Tonton_Zola

I think the features you mention are worse than ‘bloat.’ They often feel like poorly or unclearly executed mini games, in parts actively annoying, and with little apparent player agency / strategic choice. That isn’t bloat. That’s just unsuccessful game design. the best thing SI have done in the last few weeks? Remove things. More to come I hope.

I have an even better idea. lets call it.. Football Manager.

I am generally an optimistic person, but my two pennies: The real UI screenshots won’t look too different from those WIP files. The match day graphics will represent a marginal improvement, but still disappoint most here, including myself. Happy to be quoted on this when it’s all revealed. my faith in the SI project over the last half decade at so - its prioritisation, its comms, its pursuit of public interest press, its general executive decision-making - is extremely low sadly. Women’s football is a noble endeavour but, let’s be clear, the data will almost certainly lay near the true extent of interest in it currently, and that its development has taken x % of total resource in a game rebuild cycle says everything you need to know…

Crikey that is slightly better isn’t it. how many swings and roundabouts have we been through since then to arrive at somewhere arguably worse 10 years on?

Well said. some of this is mind blowing cognitive dissonance.

Respectfully, as an analyst you bring your own biases. I would worry that this is a particularly unrepresentative view.

Spot on. ”personality” is a sharper way to put it I keep being served old images of champ 97 etc, and - for all that it’s probably rudimentary under the hood - the top level visualisation of the moment (Tottenham 0 Arsenal 1 Wright ‘54 with club colours and background pic) remains untouched. i know licensing is a tough area, but - really - the first thing I would do is licence stadium / image rights from the top clubs and place a rotating pack of 10 for the background experience of playing each. Failing this, commission a photographer to take licence-free photos of club atmospherics for the background. i just worry that - amidst all the technocracy - SI / Miles are totally missing the emotional detail that makes THE REAL DIFFERENCE.

Wider thoughts: to me, the conversation above, and indeed the update from Miles, expresses the big problem the game has right now: lots of talk of UIs, UXes, data, 360 degree views of every stat you could possibly need… …and very little talk of immersion, narrative, joy, emotion, the game itself! The priorities for me: how does the game ‘feel’ when your team scores a goal? Let me tell you, on old text based champs it felt GREAT. A flashing light in club colours - Bobic ‘83. What is today’s equivalent? how much of an individual does your new 17 year old wonderkid feel when he gets the ball? how does my sense of achievement and status grow with my club’s success? What is the reward for all that effort, all those clicks, all those hard yards in the training ground?

Hate to break it to you guys, but those UI shots that you’re hoping are just ‘idea mock ups’ and will change beyond recognition before release…? they most likely a pretty damned close reflection of what’s coming. let’s not kid ourselves.

Surely we need a reassuring response from SI on this “attributes don’t matter” hypothesis? The tests around a sub goalkeeper outperforming a regular striker up front, for example, are potentially deal breaking for many, surely?

Very interesting indeed

Or… removing them.

Yeah the example is poorly thought through, but just wanted to share the concept. The balancing wound need to be done carefully…

Sorry how is this materially different? a big difference would be to have only a handful of meaningful interactions in a year (let’s say between 6 and 10)… These happen as spot moments emerging from media events, press conferences, club live streams, interviews, off the record phone conversations whatever… each interaction spawns four or five possible responses, each with transparent logic and outcome probability. e.g A journalist grabs you for an off the record conversation after a media event… ”Haaland isn’t as prolific as last year, is it true you are alarmed by his form?” 1. “Look I am not being drawn on this. My loyalty to players is supreme” 80% chance newspaper runs piece on tightness of your group. Morale and manager closeness up 10% 2. “Haaland needs to improve. He can be monstrous, but he isn’t working hard enough” (based on Haaland personality - driven) 60% chance blog post published on private account, Haaland responds “I am determined to prove the boss wrong” 30% chance blog post published, Haaland responds, “that’s it for me and the boss. Hands on transfer request” too busy to write out examples, but you borrow logic flow from games like CIV / paradox interactive etc, and bake in personalities into the outcome probabilities. Outcomes are material and clearly communicated, making these interactions feel meaningful and less chore-like! you would look forward to these moments during a calendar year…

Feels like interaction logic might benefit from being made “transparent” in the vein of - say - a Civ game or a D&D world. I.e Chances of outcomes could be made explicit to you / as well as knock on effects resulting from that outcome. These %s would vary depending by on your manager style and the personality of the person you’re interacting with etc. e.g if I have gone for “man manager” style it would be close to 100% that if I tell Erling Haaland he’s had a great game after a hat trick he will respond positively. introducing this machinery would do so much for all interactions or “spot events” within the game. It delivers both logic, as well as a clear connection to the wider game world. because - for me - there are three issues with the interaction elements: 1. there’s too many of them 2. they follow little discernible logic 3. they often seem arbitrary, disconnected from the wider game experience so make fewer. give them explicit logic give them clearer, more interesting implications