Player development makes zero sense to me in this game.

[Marko1989]

38 minutes ago, Sharkn20 said:

This whole thread of criticism is really opportunistic, vague and baseless.

I really hope SI doesn't nerf the model because of it. That would make a lot off of veterans angry, who know indeed how to develop players.

English is not my native language but as far as I know, nerf means downgrading something. I am asking for improvement by adding dynamic potential, not downgrading. 

[Sharkn20]

2 minutes ago, Marko1989 said:

English is not my native language but as far as I know, nerf means downgrading something. I am asking for improvement by adding dynamic potential, not downgrading. 

Don't fix what is not broken. That's easy to understand.

Dynamic potential is already embeded in the game. If you don't develop your full potential as normally happens in real life, it goes down. And majority of players don't become Gods from night to day by increasing PPA 50 just because they had a good night of sleep, so that is not realistic.

Edited January 8, 2021 by Sharkn20

[Marko1989]

1 minute ago, Sharkn20 said:

Don't fix what is not broken. That's easy to understand.

You've said it would make veterans angry. Player development was different in 2003, it was different in 2015, and it is different now. I may be wrong but I think I have noticed more strict development for the first time back in FM 2017.

It is not exactly the same for past 20 years so that would make veterans angry. They are changing things so it is obvious that they are still searching for the best model. 

[HUNT3R]

9 minutes ago, Marko1989 said:

His Marking and Tackling didn't improve from age of 23 to 30. And below that I wrote a scenario where it would be strange that he remains defensively the same between age of 23 and 30+.

His tackling didn't. His marking did.

When looking at anything though, like I mentioned, it's going to be important to look at the whole picture rather than (in this case) a single attribute. Keep in mind also, the the higher an attribute is, the harder it'll be to improve it. Just because his technical attributes haven't increased, doesn't mean that others haven't either and he's likely still a better player (even when looking at marking or making tackles) because of other improvements.

 

[Marko1989]

3 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

His tackling didn't. His marking did.

When looking at anything though, like I mentioned, it's going to be important to look at the whole picture rather than (in this case) a single attribute. Keep in mind also, the the higher an attribute is, the harder it'll be to improve it. Just because his technical attributes haven't increased, doesn't mean that others haven't either and he's likely still a better player (even when looking at marking or making tackles) because of other improvements.

 

Marking didn't changed. First screenshot is him at age of 21.  Marking improved at age of 22 if I remember correctly. I am talking between the age of 23 and 30.

I know what are you saying, but I am mainly talking about main defensive attributes such as marking and tackling. 

[HUNT3R]

Just now, Marko1989 said:

I know what are you saying, but I am mainly talking about main defensive attributes such as marking and tackling. 

Okay, so 1 player didn't improve there. That leads you to draw an immediate conclusion that development is broken? Did you focus on these attributes? Did he have room to grow still? Did other attributes improve?

If he's better at Anticipation and Decisions, for instance, that will make him a better marker and tackler in general, so it's not a great idea to look at a single attribute in isolation.

[Marko1989]

5 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

Okay, so 1 player didn't improve there. That leads you to draw an immediate conclusion that development is broken? Did you focus on these attributes? Did he have room to grow still? Did other attributes improve?

If he's better at Anticipation and Decisions, for instance, that will make him a better marker and tackler in general, so it's not a great idea to look at a single attribute in isolation.

Man, I didn't ever said it is completely broken, I've said that I don't like it and that there is a room for improvement. At least for me, dynamic potential would improve the development. Yes, other attributes did improve a bit, but as I've said I am here mostly focused on those attributes. 

But ok, I give up, I don't want to argue with people anymore. 

[Platinum]

1 hour ago, Marko1989 said:

His Marking and Tackling didn't improve from age of 23 to 30. And below that I wrote a scenario where it would be strange that he remains defensively the same between age of 23 and 30+.

His marking and tackling dont *have* to improve for him to become a better player. Mental attributes can increase and ass HUNTER said consistency and important matches can also increase and you might not even realise.

On top of that your development of the player could just be bad and that's why he didn't improve as much as ypu hoped.

In my experience player development is generally fine, apart from physical attributes detoriating really quickly (which I havent checked in fm21) and so I would hope big changes arent made due to unproven claims made in this thread.

Edited January 8, 2021 by francis#17

[Sharkn20]

2 hours ago, francis#17 said:

His marking and tackling dont *have* to improve for him to become a better player. Mental attributes can increase and ass HUNTER said consistency and important matches can also increase and you might not even realise.

On top of that your development of the player could just be bad and that's why he didn't improve as much as ypu hoped.

In my experience player development is generally fine, apart from physical attributes detoriating really quickly (which I havent checked in fm21) and so I would hope big changes arent made due to unproven claims made in this thread.

What he says. +1.

[PeeDub]

4 hours ago, Marko1989 said:

His Marking and Tackling didn't improve from age of 23 to 30. And below that I wrote a scenario where it would be strange that he remains defensively the same between age of 23 and 30+.

Counterexample: Paul Scholes. Improved quite a lot. Still a **** tackler.

[Dundalis]

To me PA is far too rigid. I also don't believe in the real world that potential is fixed. Looking back after a players career and saying, well that was his actual potential ability is straight up doing it wrong. It's like those athiests that don't believe in free will. Why do anything if outcomes are all fixed? Don't believe it.

Sure it would take a lot of work to test and balance, but by far the most organic way to have player development in the game would be to remove PA altogether, you start off as a young player with a CA, and growth from that point on is completely dependant on hidden attributes, natural fitness and determination, as well as environmental attributes such as training quality and playing time. No one in real life looks at a kid and says this is his possible potential ability. They effectively look at the players CURRENT ability, and say, he's really advanced for his age, his development curve is going to take him X far, because this is how much talent and how good he is now at the age he is. i.e. a 15 year old can have 40 CA and 170 PA in the game. Utterly meaningless. While another kid could have 100 CA and 110 PA at 15. But what if that kid has 20 professionalism, 20 determination, 20 natural fitness (which should have a big say in progressive development in late career), high ambition etc. This is where the PA in my mind becomes arbitrary and out dated, because those hidden attributes along with training and playing time should have FAR more say in how much a player can actually improve than something like a simple PA attribute just capping said player from progressing anywhere past his 15-16 year old regen self, despite all the right attributes and situation to improve.

I would bet you youth players with super high ability that don't progress IRL, don't progress due to not rating high in one or more of these key personality/hidden attributes, particularly professionalism, or injury proneness, or being in a bad development environment without the right training/support, and progression opportunities, not because god put an arbitrary cap on their potential ability to play football.

