This week, I will be doing a three-part mini series, celebrating and analysing the release of the most successful and popular football game series of all time. I am, of course, speaking of the immortal FIFA series. A franchise that has generated upwards of £3.7 billion since its inception in 1993, the game has made its way into the hearts (and homes) of football fans and gamers across the country. Last year's edition of the game has seen over 4.5 billion goals scored, and a staggering average of 13.3 million per day. The hotly anticipated release of their '14' version, which hit the shelves Friday 27th September, sold over 2.5 million copies on the day of release. Having got my copy on the day, I have decided to see whether FIFA 14 can be considered to have achieved its primary objective: to be realistic. For Part 1 click here.
For those of you who follow me on Twitter (@amhaywood), you will have seen my feed dominated with my newest project. I have decided to use the current Premier League fixtures to try and assess the realism of the game. Having already created a predictions spreadsheet, which I advertised here, I have the full 388 games being played in the Premier League this season readily available, along with the method of calculating the accuracy, and even comparing it to predictions sent in for my competition. This should give me some indication of just how realistic FIFA is compared to real life, as in the early weeks I will have something to compare it to immediately, whilst in later weeks I will be able to see if real life then mirrors the game. In this post, I will be explaining exactly how I am going about this test, and assessing the test's flaws etc, before examining my early season data to see how true to life it really is.
As I explained in the paragraph above, I will be using FIFA 14 to predict the Barclays Premier League scores from the season 2013/2014. Using the 'Kick Off' mode on the game, I will play as neither team, and allow the game to play out as though I were watching it on TV. I will then record the scores of each fixture into my pre-designed prediction spreadsheet (where it will automatically score it in line with the rules for my prediction competition: 1 for a correct result (HW, AW, D) and 2 for a correct scoreline), where it will then calculate the table as FIFA would predict it to happen. This way we could see an accurate representation of exactly how FIFA thinks the season will pan out. I will also be recording the goalscorers, so that we can see who FIFA believes the Golden Boot will go to this season.
I have consulted the Internet in order to find the most realistic difficulty level to play the simulation at. The vast majority of comments have suggested that somewhere around the 'World Class' to 'Legendary' levels would be the most realistic in terms of gameplay and speed of the game. Having tested out both of these levels in numerous practice games, I have concluded that Legendary is the level that I will use for my test, as it tends to produce more chances and a more exciting game to watch. In terms of the half length, for obvious reasons (being too boring and too many goals), I have decided against playing the realistic 45 minutes a half, instead choosing six minute halves. Once again, the practice games suggest that this is the most entertaining game length. Other than that, I will allow FIFA to randomly select weather etc-all I will do is ensure that the time of year is correct, thereby reducing the chances of snow in a match in May!
Whilst I will do my all to make sure that conditions are as realistic as possible, meaning that the test is as fair as I can make it, I acknowledge that there are flaws with my idea. Arguably the biggest one surrounds the selection of realistic squads. As I am planning to predict results with FIFA before they actually happen, there is no way that I can be expected to field accurate sides for every Premier League club. Therefore, what I have decided is this: I will put out the strongest possible team I can for each side, by ratings alone, ensuring that I am being as fair to all sides as possible. It does, however, mean that a mid-season injury crisis will not be picked up, nor will any January transfers. However, should there be significant transfer activity in the New Year window, I may revisit the idea of replaying the games with the updated squads, taking the results up to January 1st as given. If anyone has any suggestions as to the strongest side for their club, please feel free to leave a comment or send me an email to itsmorethanjustagameblog@gmail.com, and I will do my best to accomodate you.
I did also have initial worries about the setup of the game, and whether the simulation would produce competitive matches, or whether the ball would just be stuck in the middle of the pitch for the 90 minutes. Certainly, on the last few FIFA games, whenever you try and play a simulated game, the score would normally end up a boring 0-0 draw, with little in the way of goalmouth action. Another worry was that due to the natural ranking of the teams, we would just see a table skewed in favour of those with a better rating. Both of these fears were allieviated just two games into my simulated season. My first game was the lunchtime kick-off between Liverpool and Stoke at Anfield. Under normal circumstances, a banker home win. In line with my rules, I even had Luis Suarez in the Liverpool line up, despite his 8 match ban for biting Branislav Ivanovic. Despite all of this, and early Reds dominance, a quick-fire double from Peter Crouch put the visitors 2-0 up at half time. Though Liverpool rallied, with Suarez scoring within 10 minutes of the restart, they couldn't find a way through the Potters' rearguard. An entertaining, and surprising start to the season.
