Public Beta Reaction Thread

[TeemuFoundation]

I don't think we know for sure that pre-set and custom products could co-exist, by the way. Just saying. None of us know exactly how the code for TEW works, I don't think. It's easy to throw out stuff like "Just do it this way, it's ez", but none of us have any idea. I'm saying this as someone with some beginner level coding experience.

[awesomenessofme1]

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.

 

The new list functionalities actually don't work with keyboard/mouse support, though. So that's a bad example.

[southside_hitmen]

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.

 

Big Japan -- 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.

 

ACPW -- 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.

 

FMW -- I get two Products when I search the FMW tag. Neither are 100% Deathmatch.

 

Again, I'm not trying to attack you or pick apart your requests. I'm genuinely curious what, specifically, people are interested in customizing.

 

Thanks for the specifics.

 

Let me also say, I'm not going after "you" in the singular here (or anyone specific for that matter).

 

The FMW products in your example don't explicitly require 100% deathmatches, but they do require:

- Fans expect dangerous, gimmicky matches at all times

- severely penalize comedy matches

- require that all matches be aimed as Deathmatch, Hardcore, Wild Brawl, Car Crash, or Mayhem

 

I'm not trying to "convince" anyone that the way I see a specific promotion is the "correct" way or anything like that either. For some, heck for most, the above may be the perfect representation of FMW in their mind.

 

For me, it's not. FMW of course had explosions at the top of the card, but it also had "different style fights" pitting MMA/boxing folks against wrestlers, Megumi Kudo putting on technical wrestling clinics that would be perfectly in place in AJW, and goofy lucha six mans where the primary focus WAS comedy.

 

You can see a taste of that here: https://www.cagematch.net/?id=1&nr=10128

 

But, before I get lost in the weeds, the debating minutae on what is in or not in a promotion is my exact point. The way I see a promotion is, can, and frankly in a lot of cases should be different than how the collective "you" may see it. We are all shaped by our tastes in wrestling.

 

The rub here, is that a lot of people are coming off like they "know" wrestling better than you, me, or someone else. Things like:

- This thing "should" penalize A, B, or C because of X, Y, or Z.

- Angles should be limited to X minutes or else you lose the crowd.

- Of course you can't run this match in this promotion, etc...

 

I've never had a TEW tell me that there is a right or wrong way to play.

 

Before, if I disagreed, I could remedy that and get back to playing. Now I can't.

 

However, I also am self-aware enough to realize I may be coming off as a negative nancy here.

 

There are various nits to pick on certain products, yes, but there is a great game under the hood. I mentioned this in previous posts, but I adore the new stables system. I love that my baby BCG survived and is thriving in the CVerse. TCW is still going strong, etc...

 

The new product system may not be my jam at the moment, but the reason I'm posting about it is because it is sooooo close to being right on. There is a lot to like for a lot of people and Adam DOES HAVE a great track record of incorporating user feedback into making his game better (it's why we all love it after all). I'm confident that he'll put out and improve upon a great game like he always has.

[Jaded]

 

ACPW -- 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.

 

I think a few is fine, but with ACPW, it's literally over half the roster, including people like Jamie Atherton who's been there 10 years plus, won the Junior Heavyweight title 3 times, and was generally one of the best choices for figurehead in 16, and Dagger, who has 5 title runs in the fed and whose bio says he's part of an excellent tag team. It seems REALLY strange when guys like this who were previously top people are getting that note. (And, personally, I'm not overly bothered because I'm still getting ridiculously good ratings compared to ACPW's size, but I think it will confuse newcomers to the series and it's a shame, especially as ACPW is a really good fed for people to get to grips with usually.)

[nerodragomir1]

The new list functionalities actually don't work with keyboard/mouse support, though. So that's a bad example.

 

So I have said this a bunch of times. I'm in no was a programmer. Is this new controls something that had to happen? Was there some addition to the game that demanded he use a new control scheme? I really don't know, so I'm asking. If the new controls are something he thought people would like, so he prioritized them over the old controls that nobody ever complained about. I think that's not the best move. If he felt the new "super clicky" controls were the way of the future but in order to implement those, he had to remove a lot of the access for the old scroll & arrow controls. I can honestly say that's a terrible idea. Removing/restricting a feature literally nobody disliked. So they can add a new feature that isn't nearly as fluid or good. Just doesn't seem good to me.

