Public Beta Reaction Thread

[Skummy]

Has anyone actually tried to book a Rumble style match in those product types to see what kind of penalty you'd get out of curiosity. . ??

 

I haven't done a Royal Rumble, but to test all this out, on a converted 1991 database (so with the caveat that 2016 - 2020 conversions aren't going to map exactly), I booked Randy Savage and Hulk Hogan in a 40+ minute match, which got penalised for match length, for Hogan's stamina being poor, and for the road agent not doing a good enough job, and still got a rating of 86, because at the end of the day it was still Hulk Hogan vs. Randy Savage in 1991.

[TOTKingNothing]

These are all great points! I'm personally fine with the match/angle ratios & match lengths. Although the fact WM had like almost 40 matches over 2 nights is scary! I knew I passed on this year's WM for a reason.

 

You misunderstood. There were 19 matches across two nights. Not 19 matches each.

[Skummy]

Some of these settings literally just prevent you from getting good scores with certain matches.

 

Which would have been exactly the same in TEW 2016.

 

If you look at the analysis of any product you could put together on TEW 2016, you'll find penalties for certain match types and certain angles, notes about fans being turned off by high risk or low risk matches, nuanced or simplistic gimmicks, and so on. If you randomly scale up the match intensity to 100 in 1995 WWF, you'll get road agent notes telling you it was too much for the fans. If you book an overbooked Car Crash match in 1980s JCP, it'll tell you it was too chaotic for the fans.

 

These detriments have always been there, they're just explained slightly differently - perhaps more literally - now.

[Ltkmk]

Everyone's debating about match length but could 5 minutes not be considered a long angle in any future patch? That's beyond irritating for me.

[MainOffender]

Has anyone actually tried to book a Rumble style match in those product types to see what kind of penalty you'd get out of curiosity. . ??

 

I just ran two Rumbles using the first 30 guys in alphabetical order from TCW. Set the match length as 56 minutes, the minimum default time for the default Rumble.

 

First I used the Classic Mainstream Puroresu product (lol) which has no penalties for match length. Got a 68 rating.

 

Then, I tried PG Rated Sports Entertainment, which has the same "Lengthy matches will tend to lose the audience" setting as Attitude Entertainment. Booked the same match and triggered the "this match was far too long for our fans" penalty, which is the worst of the length penalties. The rating was 62.

 

So, basically, with all the various pluses/minuses that go into a match that big, the length penalty is ultimately negligible.

[southside_hitmen]

Again, I think some are missing the forest through the trees here.

 

Wrestling is SUBJECTIVE. We aren't measuring the velocity of a free kick, the spin rate of a curveball, or someone's 100M time. Different people are going to look at the exact same promotion and see it differently.

 

There are no hard and fast rules for what is "right" for a certain product.

 

In previous games, everyone could be "right". If you liked what was preset, great! If what you thought WWE "should" be like was different, you could set it in 1 minute fiddling in the editor and get back to business.

 

Now, you can't, plain and simple.

 

The aboslute best case scenario given the current setup is that Adam is going to have to play whack-a-mole adding new products in patches (which will still leave people unsatisfied because there is no way he gets everything “right” for every person or all the suggestions “in”) vs adding new features to or improving the game.

 

So, if you happen to agree with how some of the products have been setup, fantastic! That's awesome for you.

 

However, a lot of us don't. And the fact that we can't tweak it to be the way we see it, like we have been able to since TEW 2007 (I think?) really sucks.

[TOTKingNothing]

Everyone's debating about match length but could 5 minutes not be considered a long angle in any future patch? That's beyond irritating for me.

 

It’s only long if you book everyone to be rated on overness. After reading the handbook about how the different “rated on” categories are different from each other I started having much much better segments

[moafnsteel]

Everyone's debating about match length but could 5 minutes not be considered a long angle in any future patch? That's beyond irritating for me.

 

Doesn't that depend on the product? In my SWF save I have ran an 8 minute angle with no problem. Most of my angles are 5-6 minutes.

[TOTKingNothing]

Again, I think some are missing the forest through the trees here.