Edited June 16, 2021 by Dundalis

[GreenTriangle]

In other words, you want any young player transferred or coached as a junior by a world top club to automatically become a world class player. I know, everything has to depend on professionalism, injuries, environment, etc. What top club will include in its underXX team a player who does not have a proper mentality? Or a fragile player ?

[Dundalis]

8 minutes ago, GreenTriangle said:

In other words, you want any young player transferred or coached as a junior by a world top club to automatically become a world class player. I know, everything has to depend on professionalism, injuries, environment, etc. What top club will include in its underXX team a player who does not have a proper mentality? Or a fragile player ?

Plenty. Because there's this function in the game called mentoring. Now it needs to be more balanced, because its a little too easy to increase certain hidden attributes, but the bottom line is, hidden attributes aren't fixed (unlike PA), which is a good thing.

But ultimately the player with the high current ability and great mental attributes will ALWAYS be the most prized youth players for teams to acquire. Players with high current ability and dodgy personality will come second. Just like it would be IRL. Personality traits are almost just as well researched by youth scouts these days as the players natural ability and given very high weighting.

And yes, if the player has a high CA at a young age, great personality attributes and put in a great situation for development that isn't ruined due to injury proneness or blocked progression at a key development stage, there SHOULD be a high chance they become world class.

Edited June 16, 2021 by Dundalis

[GreenTriangle]

That's it. You're proposing to generate countless super players just because those players are young players at a world class club. All players produced by (let's say) Real Madrid are "180 or more" CA players IRL ?

[Dundalis]

4 minutes ago, GreenTriangle said:

That's it. You're proposing to generate countless super players just because those players are young players at a world class club. All players produced by (let's say) Real Madrid are "180 or more" CA players IRL ?

You aren't reading very well clearly. If a player has a high CA at a young age, great personality attributes, development supported, not blocked, no injury proneness causing issues, they should develop into a world class player. There are NOT going to be very many players that will meet all those criteria. The fact that you think it will produce endless super players means you are just not understanding the pre requisites. Obviously there will need to be balancing done to ensure all the hidden attributes support player development in the most organic way possible. That might mean nerfing or increasing the effect of something like professionalism, or breaking it into multiple attributes.

Edited June 16, 2021 by Dundalis

[GreenTriangle]

Of course, a big (and rich) club will avoid selecting too many players with a positive personality so as not to generate too many world-class players, right ? I guess that club will avoid using its own facilities too much.

Edited June 16, 2021 by GreenTriangle

[Dundalis]

15 minutes ago, GreenTriangle said:

Of course, a big (and rich) club will avoid selecting too many players with a positive personality so as not to generate too many world-class players, right?

Are you being purposely obtuse? You are literally just picking one or two pre requisites and making nothing statements cause you are missing the point. It doesn't matter if all the player has is great personality stats. Do I need to repeat it? The player has high starting CA, great personality stats, both good development/training facilities and no progression stoppers, not being injury prone, and some random luck. Just like real life. Meeting all these criteria WILL be rare, both IRL and should be in the game too.

i.e. a 40 CA 15 year old will not be able to develop in a world class player because of great personality traits. If they can, that simply means SI have coded progression wrong. You do realise this is a video game right? And the devs can literally code any part of the game to whatever they want? Not to mention going to a big club in and of itself means nothing. They have to have development opportunities just like IRL. Most young players go to big clubs but find their pathway blocked to the first team because of better players, and then go to smaller clubs. This should be reflected in game included the effect on the player at a key point in their development cycle (halting progression).

This change will actually make players feel more realistic and like real athletes, rather than like autobots with some fixed start and end point. It would absolutely make player progression 10x more organic as well as unpredictable. What do you do with players with high starting CA (100+ at 15/16), great personality traits, but ZERO progression ability because PA is almost the same as CA? You get rid of them. That should not happen. It wouldn't happen IRL either, because real life has no PA cap like that. That's what makes players in the game feel like bots.

Edited June 16, 2021 by Dundalis

[GreenTriangle]

17 minutes ago, Dundalis said:

The player has high starting CA, great personality stats, both good development/training facilities and no progression stoppers, not being injury prone, and some random luck. Just like real life. Meeting all these criteria WILL be rare, both IRL and should be in the game too.

And, of course, a big and rich club does not have any chance to "receive" much more youngsters having high starting CA (and the other conditions) compared with a not so big and rich club. Do you understand the problem? The game tries to keep a reasonable ratio between those good players generated by big clubs and those generated by small clubs. You want that ratio to disappear and the most top players to be generated only by big clubs. It's a game? Sure. But even small clubs are part of this game.

...

Quote

Not to mention going to a big club in and of itself means nothing

lol

Edited June 16, 2021 by GreenTriangle

[Dundalis]

10 minutes ago, GreenTriangle said:

And, of course, a big and rich club does not have any chance to "receive" much more youngsters having high starting CA (and the other conditions) compared with a not so big and rich club. Do you understand the problem? The game tries to maintain a reasonable ratio between those good players generated by big clubs and those generated by small clubs. You want that ratio to disappear and the most top players to be generated only by big clubs. It's a game? Sure. But even small clubs are part of this game.

What are you talking about? All the big clubs DO accumulate and generate all the best talent in the game right now. What ratio? The skewed ratio to all the clubs with best training and youth facilities, best youth coaches in the best youth development ranking countries? lol. In fact it would potentially give smaller clubs a BETTER chance to develop top quality players than already exists. Because the smaller club is much less likely to block their young players path to the first team AND that club won't be limited by the fact the game will give small clubs much less players with a high fixed PA than a bigger club. If the small club has just one or two players with high CA and even decent personality traits they can mentor into good, they can progress to the first team and develop into very good players. Where bigger clubs, a lot of players that might become top class will be prevented by inability to progress to the first team putting a dent in development. I don't get why this is so hard to wrap your head around, its not that complicated, and it's literally what happens IRL.

Edited June 16, 2021 by Dundalis

[herne79]

59 minutes ago, Dundalis said:

by far the most organic way to have player development in the game <snip>, you start off as a young player with a CA, and growth from that point on is completely dependant on hidden attributes, natural fitness and determination, as well as environmental attributes such as training quality and playing time

That's exactly what happens now.  I snipped the part about PA because PA is irrelevant.  PA is nothing more than a programming function to a) prevent exponential player growth and b) to ensure there is a healthy population of players at all levels of the game.  That's why it's hidden.  It's only us clever users who have discovered this hidden number and started to use it in the unintended way of deciding who can be "good".

Your own coaches when looking at young players are in part basing their perception of potential on their actual ability at that point in time.  That "Perceived Potential Ability" can be wildly different from a player's actual PA and will change over time.

Pretend PA doesn't exist when playing the game because unless you are using an editor, it doesn't really.  Use PPA and you've got exactly what you want already.