 

The search feature not working with mouse & arrows I don't get how they correlate but heck, I don't know man. Truthfully the new search function isn't as good as the old way IMO.

I liked being able to just put a letter in & zoom over to that part of the list I was on. If the search feature caused something as intragal as the mouse & arrows to stop working the way they used to, then I don't know if that was a worth while move.

[Jaded]

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?

 

Not just you - I searched for Near to New Zealand and got guys from Mid-South USA and Eastern Europe!

[Idolized]

The new list functionalities actually don't work with keyboard/mouse support, though. So that's a bad example.

 

This. It’s a technical limitation. That’s why scrolling and arrow keys aren’t functioning with the colored lists and why “use old style lists” is an option.

[HarryFandango86]

The “no style” style product seems to give more of an easier ride for people who want extra creativity and less fuss. I booked a royal rumble with this product and it got 78 rating. Also with converting 2016 real world mods, it appears to me gimmicks are getting lost in translation somehow, possibly causing segments with stars to sink in rating. This is my guess.

[awesomenessofme1]

So I have said this a bunch of times. I'm in no was a programmer. Is this new controls something that had to happen? Was there some addition to the game that demanded he use a new control scheme? I really don't know, so I'm asking. If the new controls are something he thought people would like, so he prioritized them over the old controls that nobody ever complained about. I think that's not the best move. If he felt the new "super clicky" controls were the way of the future but in order to implement those, he had to remove a lot of the access for the old scroll & arrow controls. I can honestly say that's a terrible idea. Removing/restricting a feature literally nobody disliked. So they can add a new feature that isn't nearly as fluid or good. Just doesn't seem good to me.

 

From the journal:

"Transparent lists are available throughout the game, which both look better than the usual solid versions because they blend into the background and also allow items within the list to be highlighted using different coloured text; for example, an injured worker could be highlighted in red. Unfortunately these new lists cannot have keyboard support due to a limitation of the programming language, so the user does have the option of using the old style lists from TEW2016 if they prefer."

 

I mentioned back when that was first announced that I didn't think it would be worth it and I turned out to be right. Thankfully, some or all of the lists that aren't covered under the setting will be included by full release.

[TeemuFoundation]

The “no style” style product seems to give more of an easier ride for people who want extra creativity and less fuss. I booked a royal rumble with this product and it got 78 rating. Also with converting 2016 real world mods, it appears to me gimmicks are getting lost in translation somehow, possibly causing segments with stars to sink in rating. This is my guess.

Yea, No Style is pretty fantasy book friendly. And since you can still give a custom name for the product, you can name it "sports entertainment", for instance, if you're doing WWE. Or whatever it is you're doing.

[nerodragomir1]

From the journal:

"Transparent lists are available throughout the game, which both look better than the usual solid versions because they blend into the background and also allow items within the list to be highlighted using different coloured text; for example, an injured worker could be highlighted in red. Unfortunately these new lists cannot have keyboard support due to a limitation of the programming language, so the user does have the option of using the old style lists from TEW2016 if they prefer."

 

I mentioned back when that was first announced that I didn't think it would be worth it and I turned out to be right. Thankfully, some or all of the lists that aren't covered under the setting will be included by full release.

 

I'd say you were definitely right about it not being worth it! I'm a simple man. I don't demand massive changes to the game. A little "view roster" button here, a "refine search" when booking angles there. Nothing that could possibly require 6 months to re-tool & redefine the entire system. I get the search engine was something he thought would be cool, it's honestly okay but not at the cost of such a simple thing as the scroll wheel & arrow keys. Plus like I said, I would prefer to be able to type a letter & pop up on that part of the list.

[1PWfan]

Yea, No Style is pretty fantasy book friendly. And since you can still give a custom name for the product, you can name it "sports entertainment", for instance, if you're doing WWE. Or whatever it is you're doing.