Better was yet to come, however. In the very next match, Arsenal took on Aston Villa at the Emirates. For anyone who remembers the fixture, it was a well-deserved, but shocking 3-1 away win. Whilst FIFA may have got the result wrong, the match I saw was no less entertaining. In a first half packed with goals, Arsenal raced into a 3-0 lead after just 15 minutes. My worries about the highly rated clubs beginning to peak, Villa fought back, dragging themselves back to 3-2 by 35 minutes. This was perfectly set up for the second half, until Giroud scored on the stroke of half time to give the Gunners that cushion back. After the breathless first half, the second was bound to be a little more leisurely, and that it was. A late goal from Agbonlahor set up a nervous finish, but Arsenal hung on. Whilst FIFA had got the opening two results completely wrong, there was enough evidence to suggest that this would be an incredibly intriguing experiment.
As I write this, I have currently completed the first three weeks of Premier League action, and thus far, FIFA has accurately predicted either the result or the score on 50% of matches. Whilst this may sound poor, it is broadly comparable to the percentage scores that myself, and everyone else who entered the prediction competition has. This suggests that FIFA is no more well informed than your average fan, but there is certainly a level of reliability to their results. I think I will be continuing this series with irregular blog posts throughout the season, updating you all on the progress made and the state of the FIFA table as it lies. I will also mention noteworthy games or derbies. After three games, Chelsea lead the league from Manchester City and Stoke, with Tottenham currently sitting in the final Champions League spot. Sunderland currently sit 8th, a full 12 places above reality, with Manchester United slotted in beneath them. Though in FIFA, United lost to Chelsea and drew with Liverpool, the points tally is identical to that of the real team after three games. Towards the bottom, Liverpool have had a dreadful start, picking up just 1 point from their opening games. The relegation zone currently consists of the three promoted sides, with Cardiff the only side yet to get off the mark in the FIFA Premier League. In terms of individual prizes, it is Chelsea's Samuel Eto'o that has taken his chances early, with 5 goals scored in the three games. A host of players follow him on an average of a goal a game, but that will be one that I will be interested to follow.
Whilst there may well be inaccuracies and flaws in this experiment, it is certainly one I am looking forward to undertaking and developing as the season goes on. As for how realistic the game is based on the early results, it is difficult to say. I would have to conclude that the early result suggest that the realism is perhaps not quite as good as the EA developers would have wanted, but 50% isn't bad. The early season has given me a few cracking matches so far, and I look forward to watching, and sharing, a few more in the near future.
Analysis of sporting events, talking points and controversies.
Showing posts with label Realistic. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Realistic. Show all posts
Monday, 7 October 2013
Sunday, 6 October 2013
FIFA 14 Realism Series: Review: Two Steps Forward and One Step Back
This weekend, I will be doing a three-part mini series, celebrating and analysing the release of the most successful and popular football game series of all time. I am, of course, speaking of the immortal FIFA series. A franchise that has generated upwards of £3.7 billion since its inception in 1993, the game has made its way into the hearts (and homes) of football fans and gamers across the country. Last year's edition of the game has seen over 4.5 billion goals scored, at a staggering average of 13.3 million per day. The hotly anticipated release of their '14' version, which hit the shelves last Friday, sold over 2.5 million copies on the day of release. Having got my copy on the day, I have decided to see whether FIFA 14 can be considered to have achieved its primary objective: to be realistic.
This first post of the series will focus predominantly on reviewing the game itself. I will examine what makes FIFA 14 arguably the most realistic football game of all time, and assess just how realistic I really think the game is. By looking at the progression of the gameplay (and the graphics) over the past few years, we will get some indication of whether they are moving in the right direction for realism. I will also be giving my opinion on whether it is possible to make FIFA too realistic, where it being true to life actually works to its detriment.
Over the last few years, FIFA fans have seen a dramatic overhaul of the vast majority of gameplay and graphics involved in the game. Since the transfer of the game from the PS2 to PS3 platforms, we have seen a plethora of advances made. With the introduction of HD, the look, feel and sound of the game is far more realistic than that to which I had been accustomed in my younger years. I will examine the beneficial changes and the pitfalls in more detail later, but now I will briefly run through the major changes made to the game in the last three editions. FIFA 11, the first game I played in HD, saw the gameplay develop significantly from the previous year, and began to concentrate more on the touch and moment of players, with close control generally speaking the way that games were won and lost. The defending, whilst improved on previous editions, remained sluggish and primitive, with diving into challenges the only real way of reclaiming possession. It meant that teams could easily be cut open with passing and touch alone, and as a result many more goals than normal were scored. In terms of realism, the movement and passing between players became more realistic, but the instantaneous control and difficulty defending means that the series still had some way to go.