[Dundalis]

12 minutes ago, herne79 said:

That's exactly what happens now.  I snipped the part about PA because PA is irrelevant.  PA is nothing more than a programming function to a) prevent exponential player growth and b) to ensure there is a healthy population of players at all levels of the game.  That's why it's hidden.  It's only us clever users who have discovered this hidden number and started to use it in the unintended way of deciding who can be "good".

Your own coaches when looking at young players are in part basing their perception of potential on their actual ability at that point in time.  That "Perceived Potential Ability" can be wildly different from a player's actual PA and will change over time.

Pretend PA doesn't exist when playing the game because unless you are using an editor, it doesn't really.  Use PPA and you've got exactly what you want already.

If a situation I posited where you have a youth player with reasonably high starting CA (lets ignore actual CA numbers and says scouted current ability star ranking by coaches/scouts), with a model citizen/resolute/spirited/driven etc personality, great determination etc, was not cut off right at the start by a PA close to the CA (represented as a potential star ability very close to current, along with a pro's icon that the player is close to their full ability), basically meaning it's impossible for them to see much improvement despite being only 15/16 years old, then I would agree. This scenario shouldn't have the possibility of occurring, but I see it plenty even ignoring the hidden CA/PA stats and just going off my coaching reports. To me hiding this stuff or pretending it isn't there is just throwing a band aid over an entire mechanic that should be progressing/morphing into something more advanced after some 20-30 years of game development rather than staying exactly the same. It made sense in 1992. Not so much in 2021.

Edited June 16, 2021 by Dundalis

[herne79]

3 minutes ago, Dundalis said:

If a situation I posited where you have a youth player with reasonably high starting CA (lets ignore actual CA numbers and says scouted current ability star ranking by coaches/scouts), with a model citizen/resolute/spirited/driven etc personality, great determination etc, was not cut off right at the start by a PA close to the CA (represented as a potential star ability very close to current, along with a pro's icon that the player is close to their full ability), basically meaning it's impossible for them to see much improvement despite being only 15/16 years old, then I would agree. This scenario shouldn't have the possibility of occurring, but I see it plenty even ignoring the hidden CA/PA stats and just going off my coaching reports. To me hiding this stuff or pretending it isn't there is just throwing a band aid over an entire mechanic that should be progressing/morphing into something more advanced after some 20-30 years of game development rather than staying exactly the same. It made sense in 1992. Not so much in 2021.

Again, it's not a mechanic for us to worry about because for all intents and purposes it doesn't exist.

In game we use PPA which is our coaches looking at a youngster and thinking "wow he looks good/bad for his age, he's got/doesn't have potential" and rate him accordingly.  They can be wrong (and frequently are) and their opinions of his potential will change over time as the youngster develops or stagnates.  So when you say:

1 hour ago, Dundalis said:

To me PA is far too rigid

in game it is anything but rigid.  What you want is already in game.

[Dundalis]

48 minutes ago, herne79 said:

Again, it's not a mechanic for us to worry about because for all intents and purposes it doesn't exist.

In game we use PPA which is our coaches looking at a youngster and thinking "wow he looks good/bad for his age, he's got/doesn't have potential" and rate him accordingly.  They can be wrong (and frequently are) and their opinions of his potential will change over time as the youngster develops or stagnates.  So when you say:

in game it is anything but rigid.  What you want is already in game.

I just fundamentally disagree that that is how youth players are assessed. A player that looks exceptional for his age will not have scouts come away telling their club they have great current ability but no potential IRL. Not unless there is something seriously wrong personality wise to make them say that, or some other type of issue that can be represented in game with a hidden attribute. Even if ancillary issues are at play like maybe they are playing the wrong position for their attributes, you retrain young players. Yet that situation can occur constantly in the game. No amount of simplification of how we should look at player development in game or pretending that the PA doesn't exist will remove the fact that it takes you out of immersion and makes players feel like the coded bots on glorified spreadsheets that they are when you see very talented young players with high ability who clearly simply cannot improve, whether the scouts are right or wrong about it is irrelevant. It makes it feel artificial regardless when you see a quality young player with the right attributes and personality traits that your staff say can't develop just because.

Football Manager is one of the only video games where players constantly wave away either coding problems, or areas for significant improvement in coding of the game as "part of the experience" or to just ignore it. It's super weird and backwards IMO.

Also you are right, PA is not rigid. It is static. Literally.

Edited June 16, 2021 by Dundalis

[HUNT3R]

9 minutes ago, Dundalis said:

A player that looks exceptional for his age will not have scouts come away telling their club they have great current ability but no potential IRL.

They don't do this in FM either. Scouts/coaches judge PPA based on things like age and their current ability for their age. They, like their real life counter parts, get more 'sure' (in their opinion) as players age though. That's why, as has been advised, that it's good practice not to look at actual PA and the game world would feel more realistic.

[Dundalis]

11 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

They don't do this in FM either.

Not no room for improvement, but there are plenty of youth player regens that get designated as having little room for growth, or have that be the case after 6-12 months of development. IMO that designation should be heavily dependant on a combination of personality/hidden traits as it would be IRL, not an arbitrary single number (yeah I know we are supposed to pretend it doesn't exist @herne79). To me this feels like, well we implemented it 30 years ago and it's served it's purpose so just leave it. Rather than making the game more immersive by actually changing the way player progression works to be more organic and less arbitrary.

Literally a simple change like having a separate PA for each category (technical, mental, physical) would at least be a small step in the right direction and give player development are little more variance and fluidity.

Edited June 16, 2021 by Dundalis

[Tyburn]

I agree this area of the game could do with improving.

This is the reason I don’t play with stars or attributes or numbered scout opinions. Even a coaches comment of “could become a world class player” I find jarring, although they do need to supply some sort of info on a player, I suppose. Scouts and coaches can and do get it wrong though, so it’s not all bad.

Not knowing these numerical and starred opinions gives the user freedom to play a player based on other streams of information. Form, how they sit in your tactic, how they sit in your squad, dynamics, even nationality. How YOU FEEL about them, rather than “my coaches say this kid has 4.5 star potential, I better start giving him games”.

Also, this way, a player that my coaches say isn’t good enough, even though he keeps scoring 20+ goals a season, including important goals in big matches, who my fans love, who I love, will keep getting games for me, regardless of his CA or PA or my coaches “opinion”. Who cares what the “arbitrary” number says, when this player, in this squad, with this tactic, puts up numbers above his station?

Of course PA still exists, but removing a coaches/scouts opinion of a players PA (as much as possible) def helps in negating this “hard coded” PA “issue”. And it allows you more freedom to use your own eyes and instinct.

If you go looking for the actual PA number, on websites, via editor, or even skins that show it, then you only have yourself to blame for your frustrations, imo.

[Dundalis]

2 minutes ago, Tyburn said:

I agree this area of the game could do with improving.