 

Wrestling is SUBJECTIVE. We aren't measuring the velocity of a free kick, the spin rate of a curveball, or someone's 100M time. Different people are going to look at the exact same promotion and see it differently.

 

There are no hard and fast rules for what is "right" for a certain product.

 

In previous games, everyone could be "right". If you liked what was preset, great! If what you thought WWE "should" be like was different, you could set it in 1 minute fiddling in the editor and get back to business.

 

Now, you can't, plain and simple.

 

The aboslute best case scenario given the current setup is that Adam is going to have to play whack-a-mole adding new products in patches (which will still leave people unsatisfied because there is no way he gets everything “right” for every person or all the suggestions “in”) vs adding new features to or improving the game.

 

So, if you happen to agree with how some of the products have been setup, fantastic! That's awesome for you.

 

However, a lot of us don't. And the fact that we can't tweak it to be the way we see it, like we have been able to since TEW 2007 (I think?) really sucks.

 

Thank you.

 

Add to that that it just doesn’t make any sense even from an in-universe perspective that we are limited only to what other people have come up with when making a new company, we aren’t allowed to try and innovate what wrestling could be, we are only stuck with what other people think it already is.

[MainOffender]

Everyone's debating about match length but could 5 minutes not be considered a long angle in any future patch? That's beyond irritating for me.

 

It's six minutes that triggers the penalty in companies that expect short angles, not five. But yeah, I think that one is needlessly restrictive.

 

Again, I think some are missing the forest through the trees here.

 

Wrestling is SUBJECTIVE. We aren't measuring the velocity of a free kick, the spin rate of a curveball, or someone's 100M time. Different people are going to look at the exact same promotion and see it differently.

 

There are no hard and fast rules for what is "right" for a certain product.

 

In previous games, everyone could be "right". If you liked what was preset, great! If what you thought WWE "should" be like was different, you could set it in 1 minute fiddling in the editor and get back to business.

 

Now, you can't, plain and simple.

 

The aboslute best case scenario given the current setup is that Adam is going to have to play whack-a-mole adding new products in patches (which will still leave people unsatisfied because there is no way he gets everything “right” for every person or all the suggestions “in”) vs adding new features to or improving the game.

 

So, if you happen to agree with how some of the products have been setup, fantastic! That's awesome for you.

 

However, a lot of us don't. And the fact that we can't tweak it to be the way we see it, like we have been able to since TEW 2007 (I think?) really sucks.

 

Thank you.

 

Add to that that it just doesn’t make any sense even from an in-universe perspective that we are limited only to what other people have come up with when making a new company, we aren’t allowed to try and innovate what wrestling could be, we are only stuck with what other people think it already is.

 

 

I don't think determining the features of a Product are nearly as subjective as you're making them out to be, but I do appreciate feeling like a layer of customization has been stripped away and replaced by a system that feels extremely restrictive. I am curious, though, what products you would make or how, specifically, you would tweak the existing ones? I made a giant post about this in the Suggestions forum that pulls out all the exact language of the Product options that should facilitate this discussion. My hunch is that some players simply want to limit the amount of penalties they're getting and they might be better served focusing on in-game Preferences than Products.

[Slim Jim]

It seems like match prestige might finally have a purpose?

 

In the same way that events get a boost for their reputation (Legendary, etc.), certain match types could get a boost from their prestige.

 

Also, quoting from here: http://www.greydogsoftware.com/forum/showthread.php?t=545889

 

Longer matches will not do well in this environment. Actually, you can run a match up to 25 minutes without a problem. That 26th minute will cost you about 8 points to the rating (“a little too long”). Go up to 33 minutes and you’re looking at a 19 point penalty for being “too long.” 40 minutes is “far too long.”

 

Lengthy matches will tend to lose the audience. 15 minutes and under is safe. 16-20 is “a little too long” and costs 5 points. 21-25 is “too long” and costs 11 points. This consequence has seen some discussion as it’s tied to the Attitude Era product. I think it’s fair! You can still book a 20 minute slow build and only suffer a small penalty. But all those horny teens in their South Park t-shirts DO NOT want your Iron Man match.

