That's the problem with going down the 'scripted' rabbit hole, we soon get this misunderstanding creeping in.

 

 

Mostly things that were explained by devs in general feedback thread, like calculating the score during warm up for the first half, which will stay the same as calculated if there are no changes. Be it 2d or 3d doesn't make a difference for the background processes and actions unfolding. And there is a post just above you.

As for the gambling part, i'll give you a different argument. In this game, your great striker will for some reason have a terrible game where he misses a lot of 1v1's, lots of other chances, oppositon gk having a great game and so on. This happens in real life, but in real life, players aren't measured in attributes, or morale, and it's down to him not doing the right thing in the right moment because of x-y-z reasons. In the game, this can also happen, but there is no x-y-z reason behind, your player is tied to his attributes, his morale, his form, weather, but in the end, it's the calculation that matters, that random factor, in one game playing the same positon, same match against same opposition he will score none, in that repeated one he can score 5 without any changes by player or the ai.  There's no x-y-z reason behind why other than base reason like attributes, form, weather, and you can't do anything other than maximize that chance by playing a good tactic with a good player, but in the end, it's a gamble, not a simulation, as doing the same thing over and over brings different results. 

Ironic part is that gamble, on the large scale, does great  job of simulating football results, as the football results of the future from our viewpoints will be random. We can't know what will be result of some real future game be as we don't have parameters of that game, we can guess, but the result will be the consequence of these parameters. In Fm, as it human made code, we can know the parameters (well not really us, but people that made the code), but still not know the score and unfolding of that game, 

Edited February 3, 2020 by vukigepard

[enigmatic]

We seem to be going in yet another different direction here.

But if you play two teams against each other three times in a row IRL with the same tactics, they will get different results, so I'm not sure why a simulation should always generate the same one. Most sorts of complex simulation introduce some sort of noise: often the whole purpose of a simulation is to generate a range of possible outcomes from the same starting inputs.

[sporadicsmiles]

8 hours ago, vukigepard said:

First one is to calculate it before it has even started, to take all parameters like weather, player fitness, attributes, tactics, add some randomness and you get a result that can change according to the changes you or the ai makes during the half, then translate it into match highlights. That is the easy way, and not nowhere near real simulation, you've got yourself a dice throwing simulator maybe. Second way is where, for example weather is not calculated directly into the result, but it is calculated into the percentage of success of a single decision (for example a dribble), and that decision adds on and is calculated in the mix with other decisions (and also add some randomness), and if the calculations click, you get a goal, or corner, or a free kick, or offside, or some event.

Those two things are exactly the same, you just focus on a different part for each argument. There is inherent randomness in the game. And it works on chance for completing certain aspects of play. Which are weighted by many factors, I would imagine. 

I do not get the controversy or why this bothers people. The game is calculated before the start of the game. You then watch a highlights package. You or the AI make a tactical change, and the game recalculates. As many times as you make changes. You have complete control on the outcome of a game. Every time you make a change, a new simulation happens. There is absolutely no difference between this and having it work in real time. The engine determining the match is the same. The engine that does a recalculation when you have made a change is the same. The only difference would be when the engine calculates each event. The outcome is the same. It is nonsense to say there is a difference, because there is not. 

There are good reasons why the game would want to calculate beforehand. The most obvious is that it needs to know what parts of a game to present to you. When you select highlight level the game has to know which highlights to show. It simply cannot do that if the game is processed in real time. You would have to watch the entire 90 minutes in real time. Which is not going to happen. There is actually no way around that. And as I said, it makes no difference.

On the use of the word scripted. The use of scripted here is usually meant as there are elements that are coded into the game to happen always, no matter what the user input does. Usually assumed to give a boost to the AI, or something like that. In this sense there is no scripting at all in FM. The ME cannot tell AI and user teams apart. It is simply not fed this information as an input. We will periodically see this usage pop up, and it does not become more true the more you say it. 

[samuelawachie]

11 hours ago, Lucas said:

Just a warning in this thread its come to our attention that some user is creating alias accounts in order to agree with themselves. 

It doesn't make the argument that it is "scripted" any more true, which it isn't.

I just want to know who was the person that created new alias accounts to agree with themselves, so we can all throw our heads back and laugh! 

[Lynch48]

this  thread basically how I try to explain to my mother how Computer works

the Answer is Impossible

[likesiamesefish]

18 minutes ago, samuelawachie said:

I just want to know who was the person that created new alias accounts to agree with themselves, so we can all throw our heads back and laugh! 

If you read the thread you'll see who it's implied to be.

Hint: There are two new accounts and one of them starts their first post agreeing with someone else...

[Jack Joyce]

It seems like some of you have a good idea of how it works anyway, but for clarification:

• Matches are processed from the point of your last tactical change or shout. Every time you do anything the match gets reprocessed.
• When the match is processed, every single decision (of which there are 4 per second for an individual player) is worked out, then the match controller works out what parts of the full 90 mins are highlights so it knows what to show you on screen.
• The ME does not just work out a scoreline and make up highlights to fit. A full match simulation is calculated with every decision worked out. There's a crazy amount of factors such as weather, relationships between players, etc. that go in to it.
• We process at the beginning for performance reasons, if we did it on the fly as highlights were displayed it would lead to lag and not only that, but how would we know what passages of play were highlight worthy? You can't know what's worth showing without knowing what's happened.
• If we did work things out on the fly instead, the calculations would be identical and the match would play out in the exact same way. It would make no difference other than giving you a performance hit.

I hope that clears some things up.