This is the reason I don’t play with stars or attributes or numbered scout opinions. Even a coaches comment of “could become a world class player” I find jarring, although they do need to supply some sort of info on a player, I suppose. Scouts and coaches can and do get it wrong though, so it’s not all bad.

Not knowing these numerical and starred opinions gives the user freedom to play a player based on other streams of information. Form, how they sit in your tactic, how they sit in your squad, dynamics, even nationality. How YOU FEEL about them, rather than “my coaches say this kid has 4.5 star potential, I better start giving him games”.

Also, this way, a player that my coaches say isn’t good enough, even though he keeps scoring 20+ goals a season, including important goals in big matches, who my fans love, who I love, will keep getting games for me, regardless of his CA or PA or my coaches “opinion”. Who cares what the “arbitrary” number says, when this player, in this squad, with this tactic, puts up numbers above his station?

Of course PA still exists, but removing a coaches/scouts opinion of a players PA (as much as possible) def helps in negating this “hard coded” PA “issue”. And it allows you more freedom to use your own eyes and instinct.

If you go looking for the actual PA number, on websites, via editor, or even skins that show it, then you only have yourself to blame for your frustrations, imo.

This to me the last part of your post is a form of hand waving. You can remove all indicators you want to make it seem more realistic. We KNOW that a youth player who has everything going for them can have their progress arbitrarily halted by a single couple digits. Just that knowledge is absolutely jarring. And SI could improve it, make it more organic and complex because player development is just that. Because it's a video game, and it's 2021 now, and games have progressed significantly from what they were 30 years ago. But let's just put the equivalent of imaginary blind folds over our eyes and pretend it's not there instead....

[Tyburn]

2 minutes ago, Dundalis said:

This to me the last part of your post is a form of hand waving. You can remove all indicators you want to make it seem more realistic. We KNOW that a youth player who has everything going for them can have their progress arbitrarily halted by a single couple digits. Just that knowledge is absolutely jarring. And SI could improve it, make it more organic and complex because player development is just that. Because it's a video game, and it's 2021 now, and games have progressed significantly from what they were 30 years ago. But let's just put the equivalent of imaginary blind folds over our eyes and pretend it's not there instead....

You DON’T have that knowledge though. Unless you go looking for it…

And I’ve already said I agree with you, it’s a huge part of the game that could do with being looked at.

Just offering a plaster …

[Dundalis]

36 minutes ago, Tyburn said:

You DON’T have that knowledge though. Unless you go looking for it…

And I’ve already said I agree with you, it’s a huge part of the game that could do with being looked at.

Just offering a plaster …

You are right, I don't have the SPECIFIC knowledge if I don't look for it. What I'm saying is I know in the back of my mind when my youth player who has everything going for him ability wise and personality wise and development path wise just stops developing, I know WHY he isn't developing and it's immersion breaking. But we agree at least it should be revamped and not kept like some legacy mechanic that people find ways to pretend like it doesn't exist.

[XaW]

7 minutes ago, Dundalis said:

You are right, I don't have the SPECIFIC knowledge if I don't look for it. What I'm saying is I know in the back of my mind when my youth player who has everything going for him ability wise and personality wise and development path wise just stops developing, I know WHY he isn't developing and it's immersion breaking. But we agree at least it should be revamped and not kept like some legacy mechanic that people find ways to pretend like it doesn't exist.

I'm sorry, and this is not a provocation or anything, but I'm not sure I understand your reasoning? Are you simply looking to min/max and don't want "fictional" barriers to stop it, or are you looking for a way to mirror real life as best as possible?

I'm asking, because you have stated what you want to do, but not how it should be handled in the game. I agree that the current PA is not flawless and have some drawbacks and issues, but I don't really see any other alternative to mirror real life as much as possible. If you want some randomness to it, but I don't see how that will help since it will bring the same barriers that can be seen the same way with any editors anyway? Or do you want no hard barriers, and if so, how would you combat too many players with too high potential? There would be min/max guides soon anyway to let you know how to max it out. That would only give the user even more tools the AI cannot use.

So unless I've missed something I'm not sure what you are asking for other than something else than what we have?

[Dundalis]

1 minute ago, XaW said:

I'm sorry, and this is not a provocation or anything, but I'm not sure I understand your reasoning? Are you simply looking to min/max and don't want "fictional" barriers to stop it, or are you looking for a way to mirror real life as best as possible?

I'm asking, because you have stated what you want to do, but not how it should be handled in the game. I agree that the current PA is not flawless and have some drawbacks and issues, but I don't really see any other alternative to mirror real life as much as possible. If you want some randomness to it, but I don't see how that will help since it will bring the same barriers that can be seen the same way with any editors anyway? Or do you want no hard barriers, and if so, how would you combat too many players with too high potential? There would be min/max guides soon anyway to let you know how to max it out. That would only give the user even more tools the AI cannot use.

So unless I've missed something I'm not sure what you are asking for other than something else than what we have?

I posted they outline of how I think player development should work in the first post I made in this thread, which is closer to the top of this page. I want an organic immersive player development mechanic, and IMO all this imaginary blindfold pretending it doesn't exist doesn't really work (not to mention most seem to agree it's a flawed system anyway). The idea that in 2021 you can't code a more realistic and fluid way to navigate player development in the game than a static potential ability number when you consider some of the marvels that have been accomplished in numerous other current gen games just seems a bit lazy to me.

[XaW]

1 minute ago, Dundalis said:

I posted they outline of how I think player development should work in the first post I made in this thread, which is closer to the top of this page. I want an organic immersive player development mechanic, and IMO all this imaginary blindfold pretending it doesn't exist doesn't really work (not to mention most seem to agree it's a flawed system anyway). The idea that in 2021 you can't code a more realistic and fluid way to navigate player development in the game than a static potential ability number when you consider some of the marvels that have been accomplished in numerous other current gen games just seems a bit lazy to me.

First of all, calling the devs lazy are against the rules of this board, so consider this your warning. That is just not acceptable in any way if you are actually looking for a meaningful discussion. So just cut that out.

What is the imaginary blindfold that makes other sprinters slower than Usain Bolt? Why are not all professional (with good work ethic, model professionals, etc) as good as Messi or Ronaldo? There are limits to how good/fast/strong/intelligent anyone can be, that's the natural potential that fixed PA is trying to represent. There are a lot of ultra professional, determined players out there who have done anything possible to become the best, but they still see that Messi are better than them. That's not a blindfold, that's just how we humans are.

I read that post you mention and I still don't understand how your suggestion would provide a balanced game world. What's stopping everyone becoming amazing? Unless you believe that EVERYONE not at the top level is either unprofessional, injury prone, lazy, etc? How would your system fill out the real life level of say Vanarama National? Could any young player there become the next Vardy? Or were he just the outlier that breaks the rules? For me, the last is far more likely.