 

The fans tend to have short attention spans, so longer matches will not do well. Penalties once again kick in at 16/21/26 minutes but are harsher, going up to 8/17/??

 

Fans expect matches to be short and will get bored if they go long. Same deal as above except the penalties are a scooch higher (9/19/??) so they could fall into the margin of error for my tests. Also, like, this is applied to Stoner Entertainment and if stoners actually had short attention spans jam bands wouldn’t exist, so…

 

The fans expect important matches to be quite lengthy. Important matches appear to be any match with a Major Star or Star, even against people classed as Unimportant. That’s not consistent with the definition of important match we’ll see later. Minimum time here is 20 minutes. There are levels to this penalty as well but I didn’t seek them out.

 

The LEAST severe version is fine with a 25 minute match. Great, that will work for 99% of my purposes but what about if I feel like a 30 minute Ironman match with a 3 minute sudden death overrun (33 minutes in total for those keeping track at home) - now I've lost 19 points. Really? Someone that has zero problem with a 25 minute match is suddenly angry enough that a match has gone 8 minutes longer that it tanks their entire feeling toward the match. It's just too severe a penalty, I think that is the problem for me. I don't mind it being penalised but it shouldn't be so destructive so soon.

 

I would also be interested to know if the penalty works on a curve or if you have to hit certain times to move into a new penalty range because it seems like the analysis done by MainOffender is saying that there are ranges where penalties apply rather than a gradual increase.

 

The first penalty is 8 points. 24:59 - nothing, 25:01 - 8 points. At the ref's one count, the match was flawless. At the three count, nah, it lost it's shine, great Main Event but no longer a 5* classic.

 

Is there the possibility that road agents could have attributes that affect this? A minor, average and major positive/negative range for booking long matches and the same for booking short matches. It would give some value and strategy to assigning road agents beside just getting the best respect/experience/psychology combo. Suddenly you find yourself turning to Joe Long Match to book your Main Event because you want to do an Iron Man match so even though his stats are 85/90/80 compared to Frank Normal Match's 95/100/92, you choose Joe because he can book a match that goes over the penalised match lengths by 9 minutes without getting dinged.

[GoldStarSticker]

First Impressions

 

The Good

Gameplay: A mile long and a mile deep. Overall, this is the high note of the game and series (if a bit daunting). A "simplified" mode at this point would be warranted. There were a lot of significant under the hood upgrades made that won't go unappreciated for even casual users. It would have been nice to see a better system implemented for goals and achievements, but since this is largely a sandbox it comes with the territory.

 

The Bad

UI: With a release in 2020, there's no reason that you can't have basic dropdown menus that scroll. Adding to that, if you're "scrolling" through images or workers, there's no reason why you shouldn't be able to use the arrow keys to move down the list. I'm aware that it has been addressed (kind of?), but the layout of the UI is overall very poor and convoluted - so much so that it significantly distracts from being able to play the game. I'm not expecting the world to have the ability to graphically sort multiple workers based on search criteria (sort 20 workers "sex appeal" trait in ascending or descending order). At the main menu in-game, I shouldn't have to hover over every option to see "what is this again?". This is the one time that I would actually argue that TEW could use some more sub-menus in order to retain the screen real estate for text.

 

The Ugly

Graphics: Very disappointed that the baked-in graphics are so poor and the presentation hasn't been updated in a decade. I know that a lot of folks play with mod packs, but as an amateur with Photoshop I can do better. Well then, why don't I? If I'm paying for a game, I'm expecting to not have to do the work of the developer. Even a "downgrade" to 8-bit style graphics would have been more aesthetically pleasing.

 

The Rundown

As with previous iterations of the series, the "hallmark" visual presentation of this game remains absolutely abysmal, with a UI that punishes users rather than helping them to play the game. Bringing in an outside UI developer would have done more wonders for this game than all of the added features combined. The graphics haven't been updated in a decade, but aren't a dealbreaker as they can be replaced relatively easily. Gameplay has been deepened, but not in a way that significantly alters the experience or increases enjoyment of the game versus the 2 previous iterations.

