OOTP Developments Forums - View Single Post - what new feature are you most excited about in FHM 8

Bones26 · 10-21-2021, 02:10 PM

From my personal perspective at least, the true test of any management simulation and ultimately its immersion quotient, is its ability to appropriately reflect back to the human player the consequences of their game decisions in a readily discernable, meaningful and actionable fashion, consistent with the what one could reasonably expect if it were to be translated into a real-world situation. Case in point for a human player playing from a coach’s perspective.

As a supporter of FHM ever since its first iteration, one thing that has constantly frustrated me is, as ‘artlan’ has also commented “…the biggest area that needs to be addressed is the tactics. I would like to receive feedback and input on what is working and what isn't and why yes and why not so I can properly implement tactics. …this area to be underwhelming to say the least.”

Echoing that sentiment, my biggest gripe as it stands now, (and in this example let’s just stay with even strength play), is that with 21 different unit attacking tactical options to choose from, plus an additional 19 separate unit defensive tactical options one can choose to apply. All of which in turn can be assigned separately to each individual line. The human player is in effect being presented with a total universe of 84 different attacking and 76 defending options to choose from in setting their teams game strategy. This to say nothing of one’s ability to further tweak their strategy through 8 different individual player tactical tendencies, which themselves comes with 5 different set point options that can be applied individually to each of the 18 players on the ice. And with this all further contained within the envelope of individual player roles of which there are also multiple variants available that can be selected… Well I hope you catch my point…

And thus, the issue is that absent any type of meaningful feedback mechanism for the human player to appreciate the effectiveness or lack thereof of their chosen strategy(s) in-game, (unless the 2D engine has undergone an incredible up-grade for FHM8 to capture and reflect back these nuisances), I am at loss as to how one is to make any sense of this smorgasbord of choices playing out against an opponent in real-time, and to be able adjust their tactics accordingly, based on any of the feedback currently provided by the game.

So strike one for any immersion factor. To borrow from ‘Arch7ngel’ comment “…harder for the sake of being harder rather than being more realistic.” Except here we seem to have a case of have been provided complexity and busy work as a substitute for immersion.

10-21-2021, 02:10 PM	#17
Bones26 Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Sherbrooke, QC Canada Posts: 64	From my personal perspective at least, the true test of any management simulation and ultimately its immersion quotient, is its ability to appropriately reflect back to the human player the consequences of their game decisions in a readily discernable, meaningful and actionable fashion, consistent with the what one could reasonably expect if it were to be translated into a real-world situation. Case in point for a human player playing from a coach’s perspective. As a supporter of FHM ever since its first iteration, one thing that has constantly frustrated me is, as ‘artlan’ has also commented “…the biggest area that needs to be addressed is the tactics. I would like to receive feedback and input on what is working and what isn't and why yes and why not so I can properly implement tactics. …this area to be underwhelming to say the least.” Echoing that sentiment, my biggest gripe as it stands now, (and in this example let’s just stay with even strength play), is that with 21 different unit attacking tactical options to choose from, plus an additional 19 separate unit defensive tactical options one can choose to apply. All of which in turn can be assigned separately to each individual line. The human player is in effect being presented with a total universe of 84 different attacking and 76 defending options to choose from in setting their teams game strategy. This to say nothing of one’s ability to further tweak their strategy through 8 different individual player tactical tendencies, which themselves comes with 5 different set point options that can be applied individually to each of the 18 players on the ice. And with this all further contained within the envelope of individual player roles of which there are also multiple variants available that can be selected… Well I hope you catch my point… And thus, the issue is that absent any type of meaningful feedback mechanism for the human player to appreciate the effectiveness or lack thereof of their chosen strategy(s) in-game, (unless the 2D engine has undergone an incredible up-grade for FHM8 to capture and reflect back these nuisances), I am at loss as to how one is to make any sense of this smorgasbord of choices playing out against an opponent in real-time, and to be able adjust their tactics accordingly, based on any of the feedback currently provided by the game. So strike one for any immersion factor. To borrow from ‘Arch7ngel’ comment “…harder for the sake of being harder rather than being more realistic.” Except here we seem to have a case of have been provided complexity and busy work as a substitute for immersion.