My currently best suggestion is to make everyone have a much higher potential, but make it really hard to reach it. Sort of the same for the negative values in the current database. As an example, a player that today have a PA of 150 will have a PA of 180, but make the "likely range" be 130-170. So in most games the player will reach something around 150, but in outliers he could reach 180 while others never go over 110. The ranges here are just examples and would have to be tested on and most likely tweaked a bit. And I would like to see it linked to training, personality, club facilities, coaches, and some random events out of the control of the player to avoid min/max-ing. Also how soon or late the player is blooming and at what level they require games would also be "hidden", but hinted from the staff with their judging skills making them more or less correct respectively.

Not sure if that would work, but it's the best I've come up with that would still likely keep a balanced world and allow for more differentiated saves each time with varied requirements to youth development.

[Platinum]

3 hours ago, Dundalis said:

Are you being purposely obtuse? You are literally just picking one or two pre requisites and making nothing statements cause you are missing the point. It doesn't matter if all the player has is great personality stats. Do I need to repeat it? The player has high starting CA, great personality stats, both good development/training facilities and no progression stoppers, not being injury prone, and some random luck. Just like real life. Meeting all these criteria WILL be rare, both IRL and should be in the game too.

i.e. a 40 CA 15 year old will not be able to develop in a world class player because of great personality traits. If they can, that simply means SI have coded progression wrong. You do realise this is a video game right? And the devs can literally code any part of the game to whatever they want? Not to mention going to a big club in and of itself means nothing. They have to have development opportunities just like IRL. Most young players go to big clubs but find their pathway blocked to the first team because of better players, and then go to smaller clubs. This should be reflected in game included the effect on the player at a key point in their development cycle (halting progression).

This change will actually make players feel more realistic and like real athletes, rather than like autobots with some fixed start and end point. It would absolutely make player progression 10x more organic as well as unpredictable. What do you do with players with high starting CA (100+ at 15/16), great personality traits, but ZERO progression ability because PA is almost the same as CA? You get rid of them. That should not happen. It wouldn't happen IRL either, because real life has no PA cap like that. That's what makes players in the game feel like bots.

I hear what you are saying but I don't think you would have this issue if you didn't use the editor to look at a players CA and PA, hence not knowing what a players limit is.

(Im assuming you do use the editor).

Your point about FM players giving SI a free pass on coding problems: I often call out lots of issues in the game and file bug reports so this is not true for me however I dont think what you are asking for will have any affect on the users unless you use the editor to look at PA. On top of that your suggestion will change the issue of using the editor to look at PA to instead using the editor to look at professionalism and injury proneness and using that to know how good they can become. You also seem to have this notion that players regularly reach their PA which is not true at all

Edited June 16, 2021 by francis#17

[Platinum]

12 minutes ago, XaW said:

First of all, calling the devs lazy are against the rules of this board, so consider this your warning. That is just not acceptable in any way if you are actually looking for a meaningful discussion. So just cut that out.

What is the imaginary blindfold that makes other sprinters slower than Usain Bolt? Why are not all professional (with good work ethic, model professionals, etc) as good as Messi or Ronaldo? There are limits to how good/fast/strong/intelligent anyone can be, that's the natural potential that fixed PA is trying to represent. There are a lot of ultra professional, determined players out there who have done anything possible to become the best, but they still see that Messi are better than them. That's not a blindfold, that's just how we humans are.

I read that post you mention and I still don't understand how your suggestion would provide a balanced game world. What's stopping everyone becoming amazing? Unless you believe that EVERYONE not at the top level is either unprofessional, injury prone, lazy, etc? How would your system fill out the real life level of say Vanarama National? Could any young player there become the next Vardy? Or were he just the outlier that breaks the rules? For me, the last is far more likely.

My currently best suggestion is to make everyone have a much higher potential, but make it really hard to reach it. Sort of the same for the negative values in the current database. As an example, a player that today have a PA of 150 will have a PA of 180, but make the "likely range" be 130-170. So in most games the player will reach something around 150, but in outliers he could reach 180 while others never go over 110. The ranges here are just examples and would have to be tested on and most likely tweaked a bit. And I would like to see it linked to training, personality, club facilities, coaches, and some random events out of the control of the player to avoid min/max-ing. Also how soon or late the player is blooming and at what level they require games would also be "hidden", but hinted from the staff with their judging skills making them more or less correct respectively.

Not sure if that would work, but it's the best I've come up with that would still likely keep a balanced world and allow for more differentiated saves each time with varied requirements to youth development.

Tbf the poster said a high CA at a young age would solve everyone with a good work ethic not being as good as Messi or Ronaldo. But then for someone like Vardy who had a low CA at a young age how would we account for that ? We cant use professionalism and work ethic as there are loads of semi-pro players that are super professional but don't make it far. So it must be an element of so called luck, and guess how the luck is implemented into the game...yep its PA.

You can have two players with similar ability and similar work ethic but one isn't able to make it as far as the other, and it can simply be down to the limitations of the players body and mind, in other words luck , and that is captured by PA.

I do find this conversation interesting though as I could be wrong and its good to challenge the status quo at times.

[Dbuk1]

The only thing that needs adjusting is player development in later years. Every player should have a peak age that is hidden and it should be varied so some players peak at 28 and some at 33 e.g. mixed in with all ages with the standard “average” age that players generally peak. You need to create the illusion or ability that we the managers can improve a player regardless of age and if the player doesn’t develop it’s because of many different reasons but none of them should be because the player has reached the age of 23 (unless that is the hidden peak for that individual player) as is currently the situation.

[Platinum]

9 minutes ago, Dbuk1 said:

The only thing that needs adjusting is player development in later years. Every player should have a peak age that is hidden and it should be varied so some players peak at 28 and some at 33 e.g. mixed in with all ages with the standard “average” age that players generally peak. You need to create the illusion or ability that we the managers can improve a player regardless of age and if the player doesn’t develop it’s because of many different reasons but none of them should be because the player has reached the age of 23 (unless that is the hidden peak for that individual player) as is currently the situation.

I've seen Seb Wassel (an SI staff member) say that this is already in the game

[Dbuk1]

Then what is the issue? Everyone is saying the players don’t develop after 23??

[Marko1989]

2 hours ago, Dbuk1 said:

The only thing that needs adjusting is player development in later years. Every player should have a peak age that is hidden and it should be varied so some players peak at 28 and some at 33 e.g. mixed in with all ages with the standard “average” age that players generally peak. You need to create the illusion or ability that we the managers can improve a player regardless of age and if the player doesn’t develop it’s because of many different reasons but none of them should be because the player has reached the age of 23 (unless that is the hidden peak for that individual player) as is currently the situation.