 

To avoid some of the hate that I'm sure I'll get (you should know what you're getting into, this is a text simulator not Madden, etc.), I'm fully aware of what this game is at it's core. I really like the idea of the game, but so much time is wasted fighting and navigating the clunky menus that I spent very little time actually being able to play or make actionable choices. What should take a few seconds with a good menu takes many minutes for no good reason. I want to spend the majority of my time booking shows, hiring, firing, dealing with drama, etcetera. Unfortunately, that is not the case here and I will not plan on buying any other products in this series until something drastically changes.

[MainOffender]

I would also be interested to know if the penalty works on a curve or if you have to hit certain times to move into a new penalty range because it seems like the analysis done by MainOffender is saying that there are ranges where penalties apply rather than a gradual increase.

 

I just ran a quick test of this using Family Friendly Pro Wrestling which has the "Lengthy matches will tend to lose the audience" note. I tested in to "too long" penalty range which is between 21-25 minutes. As with all my "analysis," I'm using very small sample sizes and there are a lot of factors that could be skewing things. Anyway, all the matches received roughly the same grade at 21 minutes as they did at 25 minutes (plus or minus literally one or two points). The exception was the main event, which did significantly better at 21 than 25, but I think I hit on some bonuses so I wouldn't read too much into that. Basically, if I had to guess, I'd say there's not much of a curve.

[southside_hitmen]

I don't think determining the features of a Product are nearly as subjective as you're making them out to be, but I do appreciate feeling like a layer of customization has been stripped away and replaced by a system that feels extremely restrictive. I am curious, though, what products you would make or how, specifically, you would tweak the existing ones? I made a giant post about this in the Suggestions forum that pulls out all the exact language of the Product options that should facilitate this discussion. My hunch is that some players simply want to limit the amount of penalties they're getting and they might be better served focusing on in-game Preferences than Products.

 

I'll pick a few specific cases just for giggles, but again, I want to reiterate, the fact that I (or anyone else) have to answer this question to "prove" what is "right" for a product is the entire problem itself.

 

- Why is a product tailor made for Big Japan (Slobberknocker-Deathmatch Combined) not tagged for them when I search by name, then not good for either the strong or death match division?

- Why does the default product for ACPW hate the majority of people on the starting roster?

- Why does the default product when you search for FMW only include 100% death matches (did Hayabusa or Megumi Kudo not exist?)?

 

Again, it's totally reasonable that those 3 above are setup perfectly to your expectations. And that's great for you.

 

However, it doesn't "feel" right to me. Before I could fix that. Now I can't.

 

Why do I need to "prove" that a product should be tweaked when I can edit literally everything else about the game?

 

I don't need to prove to you that Kenny Omega's selling should be dropped because I think he oversells. I can edit it.

I don't need to justify creating a freestyle angle where Wolf Hawkins just stands in the ring and looks cool because I think he's the bee's knees. I can just create it.

I don't need to get an "OK, you can do that" from some higher power to hold a battle royal in a ring in the middle of a swimming pool and surround it with landmines when I want to channel my inner Atsushi Onita. I can just do it.

 

Why do I need to submit a suggestion about adding a product when I want to make something that is my own (or, replicate a real world setup that isn't in a preset list)?

 

It just does not make sense.

[MaddoxEra]

Something that I find very annoying when booking shows is the removal of the quick filter for match types. In 2016 it was so handy being able to click on the quick filter & then scroll through the various match types while seeing their details on the same screen.

 

In this game to scroll through match types we have to click search, choose the match type, click search again. Then click through individually (I'm aware this bit at least is likely to be fixed) but even then you still have to click on "View Full Match Details" to see what the rules, set-up, finishes, content & injury risk are. And then to make things even worse, when you next go to book a match it has stored the search so you have to click search, reset & search again just to go back to the basic match types.

 

I get that the new system doesn't open a new window, and if you decide to change the stipulation halfway through booking you don't need to delete it & start a new one which I expect to be a good time saver. But if you don't know the exact match type you want to book then the amount of clicks required to figure it out is insane compared to the old method.

[Eastshire]

The problem with the penalties is they aren’t spelled out anywhere. So most people likely assume it means any penalty will trash the card. Most of the match engine is in a black box. So that doesn’t help.

