TEW2020 Discussion Thread

[pmfg10]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Hollywood" data-cite="Hollywood" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>If we can get Cinematic matches added this late in development, is it possible to remove the time limit cap for matches to get higher ratings? A lot of modern matches are sub-10 minute sprints, like a Lesnar match, and every time they get capped at 80 due to match time.<p> </p><p> Could this be something we can toggle? In the user preferences section maybe?</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> Yep, I actually wanted to book a fast paced Attitude-Era type of show and you can't do it because matches and angles have capped ratings due to time. You had fantastic main events that lasted 6 minutes and great angles that lasted 30 seconds and it takes away the fun for me to have to stretch things out otherwise your company goes down the toilet</p>

[Teh_Showtime]

I was always confused when people say these things because I’m always able to book short matches and still get really good ratings. They’re obviously capped, and I’m not seeing 90+ ratings but it’s not like it restricts you from the B+ area and you can most of the time still go up in popularity while having super short matches on top.

[BrokenCycle]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Teh_Showtime" data-cite="Teh_Showtime" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I was always confused when people say these things because I’m always able to book short matches and still get really good ratings.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> That's exactly what I've noticed, too. This game has been out for 4 years, and people still say this, and I don't get it. I'm not sure what the blurb about it in the Handbook is referring to, but you could have a great short match in this game. </p><p> </p><p> In reference to the previous post, just because something is "fantastic" (translation = very entertaining) doesn't mean it's an out of this world excellent match.</p>

[pmfg10]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I was always confused when people say these things because I’m always able to book short matches and still get really good ratings. They’re obviously capped, and I’m not seeing 90+ ratings but it’s not like it restricts you from the B+ area and you can most of the time still go up in popularity while having super short matches on top.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> </p><p> What do you mean by short matches? How many minutes and what kind of rating does that get you? B+ main events don't allow you to go up in popularity after you book 6 months of WWF in any 1997 or 1998 mod for example. </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="46105" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>In reference to the previous post, just because something is "fantastic" (translation = very entertaining) doesn't mean it's an out of this world excellent match.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> </p><p> If most people that watched thought it was a great match who are you to say it wasn't? The quality of matches is subjective and If my product is something like "Attitude Entertainment" it's gonna attract those types of fans and for those types of fans you don't need a 20 minute match to have an "out of this world excellent match". </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> I just wanted to have the option of not having to have the standard "long match clean finish main event" to gain popularity and TV ratings because at the end of the day that formula never gained significant popularity or TV ratings anywhere, the type of product I want to portray has done it</p>

[Teh_Showtime]

<p>My current 2016 game is HGC in 1997 basically as an identical copy to the attitude era product I rarely have matches over 12 minutes main event, and they’re just as good as lengthy PPV matches for me. When you also consider how these short matches usually have a show closing angle as the “true” main event, plus angle ratio properly having big segments weigh as much as big matches, it’s mostly a non issue.</p><p> </p><p>

Even if a 1 minute main event bombs, the following segment is usually strong enough to absorb that hit anyways. I feel like people get afraid of the inherent cap for a short match, but still overlook gimmick and momentum bonuses (for each worker), storyline bumps, etc. It’s a much larger part than just a match penalty for being short.</p>

[awesomenessofme1]

I would say a reasonable compromise would be to just have short matches have a penalty rather than a cap.

[Rone Rivendale]

Or stop trying to min/max and focus more on having fun. <img alt="" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" />

[Moe Hunter]

If we can get Cinematic matches added this late in development, is it possible to remove the time limit cap for matches to get higher ratings? A lot of modern matches are sub-10 minute sprints, like a Lesnar match, and every time they get capped at 80 due to match time.

 

Could this be something we can toggle? In the user preferences section maybe?

 

What sub-ten minute Lesnar match do you think *should* get more than 80/100? The one where he does the same move over and over, and then maybe his opponent does the same? Or the one where he does one move and then it's over?

[shawn michaels]

What sub-ten minute Lesnar match do you think *should* get more than 80/100? The one where he does the same move over and over, and then maybe his opponent does the same? Or the one where he does one move and then it's over?

 

The one where Goldberg did a couple of moves and it was over.

 

Lesnar getting squashed by Goldberg was actually a great match. Quick, to the point, avoided weaknesses to rear their ugly heads, shock value for casual fans...pretty entertaining. Squash matches well executed like that in a ME are a good example and the shock value leads them to score well in reviews as well, if well executed. On the other hand, several matches nowadays are fast sprints (now going beyond Goldberg or Lesnar) full of spots, action and speed, that end quickly but are still entertaining.