Hmm, no. There should not be hidden peak age. There is no way you can predict when the player will peak. Let's take for example Luca Toni. You would thought that big, slow guy like him will peak early, but he was Serie A top goalscorer at the age of 38. There is no way this could happen in FM.

FM needs dynamic potential. With the current system, you already know if some 16 year old player will develop good or not just at the start of his career. For example, some young central defender could have 13 tackling and 13 marking at the age of 16, but if he has low PA there is no need to play him because you already know that he will not improve.

Dynamic potential would solve the issue with mid-aged (after 23-26) players not developing almost at all. And Dynamic Potential could create late-bloomers just like in real life. The problem is - people are satisfied with this current, very limited CA - PA system, and it will probably not be improved any time soon.

Edited June 16, 2021 by Marko1989

[Platinum]

50 minutes ago, Marko1989 said:

With the current system, you already know if some 16 year old player will develop good or not just at the start of his career.

I've had players that the coaches thought they had high potential but they just never improved

[Marko1989]

15 minutes ago, francis#17 said:

I've had players that the coaches thought they had high potential but they just never improved

That is because professionalism, ambition, determination and some other aspects of the game are also important for the development of the players with high potential. 

[Dbuk1]

Some players in real life have good seasons and bad seasons that are unexplainable e.g why did Fernando Torres forget where the back of the net was after leaving Liverpool? Why did Gnabry struggle in the Prem but now is a star. Some players improve later on in there career and other players level drop also. My point is this is a game that has to be coded so it actually has to make logical sense for us players to feel rewarded for making logical decisions. In game players have to have pre determined limits but to make us players feel like every player can have the opportunity to improve is the solution. Then after we spent years trying we realise that the player was poor or he actually kicked on and made it big. There is no perfect answer to this problem. The best way is to make it feel possible for all players to improve but just like real life that is not possible regardless of how much training etc all players do. Only special players become……special. To make it feel possible they have to code certain players to peak at different stages of the players career. Essentially like real life. 

Edited June 16, 2021 by Dbuk1

[herne79]

38 minutes ago, Marko1989 said:

FM needs dynamic potential. With the current system, you already know if some 16 year old player will develop good or not just at the start of his career. For example, some young central defender could have 13 tackling and 13 marking at the age of 16, but if he has low PA there is no need to play him because you already know that he will not improve.

With the current system no you don't "already know if a 16 year old will develop good or not".  The only reason you know he has low PA is because you looked at something you're not supposed to see and then used that knowledge to cheat the system.

If you did actually use the current system, all you would see is a kid with decent attributes that you'd take a punt on to develop and see how he progressed.  Over time your opinion of his potential would change to become either "hmm, not going to be that good after all" or perhaps "hmm, I wonder if he might be a late bloomer". ie., your perception of his potential is dynamic and changed over time.  And that's exactly what you want isn't it?

[Dundalis]

6 hours ago, XaW said:

First of all, calling the devs lazy are against the rules of this board, so consider this your warning. That is just not acceptable in any way if you are actually looking for a meaningful discussion. So just cut that out.

What is the imaginary blindfold that makes other sprinters slower than Usain Bolt? Why are not all professional (with good work ethic, model professionals, etc) as good as Messi or Ronaldo? There are limits to how good/fast/strong/intelligent anyone can be, that's the natural potential that fixed PA is trying to represent. There are a lot of ultra professional, determined players out there who have done anything possible to become the best, but they still see that Messi are better than them. That's not a blindfold, that's just how we humans are.

I read that post you mention and I still don't understand how your suggestion would provide a balanced game world. What's stopping everyone becoming amazing? Unless you believe that EVERYONE not at the top level is either unprofessional, injury prone, lazy, etc? How would your system fill out the real life level of say Vanarama National? Could any young player there become the next Vardy? Or were he just the outlier that breaks the rules? For me, the last is far more likely.

My currently best suggestion is to make everyone have a much higher potential, but make it really hard to reach it. Sort of the same for the negative values in the current database. As an example, a player that today have a PA of 150 will have a PA of 180, but make the "likely range" be 130-170. So in most games the player will reach something around 150, but in outliers he could reach 180 while others never go over 110. The ranges here are just examples and would have to be tested on and most likely tweaked a bit. And I would like to see it linked to training, personality, club facilities, coaches, and some random events out of the control of the player to avoid min/max-ing. Also how soon or late the player is blooming and at what level they require games would also be "hidden", but hinted from the staff with their judging skills making them more or less correct respectively.

Not sure if that would work, but it's the best I've come up with that would still likely keep a balanced world and allow for more differentiated saves each time with varied requirements to youth development.

Sorry but you are being WAAAY more obtuse about this than is necessary. Everyone is talking like this video game is some kind of set organism that cannot be completely coded or recoded. It's straight up weird. As mentioned no other video game has this kind of weird symbiotic relationship between the player base and the way the game is coded.

Everything you object to can be CODED to work correctly. Because it's a video game. It's not a living organism. Why are not all professional players as good as Messi or Ronaldo? Because both Messi and Ronaldo were absolute freaks as youth players, who made their debuts at 16 years old, and have had freakish work ethics AND longevity AND played a lot of first team football very early without getting derailed by lots of injuries. That is NOT common. It was not just about their pure footballing talent. Either of them could have flamed out if something wasn't right. The idea that you can't see how you could code that into the game without using PA as a crutch, meaning every professional DOESN'T simply become Messi or Ronaldo, is beyond me. It's like people think FM is the bible, and any changes to the text is sacrilege, despite a lot of it being hundreds of years outdated. There are literally hundreds of better methods to build a player progression model than PA, and ALL of them will work. You know why? Because it's a video game. You code the mechanic to work. Literally anything. You code it by altering or even adding completely new and necessary attributes to support the new model, then balance it by lots of Q&A testing to ensure it works over many multiple long saves. This isn't rocket science, this is literally how video game development is supposed to work.

You don't rest on mechanics that just "function", you actively and constantly improve them. Otherwise every gamer would all still be playing pong.

Edited June 17, 2021 by Dundalis

[Marko1989]

29 minutes ago, herne79 said:

With the current system no you don't "already know if a 16 year old will develop good or not".  The only reason you know he has low PA is because you looked at something you're not supposed to see and then used that knowledge to cheat the system.

If you did actually use the current system, all you would see is a kid with decent attributes that you'd take a punt on to develop and see how he progressed.  Over time your opinion of his potential would change to become either "hmm, not going to be that good after all" or perhaps "hmm, I wonder if he might be a late bloomer". ie., your perception of his potential is dynamic and changed over time.  And that's exactly what you want isn't it?

You can find out will the player improve or not at the age of 16 without cheating. 