[Kimberly]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="southside_hitmen" data-cite="southside_hitmen" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="47578" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I'll pick a few specific cases just for giggles, but again, <strong>I want to reiterate, the fact that I (or anyone else) have to answer this question to "prove" what is "right" for a product is the entire problem itself</strong>.<p> </p><p> - Why is a product tailor made for Big Japan (Slobberknocker-Deathmatch Combined) not tagged for them when I search by name, then not good for either the strong or death match division?</p><p> - Why does the default product for ACPW hate the majority of people on the starting roster?</p><p> - Why does the default product when you search for FMW only include 100% death matches (did Hayabusa or Megumi Kudo not exist?)?</p><p> </p><p> Again, it's totally reasonable that those 3 above are setup perfectly to your expectations. And that's great for you.</p><p> </p><p> However, it doesn't "feel" right to me. <strong>Before I could fix that. Now I can't.</strong></p><p> </p><p> Why do I need to "prove" that a product should be tweaked when I can edit <em>literally everything else</em> about the game?</p><p> </p><p> I don't need to prove to you that Kenny Omega's selling should be dropped because I think he oversells. I can edit it.</p><p> I don't need to justify creating a freestyle angle where Wolf Hawkins just stands in the ring and looks cool because I think he's the bee's knees. I can just create it.</p><p> I don't need to get an "OK, you can do that" from some higher power to hold a battle royal in a ring in the middle of a swimming pool and surround it with landmines when I want to channel my inner Atsushi Onita. I can just do it.</p><p> </p><p> Why do I need to submit a suggestion about adding a product when I want to make something that is my own (or, replicate a real world setup that isn't in a preset list)?</p><p> </p><p> It just does not make sense.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> This isn't constructive..at all...but, I loved this post just because you said "bee's knees". <img alt=":D" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/biggrin.png.929299b4c121f473b0026f3d6e74d189.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p>

[MainOffender]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="southside_hitmen" data-cite="southside_hitmen" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="47578" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I'll pick a few specific cases just for giggles, but again, <strong>I want to reiterate, the fact that I (or anyone else) have to answer this question to "prove" what is "right" for a product is the entire problem itself</strong>.<p> </p><p> - Why is a product tailor made for Big Japan (Slobberknocker-Deathmatch Combined) not tagged for them when I search by name, then not good for either the strong or death match division?</p><p> - Why does the default product for ACPW hate the majority of people on the starting roster?</p><p> - Why does the default product when you search for FMW only include 100% death matches (did Hayabusa or Megumi Kudo not exist?)?</p><p> </p><p> Again, it's totally reasonable that those 3 above are setup prefectly to your expectations. And that's great for you.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> First, let me just say, you don't have to prove anything to me. You don't like it and that's totally cool. I'm not sure I like it either! We're just spit-balling here. But let me tackle the three examples you listed, because I don't think they have that much to do with how the Products actually function.</p><p> </p><p> <strong>Big Japan</strong> -- I don't know why this isn't tagged but that's just an annoying oversight. As for the product itself, I'm not sure what specifically you mean by it not being good enough. Looking it over, I do think the content risk setting "Fans will be upset by..." needs to be upgraded so you can actually run Deathmatches. That seems like the kind of easy/logical fix Adam would be receptive to.</p><p> </p><p> <strong>ACPW </strong>-- This is a problem that I think should've been play-tested better so that promotions with a vocal fanbase didn't shit on such a high percentage of their talent out of the gate. This can be done in the Product settings OR on the database side. However, I do think every roster like this should have a few guys that piss off the fans for the sake of a challenge, thus making that note worthwhile. </p><p> </p><p> <strong>FMW </strong>-- I get two Products when I search the FMW tag. Neither are 100% Deathmatch. </p><p> </p><p> Again, I'm not trying to attack you or pick apart your requests. I'm genuinely curious what, specifically, people are interested in customizing.</p>

[TOTKingNothing]

<p>Adding to the other points being made on this topic on this page, I think it is important to note that I think a lot of us who are vocal and disappointed about the removal of the ability to create custom products or tweak existing ones <strong>don't think the idea behind the pre-set products is inherently bad</strong>. </p><p> </p><p>