 

I think the booking would have to matter to turn it into a good match, as well as some other factors, which could probably be covered by bonuses and penalties rather than caps, as to avoid abuse, but still make a great short match be possible. Capping it seems to simply remove the option of occasionally nailing the way to book an epic main event moment, or a great short midcard match.

[The Nickman]

I just did a 10 minute Flair/Benoit match in my 2001 WWF save that got an 86 on TV.

 

People are genuinely WAY too worried about the cap, hey.

[TeemuFoundation]

Eddie and Rey at Halloween Havoc 1997 was about 10 or so minutes, and has a ****3/4 rating from Dave Meltzer. In TEW, you would need to stretch it out to 16 minutes to get the most out of it. The most overrated thing in wrestling in my opinion is the long match.

[Bonafide_Bluffa]

it’s possible to have a great match in 10 min. it’s just easier to tell a story with more time.

[pmfg10]

If my product is "Attitude Entertainment" and draws those types of fans why can't a 10 minute match have a 90+ rating? My fans don't want a 20 minute match and the people watching on TV would turn the channel.

 

For example:

 

Storyline between Austin, HHH and Mankind -> 95 heat

Austin vs HHH -> 10 minute match, Wild Brawl, Austin wins -> 86 rating, storyline loses heat

5 minutes post-match angle between Austin, HHH and Mankind -> 94 rating, storyline gains heat

Show rating: 90 (I actually managed to not get complaints from NBC)

Storyline heat: 89

 

 

Same thing but Sports Entertainment finish with Mankind interference: 81 rating, storyline loses heat

5 minute post match angle: 90

Show rating: 90 (more due to the other auto-booked stuff that had long matches and segments)

Storyline heat: 86

 

 

Same thing but with a 20 minute match with a clean finish: 95 rating, storyline advances

7 minute post match angle: 100

Storyline heat: 95

 

 

So unless you start having long matches with clean finishes on weekly TV you will have a hard time in keeping your main event feuds above 90 heat. If you ever have a DQ or no-contest in the main event your show will not have a good rating DESPITE that not being important to the fans according to your definitions of the product.

 

 

What's the point of having 50 different types of products and if you change it you can allienate fans but the path to success is almost always 'long match with a clean finish' in the main event and long angles?

[Adam Ryland]

If we can get Cinematic matches added this late in development, is it possible to remove the time limit cap for matches to get higher ratings? A lot of modern matches are sub-10 minute sprints, like a Lesnar match, and every time they get capped at 80 due to match time.

 

There would be no need to remove it as in 2020 the limits are linked to the product being used.

[pmfg10]

There would be no need to remove it as in 2020 the limits are linked to the product being used.

 

So a sports entertainment product would have lower limits for matches than the standard 2016 game? If so that's exactly what I wrote about in the previous posts, that's great

[Blackman]

If my product is "Attitude Entertainment" and draws those types of fans why can't a 10 minute match have a 90+ rating? My fans don't want a 20 minute match and the people watching on TV would turn the channel.

 

I think you're seeing this more like "school"-type grading, where there is inherently something wrong with your test results if you score a 85% (which is doable with 10 minute matches as mult. people indicated). But in this system you're not doing anything wrong: the match you produced is just less interesting than the matches you might've produced before, but B+ is still great. There just has to be a ceiling for excellence. I remember in TEW2007/2008 where you could string together A*-stuff, but as a result the game starts losing it's appeal. I'm assuming this isn't a hard cap as you otherwise wouldn't have been able to reproduce some historic A*-matches, which would've ticked people off. Your examples mention storylines losing heat, but they are still hot storylines.

 

Historically, I can't exactly remember a lot of RAW's and SD!'s that had A ratings. There will be some, but even in the Attitude era, the A-level stuff were mostly segments in-between matches. I'm not that experienced with the game so I might be wrong here, but don't tell me you get A-level stuff with amazing technical work or high flying action from upper midcarders in WWE with the realistic product.

 

A long match is basically the only condition for more psychologically intense stuff to happen. Maybe 10 minutes should be the cap and not 16 minutes, but I have a feeling this discussion happened already at some point. And if you ask me what an A* match in WWE means, I always refer to Hogan vs Rock (@WM18). And guess how long that match lasted? (that's right: 16/17 minutes ).

 

But it seems from Adam's reply that it's "fixed" now. Hopefully that doesn't mean you could book a pie-eating "match" between Rock and Austin and get an instant A*...

[shawn michaels]

Hopefully that doesn't mean you could book a pie-eating "match" between Rock and Austin and get an instant A*...

 

I mean, it's Austin and Rock. You know they would have a match of the year even if they were just arm wrestling.

Those dudes would make almost anything work.