FIFA 12 saw major alterations to the methods of defending, with interesting (and often infuriating) lessons to be re-learnt about how to best play the game. The touch remained perfect, and therefore unrealistic, but it therefore became far more difficult to rack up the huge scores that happened the previous year. The addition of 'second man marking', where a player can send a computer player to challenge the man on the ball, also helped prevent this. However, FIFA 12, unlike any FIFA I had previously experienced, was overly reliant on the speed of the individual. A simple long ball for a quick player to run onto was sufficient to score the majority of goals. This prevented the need for any real possession football, and in my mind, ruined the realism of the game. It also had the knock-on effect of nullifying the difference between gold, silver and bronze players, as any quick player could get in behind the defence and finish. It meant that a player like Omar Cummings, from the MLS, was much easier to play with than Wayne Rooney or Didier Drogba, adding to lack of realism.
FIFA 13 saw fewer major overhauls than its predecessor, but there were still a few changes that were made to find that elusive realism that the EA Sports team so crave. Touch was the main focus for last year's offering, with this aimed to create an element of difference between the various levels of player. To an extent, this worked, as gold players did control the ball more quickly than their silver and bronze counterparts. However, there was no real differentiation between the different types of gold, silver and bronze player. For example, in reality, David Silva will have a considerably better first touch than the likes of Peter Crouch, but this was not really addressed on the game. The speed remained an issue, as players with high speed kept an unfair advantage over all other types of player. This is proven by the sheer amount of online Ultimate Team players that select only the fastest players in their teams. This plagued the FIFA games, denying them that realism that they desired.
So how have FIFA rectified these errors? And are there any areas that could be improved upon? Certainly, the touch issue has been rectified. There is a marked difference between those more creative players and those that are more defensive. There is also a clear difference between the three different classes of player, meaning that it has now become much harder to player with bronze and silver players than it is to play with those top quality individuals. Speed has also been lessened as an essential attribute, as the strength of players has now been taken into effect. Stronger players can now prevent those quicker players from exploiting the space quite as easily, making the balance of the game more realistic. However, it still does appear that speedy players have retained a small advantage, meaning that whilst this is a step in the right direction, there is still some way to go.
Despite the positives, this newest FIFA installment has thrown up a few new problems, which calls into question the realism debate. All of these have been discovered whilst playing the game, some of which will be quick fixes with future patches, and some will take far more work. The first of these is the fact that on occasions, if a player is not passed the ball directly to his feet, he just stops dead, allowing the opposition to come and steal the ball unchallenged. Whilst this is only a minor change, it remains a fault with the game, and one could argue that it denies the EA Sports team the 'realistic' tag. A second problem that I have unearthed is that the new shooting system, whilst perhaps making shooting within the box more realistic, does this to the detriment of long-range shots. Gone are the days where you knew exactly where to shoot from and curling it beautifully into the top corner, and this is undoubtedly a good thing, as it removes the element of predictability. However, I think that FIFA have perhaps gone a stage too far in this process, meaning that long shots are now much harder to score, and for the lower leagues, they are next to impossible. If we look at action from the Football League, we often see individual moments of brilliance or the odd 30 yard screamer. In FIFA 14, these have become even more difficult to do, meaning that the vast majority of goals (or mine at least) are scored within the confines of the 18-yard area. Not particularly realistic.
So has FIFA 14 become the most realistic football game in history? I would say yes. There are issues that need to be solved, but I think that absolute realism is an impossible goal that they will be forever chasing. We therefore have to applaud how close they come on a yearly basis, as some of the graphics and gameplay are superb. However, the final thing I will say on the matter of realism in this post is, is it really a good thing for FIFA to be truly realistic? If we look at fixtures that take place across the world, there are an awful lot of appalling games of football, with the ball marooned in the centre of the pitch, scrappy and sloppy passing and tackling, wayward shots and overhit crosses. Would it really be enjoyable for a significant portion of game time to be spent playing matches like that? Yet this is apparently the goal that EA are chasing. I would argue that ensuring the game is enjoyable comes above and beyond the realism. If you want enjoyable realism, continue to add detail to the stadiums, pitches and fans, so that the atmosphere matches that of a football stadium. The makers have done a remarkable job with FIFA as a series. I simply worry about where they will go with it from here. If it is towards true realism, I fear that there will be a step backwards from previous editions of the game.
This first post of the series will focus predominantly on reviewing the game itself. I will examine what makes FIFA 14 arguably the most realistic football game of all time, and assess just how realistic I really think the game is. By looking at the progression of the gameplay (and the graphics) over the past few years, we will get some indication of whether they are moving in the right direction for realism. I will also be giving my opinion on whether it is possible to make FIFA too realistic, where it being true to life actually works to its detriment.