For example - I create new save game with Sassuolo. I go to u18, sort players by reports, and just by looking at the number of stars I already know who will improve a lot and who will not.

Also, after a couple of news saves, you can learn easily who are the wonderkids in the game. 

I've played in Serie C with Pordenone I think FM 2015. I had one 16y old with 14 passing and 14 technique, and I already knew, I am managing Pordenone, I know for sure that they don't have any wonderkids or players with high PA, because, again, I am managing team in Serie C and almost never in any FM version there are young players with decent PA in Serie C, so there is no point spending time trying to develop him because he will never be good enough once I reach Serie A. 

But, even if someone uses cheats to see PA, that does not change the fact that the current system is very limited. If some bad player for example score 30 goals in a season, in next FM, SI will dramatically increase his attributes, but with this system, even if he wins 5 golden shoes he will not improve because of how fixed PA is limited. 

[Outsider23]

I am not fond of the mechanic of potential ability, but I believe it is a necessary evil.

To those saying it is unrealistic I would only half agree. In real life there are limits to how much a player can improve, these limits are not as hard or as arbitrary as “PA=150” but they do exist. If you don't believe me go and find a list of the best youth players in the world from a few years ago and see how many names you recognize. Undoubtedly some of these players have become stars some are merely good, some have become second tier journeymen and others have dropped off the face of the planet all together.

The reasons for why so many of these talented players fail to meet their apparent potential are complex and, in many cases, unknowable, but as game developers, SI have to come up with simple abstractions that can represent this complex reality. If they simply remove PA it will break the game because it will be a simple matter to predict which fifteen year olds will become global superstars.

The only real alternative would be totally revamped systems of personality and hidden attributes that would have to be more organic and far more complex than they are currently, but that might slow down the pace of gameplay too much and also strain the simulation past it's technical limits.

[GreenTriangle]

2 hours ago, Dundalis said:

Everything you object to can be CODED to work correctly.

I'm very curious how you would "correctly" code the evolution of the next players :

Alex Meret (Napoli), Pedro Silva (FC Vizela), Fikayo Tomori (Milan), Issa Diop (West Ham), Emmanuel Maouassa (Rennes), Phil Neumann (Holstein Kiel), Filippo Romagna (Sassuolo), Ruben Dias (Manchester City), Xave rSchlager (Wolfsburg), Amine Hait (Schalke), Lucas Tousart (Hertha), Pepe (Olympiakos), Jean Kevin Augustin (Nantes), Ludovic Blas (Nantes), Kylian Mbappe (PSG), Sam Lammers (Atalanta)

Who are they ? The best players of the European U19 Championship, 2016 edition. According to your theory, they had a very high CA in 2016, compared to their age since then. They benefited from some very good training and coaching facilities. Almost all their teammates had a high level of professionalism and their clubs did everything possible to help them develop. And you say there should no be any PA ? Some have developed more and others have not. How did this happen? You say all should be related to their personality. I don't think you are able to say about one of these guys something like "he was really unprofessional".

Edited June 17, 2021 by GreenTriangle

[XaW]

6 hours ago, Dundalis said:

Sorry but you are being WAAAY more obtuse about this than is necessary. Everyone is talking like this video game is some kind of set organism that cannot be completely coded or recoded. It's straight up weird. As mentioned no other video game has this kind of weird symbiotic relationship between the player base and the way the game is coded.

Of course anything can be changed or redone, I'm simply asking you how you think it would work functionally? You seem to think the magical "coding" will solve anything, but the code won't do anything other than exactly what you have asked it to do, do what I'm trying to get out of you is how you see this could work out and still mirror real the real world as good as possible? I'm not saying PA is the solution to all the problems, I'm simply stating I don't see any BETTER alternatives. Since you think PA should be removed then I'm trying to get out of you is how it would work?

6 hours ago, Dundalis said:

Why are not all professional players as good as Messi or Ronaldo? Because both Messi and Ronaldo were absolute freaks as youth players, who made their debuts at 16 years old, and have had freakish work ethics AND longevity AND played a lot of first team football very early without getting derailed by lots of injuries. That is NOT common. It was not just about their pure footballing talent. Either of them could have flamed out if something wasn't right

So what made them succeed and not others? What made them get so good while others who are equally willing to work and determined just failed to take the next step? Why do someone who seemingly don't care about those things also make it to the highest level at times? The undisciplined partying idiots? How come they also sometimes succeed in football? Luck? Random chance? The question is how should the game replicate this, not in one player, but in ALL of the hundreds of thousands of players and still be as divided and unique?

6 hours ago, Dundalis said:

You code it by altering or even adding completely new and necessary attributes to support the new model, then balance it by lots of Q&A testing to ensure it works over many multiple long saves

What does this even mean? You want to remove PA, but add new attributes to build a new model? That's just PA with more work...? You haven't given a single detail of how you wish it would work FUNCTIONALLY to still retain the same quality players around the leagues of the world, and that's all I wish to know. Don't mention code, or anything because that is not needed in this thought experiment, just answer this simple question:

How would you limit the growth of too many amazing players without some sort of barrier/obstacle/PA to make sure that the same level of players within the different ranges are constant, in a way that does not make it too easy for the user?

[Mitja]

14 hours ago, XaW said:

What is the imaginary blindfold that makes other sprinters slower than Usain Bolt? Why are not all professional (with good work ethic, model professionals, etc) as good as Messi or Ronaldo? There are limits to how good/fast/strong/intelligent anyone can be, that's the natural potential that fixed PA is trying to represent. There are a lot of ultra professional, determined players out there who have done anything possible to become the best, but they still see that Messi are better than them. That's not a blindfold, that's just how we humans are.

Because they were so much better than all other at that age. And then naturally they had potential which they managed to achieve. In FM terms their starting CA was exceptional and that's what separated them not fixed PA which should be universal not fixed. All players at same age can theoretically improve by same margin, of course with many limiting factors determining it's success. 

Edited June 17, 2021 by Mitja

[Dundalis]

1 hour ago, XaW said:

Of course anything can be changed or redone, I'm simply asking you how you think it would work functionally? You seem to think the magical "coding" will solve anything, but the code won't do anything other than exactly what you have asked it to do, do what I'm trying to get out of you is how you see this could work out and still mirror real the real world as good as possible? I'm not saying PA is the solution to all the problems, I'm simply stating I don't see any BETTER alternatives. Since you think PA should be removed then I'm trying to get out of you is how it would work?

So what made them succeed and not others? What made them get so good while others who are equally willing to work and determined just failed to take the next step? Why do someone who seemingly don't care about those things also make it to the highest level at times? The undisciplined partying idiots? How come they also sometimes succeed in football? Luck? Random chance? The question is how should the game replicate this, not in one player, but in ALL of the hundreds of thousands of players and still be as divided and unique?