[Mattywood]

Hopefully that doesn't mean you could book a pie-eating "match" between Rock and Austin and get an instant A*...

 

*Vince McMahon voice* "Now that's some good [beep]!"

 

I'm sure a pie eating match would garner 7 & 1/2 stars in the Tokyo Dome.

 

Hope folks know I'm only joking and not trying to denigrate anyone.

 

Anyway, back on topic. With the addition announced yesterday, I wonder if this could pave the way for angles to having the option of being pre-taped. I'll post more about that in the suggestions board.

[pmfg10]

I think you're seeing this more like "school"-type grading, where there is inherently something wrong with your test results if you score a 85% (which is doable with 10 minute matches as mult. people indicated). But in this system you're not doing anything wrong: the match you produced is just less interesting than the matches you might've produced before, but B+ is still great. There just has to be a ceiling for excellence. I remember in TEW2007/2008 where you could string together A*-stuff, but as a result the game starts losing it's appeal. I'm assuming this isn't a hard cap as you otherwise wouldn't have been able to reproduce some historic A*-matches, which would've ticked people off. Your examples mention storylines losing heat, but they are still hot storylines.

 

Historically, I can't exactly remember a lot of RAW's and SD!'s that had A ratings. There will be some, but even in the Attitude era, the A-level stuff were mostly segments in-between matches. I'm not that experienced with the game so I might be wrong here, but don't tell me you get A-level stuff with amazing technical work or high flying action from upper midcarders in WWE with the realistic product.

 

A long match is basically the only condition for more psychologically intense stuff to happen. Maybe 10 minutes should be the cap and not 16 minutes, but I have a feeling this discussion happened already at some point. And if you ask me what an A* match in WWE means, I always refer to Hogan vs Rock (@WM18). And guess how long that match lasted? (that's right: 16/17 minutes ).

 

But it seems from Adam's reply that it's "fixed" now. Hopefully that doesn't mean you could book a pie-eating "match" between Rock and Austin and get an instant A*...

 

 

I think you're not getting my point, the quality of a show is subjective because it depends on people's opinions. Look at matches like The Rock vs Steve Austin after Survivor Series 1998 and Rock vs Mankind RAW 1999 they lasted around 8 minutes (without entrances) and they were filled with heat and were great matches.

 

 

If I wanted to do that in the game I would've gotten a rating in the mid 80s and the feud would lose heat, now look at the matches, does it look like those storylines lost heat? If I asked you "Blackman, how could I have done better?" You would probably tell me "Well pmfg10, instead of an 8 minute match you should have them have a 20 minute match" and with that change I would get a high 90s in the match.

 

 

 

Now I tell you to ask yourself if the Attitude Era fans (the ones that I'm supposed to attract due to my product choice) would've thought the match was better because it lasted 20 minutes instead of 8 and I'll tell you right now, no. An attitude era fan wouldn't think it was better because it was a 20 minute match with a clean finish instead of an 8 minute match with interference.

 

 

In your opinion the shows didn't have a lot of A ratings but if they kept growing the viewership someone thought it was an A show to start and keep watching no?

 

 

If you put Austin and Rock with almost 100 pop together unless you're having an aerial type of match or whatever, they should be producing more than B or B+.

 

 

Now if you're talking about PPVs I don't have a problem with needing to have longer matches because that's what happened in reality

[Teh_Showtime]

Rock and Austin had 2 singles matches on free TV after Austin won his first world title

 

November 1998 a 6 minute DQ

May 1999 a 22 second no contest (Lumberjack match)

 

Neither closed the show after the finish of the match (the true main event was a follow up angle). If you tried that in TEW you’d probably get a B for the matches and A/A* for the angle

 

Any storyline heat loss is negligible because the very next segment on the show was a follow-up. If you give a bad finish to a hyped match fans are let down of course, the follow up angle brings them back up. That’s exactly how storyline heat would work in game as well

[Adam Ryland]

Please stop the squabbling, I've already confirmed how this works in TEW.

[TeemuFoundation]

Doesn' TEW always count the last match as the main event? Or has it been announced that angles can now count as show main events, too, and I've forgottenP

[Morti]

Doesn' TEW always count the last match as the main event? Or has it been announced that angles can now count as show main events, too, and I've forgottenP

 

For sports entertainment companies, last angles in shows have always been weighed highly. So with SWF you can get a B+ rated show with a 70 rated main event, if the last angle is great.

[TeemuFoundation]

I didn't know that. Thanks.

[nerodragomir1]

SEVENTEEN DAYS AWAY FROM THE DEMO! I only need the demo really. I'm going to start by either retooling my DBZ mod or continue to work on the others. That week between the demo & the actual release won't feel like any time at all.