Over the last few years, FIFA fans have seen a dramatic overhaul of the vast majority of gameplay and graphics involved in the game. Since the transfer of the game from the PS2 to PS3 platforms, we have seen a plethora of advances made. With the introduction of HD, the look, feel and sound of the game is far more realistic than that to which I had been accustomed in my younger years. I will examine the beneficial changes and the pitfalls in more detail later, but now I will briefly run through the major changes made to the game in the last three editions. FIFA 11, the first game I played in HD, saw the gameplay develop significantly from the previous year, and began to concentrate more on the touch and moment of players, with close control generally speaking the way that games were won and lost. The defending, whilst improved on previous editions, remained sluggish and primitive, with diving into challenges the only real way of reclaiming possession. It meant that teams could easily be cut open with passing and touch alone, and as a result many more goals than normal were scored. In terms of realism, the movement and passing between players became more realistic, but the instantaneous control and difficulty defending means that the series still had some way to go.
FIFA 12 saw major alterations to the methods of defending, with interesting (and often infuriating) lessons to be re-learnt about how to best play the game. The touch remained perfect, and therefore unrealistic, but it therefore became far more difficult to rack up the huge scores that happened the previous year. The addition of 'second man marking', where a player can send a computer player to challenge the man on the ball, also helped prevent this. However, FIFA 12, unlike any FIFA I had previously experienced, was overly reliant on the speed of the individual. A simple long ball for a quick player to run onto was sufficient to score the majority of goals. This prevented the need for any real possession football, and in my mind, ruined the realism of the game. It also had the knock-on effect of nullifying the difference between gold, silver and bronze players, as any quick player could get in behind the defence and finish. It meant that a player like Omar Cummings, from the MLS, was much easier to play with than Wayne Rooney or Didier Drogba, adding to lack of realism.
FIFA 13 saw fewer major overhauls than its predecessor, but there were still a few changes that were made to find that elusive realism that the EA Sports team so crave. Touch was the main focus for last year's offering, with this aimed to create an element of difference between the various levels of player. To an extent, this worked, as gold players did control the ball more quickly than their silver and bronze counterparts. However, there was no real differentiation between the different types of gold, silver and bronze player. For example, in reality, David Silva will have a considerably better first touch than the likes of Peter Crouch, but this was not really addressed on the game. The speed remained an issue, as players with high speed kept an unfair advantage over all other types of player. This is proven by the sheer amount of online Ultimate Team players that select only the fastest players in their teams. This plagued the FIFA games, denying them that realism that they desired.
So how have FIFA rectified these errors? And are there any areas that could be improved upon? Certainly, the touch issue has been rectified. There is a marked difference between those more creative players and those that are more defensive. There is also a clear difference between the three different classes of player, meaning that it has now become much harder to player with bronze and silver players than it is to play with those top quality individuals. Speed has also been lessened as an essential attribute, as the strength of players has now been taken into effect. Stronger players can now prevent those quicker players from exploiting the space quite as easily, making the balance of the game more realistic. However, it still does appear that speedy players have retained a small advantage, meaning that whilst this is a step in the right direction, there is still some way to go.
Despite the positives, this newest FIFA installment has thrown up a few new problems, which calls into question the realism debate. All of these have been discovered whilst playing the game, some of which will be quick fixes with future patches, and some will take far more work. The first of these is the fact that on occasions, if a player is not passed the ball directly to his feet, he just stops dead, allowing the opposition to come and steal the ball unchallenged. Whilst this is only a minor change, it remains a fault with the game, and one could argue that it denies the EA Sports team the 'realistic' tag. A second problem that I have unearthed is that the new shooting system, whilst perhaps making shooting within the box more realistic, does this to the detriment of long-range shots. Gone are the days where you knew exactly where to shoot from and curling it beautifully into the top corner, and this is undoubtedly a good thing, as it removes the element of predictability. However, I think that FIFA have perhaps gone a stage too far in this process, meaning that long shots are now much harder to score, and for the lower leagues, they are next to impossible. If we look at action from the Football League, we often see individual moments of brilliance or the odd 30 yard screamer. In FIFA 14, these have become even more difficult to do, meaning that the vast majority of goals (or mine at least) are scored within the confines of the 18-yard area. Not particularly realistic.
So has FIFA 14 become the most realistic football game in history? I would say yes. There are issues that need to be solved, but I think that absolute realism is an impossible goal that they will be forever chasing. We therefore have to applaud how close they come on a yearly basis, as some of the graphics and gameplay are superb. However, the final thing I will say on the matter of realism in this post is, is it really a good thing for FIFA to be truly realistic? If we look at fixtures that take place across the world, there are an awful lot of appalling games of football, with the ball marooned in the centre of the pitch, scrappy and sloppy passing and tackling, wayward shots and overhit crosses. Would it really be enjoyable for a significant portion of game time to be spent playing matches like that? Yet this is apparently the goal that EA are chasing. I would argue that ensuring the game is enjoyable comes above and beyond the realism. If you want enjoyable realism, continue to add detail to the stadiums, pitches and fans, so that the atmosphere matches that of a football stadium. The makers have done a remarkable job with FIFA as a series. I simply worry about where they will go with it from here. If it is towards true realism, I fear that there will be a step backwards from previous editions of the game.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)