On the contrary, I personally totally recognize the merits and pros to the system, especially for mod makers and players looking for new challenges or new players who don't want to get overly complicated or dig into the weeds.</p><p> </p><p>

But we have been able to create our own products since 2007 and it wasn't hurting anyone to do so. It was facilitating creativity and it allowed a more fine degree of control over aspects of the game for those who wanted to learn how to use the system.</p><p> </p><p>

<strong>The issue is these two systems could easily co-exist at the same time, but for some reason, instead, we are being totally restricted.</strong></p><p> </p><p>

This is the opposite approach that was taken with the gimmick system. The gimmick system was made more simple, free form, and easy to handle, and you could still have a list of gimmick suggestions. And no one is complaining about the new gimmick system. It's been widely received as a positive change!</p>

[LloydCross]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="southside_hitmen" data-cite="southside_hitmen" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="47578" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><p> I don't need to get an "OK, you can do that" from some higher power to hold a battle royal in a ring<strong> in the middle of a swimming pool and surround it with landmines</strong> when I want to channel my inner Atsushi Onita. I can just do it.</p><p> </p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Maybe not landmines, but that gives me some ideas for ZEN. Thanks!</p>

[Gabriel]

<p>I think with the penalties, what a lot of people are missing is that there are bonuses that come into play as well.</p><p> </p><p>

Just because you're going to lose say, 10 points, for going too long with a match... doesn't mean that you can't make those points back up, or exceed what you're losing, with the bonuses.</p><p> </p><p>

I feel like people are seeing the word penalty and assuming that it's a new feature that has nerfed the game, but it was there in 2016. If you turn your dirt-sheets on, you can see exactly what you were penalized and rewarded for in that segment.</p><p> </p><p>

I haven't played any of 2020 as I have only spent time in the editor working on a mod, but if that dirt-sheet feature is still available, it's a great tool to see exactly what's happening behind the scenes and get better acquainted with how the bonus/penalty system works.</p><p> </p><p>

It's also worth noting that a lot of the statistical issues I've seen people share seem to be coming from converted mods. I had a decent chunk of a mod done that I have scrapped completely to begin work from the beginning for that exact reason. Something didn't translate in the conversion. So I wouldn't put too much stock into how the game grades you if you're using a converted mod currently.</p>

[awesomenessofme1]

<p>I don't remember who, but several people brought up an issue that it turns out was indeed an error and got fixed in the recent patch.</p><p> </p><p>

"Editing a worker's skill in the in-game editor could sometimes not reset their maximum levels, causing the skill to appear to "jump back" later."</p>

[Nachtfalter]

Yeah, mouse wheel or down arrow are pretty necessary for the long database/search fields.

 

This.

 

Not being able to properly navigate lists makes this game utterly unplayable to me.

 

I hope Adam fixes this quickly or this might become the first TEW since the very first one that I don't buy immediately.

 

EDIT: Fixed for me here - thanks a ton @Jaded

[1PWfan]

I'm having a lot of issues using the search filter Based In: Near to [insert Region Here], unless sur, sureste and centro regions in Mexico are near to Quebec. Is anyone else having this issue or is it just me?

[nerodragomir1]

The issue is these two systems could easily co-exist at the same time, but for some reason, instead, we are being totally restricted.

 

Kind of like the scroll wheel & arrow key.

 

Just sayin.... Restricting the old way in order to push a newer system that nobody wanted or liked.

 

As for the product issue you guys are conversing about. I see all of your points. 2016 had pre-established product types. It also gave you the option to make your own. I had a bad feeling when he mentioned they would be removing that. I personally don't have any issues with it. But when I book, I don't do crazy company types. I tend to stick with simple stuff. The Puro Japan product is fine with me. I'm looking forward to the restrictions that WWE product has, because truthfully it shouldn't have matches that go too long. But I totally get where you guys are coming from. The TEW games were always about doing things your own way. If you lock the product to some specific things. You taint the very essence & concept of what TEW was in 2013 & 2016.