Thanks,

Jack

[Svenc]

 

[forameuss]

15 minutes ago, Svenc said:

 

And to add to this, the only person that could perhaps be better placed to comment on the ME would be Paul Collyer (who I believe, or at least used to be, is the man largely behind the ME).  Of course, that post is more than a decade old, but I'd imagine the core functionality behind it is still sound.

[Dagenham_Dave]

14 hours ago, BezorgBier said:

 

 If the engine would change and calculate every second rather then have the match ready beforehand that makes a huge difference for some people

The player experience would be the exact same in both circumstances. You still watch the match unfold, you are still able to make changes when you want. What does it matter what goes on under the hood or when the calculations are done? There would be literally ZERO difference to how you interact with it. 

 

15 hours ago, BezorgBier said:

Some people find this important and want to know which one it is

Not a single person has given a logical reason why this is so important. 

Probably because there isn't one. 

[CaptainPlanet]

I just want to throw out that it wasn’t me creating aliases - and I don’t even care how it works, was just trying to clarify what and why people were asking. I’m happily playing and enjoying the game.

[forameuss]

1 hour ago, CaptainPlanet said:

I just want to throw out that it wasn’t me creating aliases - and I don’t even care how it works, was just trying to clarify what and why people were asking. I’m happily playing and enjoying the game.

That's exactly what someone who created an alias would say!

But seriously, it's pretty clear who did it, although unless posts have been deleted it doesn't look like said alias was "talking to himself".Just looks like a switch of account to carry on the same argument, OP never came back.  

[CVSeason]

On 02/02/2020 at 11:30, SakraTV said:

Let me explain in different manner. Scripted might not be the correct word to use in here since many elements can still change the outcome, but, the moment I get to see a highlight, the highlight is a replay of the calculation that already happened, am I right? It is not being calulated live while I am watching the highlight.

I understand what you mean, and you're right. I think the word "scripted" is putting the discussion in a different light than what you meant, though. But essentially the game will calculate an outcome based on whatever factors is uses, and then show it to you. Every decision that gets made will make it recalculate the result, and again show it to you. That's pretty much it,and that's the best that current technology can do, since most people aren't playing on supercomputers. 

Edited January 11, 2021 by CVSeason

[WhataMessi]

I can understand the sentiment behind why it matters if the match has pre calculated the score. I also do understand that the processing power to do the calculations are not there.

I actually made a post about this in 2010. A lot was different back then. I was in uni, not married. Life has changed! (In a great way btw). I probably stopped playing fm back then because i didnt have the time and it took up a lot of my time and I found it very addictive albeit in a fun way. Now and again like many of you I would dream or be tempted to dabble back into it. My first ever game was championship manager 98 so i had been playing on and off for few years. But one thing that definitely did bug me was that in 2010 it kind of hit me that the match wasnt being played out in real time, I discovered (hence my post in 2010) that extended highlights are being shown because the game already knows that they are there.

Funny now that I have some time off, I was tempted to get back into fm. Iv been thinking about it for a few days, knowing that its incredibly addictive hence the extra thought going into it.

I wanted to look up if anyone else felt like i did and came across this post, 11 years after my post on it.

My block is that the game already knows the result. That's the problem. Yes i can change the result, but there is a result already there...that does bug me. It changes the focus of me playing with anticipation as if things are happening in real time, and reacting to things I see my team and the opponent do on screen....to making me feel like "the result is already there" "this has all already happened" "I'm not changing something in real time, but im changing a replay". Can anyone help me with this, or these thoughts 😂

I for one hate watching recorded matches in real time that have happened 2 hours before. I dont mind watching highlights not knowing the result.

There is a difference for me watching highlights of a game thats happened and watching it live. I'm sure that's the case for most people.

I think an improvement would be if the whole 90 mins match outcome was not calculated prior to kick off. Instead if each 15 mins were calculated instead. That would make it feel more real. That way highlights could be played back to us after 15 mins and the real time realism is kept more.

If 15 mins is not possible due to processing power than 20 or 30 mins. Anything is better than calculating the result for 90 mins prior to kick off.

 

 

 

 

[santy001]

@WhataMessi there is no alternative though because whether the game calculates 2+2 in advance, or 2+2 in real time at the exact second its happening. The outcome is still 4. 

You've missed the most important part mind, because the game calculates the current half only because anything beyond half time is impossible. The game, as good as it is, is not omniscient and cannot know what you will do at half time. If you berate your team, sub on 5 goalkeepers and play no one in defence you're probably no longer on track for a close game. 

With enough information about a situation you can predict with accuracy, or even know, the future. If you put water in a kettle and turn it on, you know the water will boil. Is this you viewing the highlights of a kettle boiling? No. Has the kettle already boiled? No. There are factors that may take you by surprise (ie no power) or you can switch the kettle off part way through and it no longer boils but it is fundamental knowledge that if you subject water to an increased temperature it boils. All that the game does is have the advantage of being able to understand how to take all the data and convert that into a game of football. The only time a game has "happened" is when you get to the full time whistle. Even if you reload, its no longer the same game that just happened.

So again, it comes back to the simple point that there is never a situation in which anything programmatically can be given an input of 2+2 and not know its 4. The onus on you as the player is to change those numbers in your favour. 

If you want FM to recalculate the game every 15 minutes, make a change every 15 minutes. If you want it to do it every 20, make a change every 20. 

[Neil Brock]

Also another thing to bear in mind, just because the 'game' has the outcome of the result (which as Santy has very well explained above, is something that constantly changes anyway), doesn't mean the AI manager does. The AI manager only knows the current score of the game as it's played out and makes their changes accordingly. 

Without trying to be glib, the 'game' is not sat in the crowd sending sneaky text messages to the AI manager about what's going to happen in the future.