What does this even mean? You want to remove PA, but add new attributes to build a new model? That's just PA with more work...? You haven't given a single detail of how you wish it would work FUNCTIONALLY to still retain the same quality players around the leagues of the world, and that's all I wish to know. Don't mention code, or anything because that is not needed in this thought experiment, just answer this simple question:

How would you limit the growth of too many amazing players without some sort of barrier/obstacle/PA to make sure that the same level of players within the different ranges are constant, in a way that does not make it too easy for the user?

Of course you want to mimic real life as closely as possible? Why is that even a question? And why is coding "magical"? It isn't. The code WILL do exactly what it's coded to do. That you don't see a better solution than one arbitrary cap on potential is genuinely baffling.

What I guarantee made Messi/Ronaldo succeed vs others is not that they had a pre ordained potential ability cap that they were able to reach that others weren't. That much is clear. When you say some people make it to the highest level at times who are partying idiots, what are you even talking about? Simply being a professional footballer? Or being on the Messi/Ronaldo level? One, there hasn't been anyone on their level. Two the players who came close in previous generations that were party animals, played in an era, where being a party animal and lack of true professionalism, was common place. So they were playing on a relatively even playing field. That is legit common across all professional sports, elite attention to things like nutrition, exercise and lifestyle has only been a significant focus for a short period of time. There has been no party animal superstar that I'm aware of who's career lasted at a world class level for as long as Messi and Ronaldo have managed to dominate that I'm aware of.

Of COURSE it's more work to remove PA but rebuild player development! And you literally gave me a warning about calling anyone lazy, but then go ahead and make this statement. lol. The point is to build a more fluid player development model that is more immersive for the player. Just like ANY mechanic in the game, this should be the goal for dev teams of any video game that exists. Yeah that requires more work. Duh. I gave plenty of detail about how it should functionally work in my first post. But I can't mention code, because apparently it's not relevant according to you, even though it's literally the foundation of the entire structure of the game we are discussing. Really?

How would you limit the growth of too many amazing players? Very friggen easily. But apparently I can't mention code because it's irrelevant or something, even though it's the exact mechanism you will use to construct the feature. Hidden attributes, especially professionalism are known to have significant effects on player growth. Other control factors, such as growth at specific ages, are less clear. There's no reason not to create an attribute or multiple attributes to control for that aspect of development. You literally have a number of hidden attributes as well as environmental factors (starting CA, training, injuries, progression path), that all equally factor into how much or not a player develops, and at what stages in their career, (early, middle, late etc). Why not break down professionalism into it's own category with separate attributes? Work ethic. Attention to detail. Peer pressure. Off field habits. You know, actual personal attributes that reflect an actual professional athletes propensity to be the best athlete they can be. Something like Natural Fitness which should be a hidden attribute, should have even more of an effect on a players ability to have a late development curve as well as maintain their player ability late into their career. And balance the effects to have them influence player development in a way that is actually organic. Yep, more work. More authentic, and immersive for the player? No doubt. That's all that matters. I'm sure this could be expanded on and even improved, which is exactly the point. That's why you have a development team paid to work on this stuff. And fans to suggest improvements, not have a 30 year old outdated mechanic religiously supported by fans who for some reason can't think of something better than a mechanic that was created in 1992.

Edited June 17, 2021 by Dundalis

[XaW]

6 minutes ago, Dundalis said:

Of course you want to mimic real life as closely as possible? Why is that even a question? And why is coding "magical"? It isn't. The code WILL do exactly what it's coded to do. That you don't see a better solution than one arbitrary cap on potential is genuinely baffling.

What I guarantee made Messi/Ronaldo succeed vs others is not that they had a pre ordained potential ability cap that they were able to reach that others weren't. That much is clear. When you say some people make it to the highest level at times who are partying idiots, what are you even talking about? Simply being a professional footballer? Or being on the Messi/Ronaldo level? One, there hasn't been anyone on their level. Two the players who came close in previous generations that were party animals, played in an era, where being a party animal and lack of true professionalism, was common place. So they were playing on a relatively even playing field. That is legit common across all professional sports, elite attention to things like nutrition, exercise and lifestyle has only been a significant focus for a short period of time. There has been no party animal superstar that I'm aware of who's career lasted at a world class level for as long as Messi and Ronaldo have managed to dominate that I'm aware of.

Of COURSE it's more work to remove PA but rebuild player development! And you literally gave me a warning about calling anyone lazy, but then go ahead and make this statement. lol. The point is to build a more fluid player development model that is more immersive for the player. Just like ANY mechanic in the game, this should be the goal for dev teams of any video game that exists. Yeah that requires more work. Duh. I gave plenty of detail about how it should functionally work in my first post. But I can't mention code, because apparently it's not relevant according to you, even though it's literally the foundation of the entire structure of the game we are discussing. Really?

How would you limit the growth of too many amazing players? Very friggen easily. But apparently I can't mention code because it's irrelevant or something, even though it's the exact mechanism you will use to construct the feature. Hidden attributes, especially professionalism are known to have significant effects on player growth. Other control factors, such as growth at specific ages, are less clear. There's no reason not to create an attribute or multiple attributes to control for that aspect of development. You literally have a number of hidden attributes as well as environmental factors (starting CA, training, injuries, progression path), that all equally factor into how much or not a player develops, and at what stages in their career, (early, middle, late etc). Why not break down professionalism into it's own category with separate attributes? Work ethic. Attention to detail. Peer pressure. Off field habits. You know, actual personal attributes that reflect an actual professional athletes propensity to be the best athlete they can be. Something like Natural Fitness which should be a hidden attribute, should have even more of an effect on a players ability to have a late development curve as well as maintain their player ability late into their career. And balance the effects to have them influence player development in a way that is actually organic. Yep, more work. More authentic, and immersive for the player? No doubt. That's all that matters. I'm sure this could be expanded on and even improved, which is exactly the point. That's why you have a development team paid to work on this stuff.

You know what? For all your brashness and to be fair, quite impolite way of trying to make your point, your final paragraph does contain some good things so I'll try to focus on that. I will advise you to try to keep things much more constructive than you do, because your points would be much clearer and easy to take in if they weren't wrapped in all that uncouth attitude.

Breaking down professionalism and/or other attributes is what I consider a good idea for player development, at least in theory. I can see a lot of issues and problems with it, but I also think it makes sense. I can also see an amazing maze of legal issues concerning real players, but for newgens at least, it could be great. It will still be some artificial limits somewhere, at least in the tutoring/mentoring aspect, otherwise it's just to gather as much professional players and have them mentor random youngsters into superstars on a regular basis. I think some of your suggestions would improve this (although I'm not sold on removing PA), and think it would be wise of you to post them, in a far more constructive and less combatant way, in the suggestions sub forum.