 

Classic Balanced is also a good one for guys who want a few restrictions but not too much.

[awesomenessofme1]

I'd say you were definitely right about it not being worth it! I'm a simple man. I don't demand massive changes to the game. A little "view roster" button here, a "refine search" when booking angles there. Nothing that could possibly require 6 months to re-tool & redefine the entire system. I get the search engine was something he thought would be cool, it's honestly okay but not at the cost of such a simple thing as the scroll wheel & arrow keys. Plus like I said, I would prefer to be able to type a letter & pop up on that part of the list.

 

To be clear: The search option is totally compatible with keyboard support. You'll notice that even when you have new-style lists enabled, you can still do text searches for those lists. It's transparent lists (which look better and can be color-coded, and not much else) that are incompatible.

[TeemuFoundation]

I always just typed in what I was looking for when having the list active anyway. Like, if I'm modding, and want to add a picture for Shawn Michaels, in TEW 2016 I click on Shawn's pic, and it opens the list of my pictures. I type on my keyboard "Shaw" and it takes me either directly to Shawn, or close to it. And then I just keep on scrolling (I have like 200 pictures for Shawn alone lmao) until I come across a pic I want to use for that specific mod.

[Hive]

As for match lengths for WWE related products.

 

In 2018, the average match on Raw was under nine minutes in length. In 1999, at the height of the Attitude area, the average match was under five minutes in length.

 

At Elimination Chamber of 2020, there were 8 matches that used 115:01 time on the show. That's just over an average match time of 14 minutes for a Pay Per View match.

 

The Royal Rumble this year had eight matches -- two of which were Rumble matches. The other six matches combined for 91:35 for an average length of just over 15 minutes.

 

The classic sports entertainment template that SWF uses is perfectly in line with these ratios.

 

USPW is supposed to be late 80's WWF and they use "Family Friendly Pro Wrestling" and they also seem to be in line with this. The outlier matches that go longer (and there are some) have to be good to hold the fans attention. That's not incongruent with actual wrestling.

 

This year's Wrestlemania had two matches that topped 20 minutes -- Charlotte and Rhea Ripley that went 20:30 and the Edge-Randy Orton match that 36:35 (and was almost universally panned as not being a great match).

 

The total match time for both nights of Wrestlemania was 232:35. There were 19 matches across the two nights which still gives us an average match length of just over 12 minutes.

 

I think the match length caps are perfectly in line with how WWE presents their product. The fans expect a certain kind of average match length and if you go over that, you have to do a good job to hold their attention. It has to have stars who are working hard, etc.

 

Keep in mind that you can have an average match length of 10 minutes on a PPV event where the main event was a much loved 25 minute match that the fans got really behind. I just checked a random year for WWE (picked 2002) - and for all the PPVs I went through (about half), they all had at least one match at 20+ minutes (and not all of them main events). Many of them received high ratings - and some went nearly 40 minutes.

[MainOffender]

I think a few is fine, but with ACPW, it's literally over half the roster, including people like Jamie Atherton who's been there 10 years plus, won the Junior Heavyweight title 3 times, and was generally one of the best choices for figurehead in 16, and Dagger, who has 5 title runs in the fed and whose bio says he's part of an excellent tag team. It seems REALLY strange when guys like this who were previously top people are getting that note. (And, personally, I'm not overly bothered because I'm still getting ridiculously good ratings compared to ACPW's size, but I think it will confuse newcomers to the series and it's a shame, especially as ACPW is a really good fed for people to get to grips with usually.)

 

Totally agree. I didn't try to figure out what triggers the penalty. I'm not sure whether it's better addressed under the hood in products or in the database itself by messing with worker stats. Your specific example about Atherton is particularly glaring. Definitely not balanced!

 

Thanks for the specifics.

 

Let me also say, I'm not going after "you" in the singular here (or anyone specific for that matter).

 

The FMW products in your example don't explicitly require 100% deathmatches, but they do require:

- Fans expect dangerous, gimmicky matches at all times

- severely penalize comedy matches

- require that all matches be aimed as Deathmatch, Hardcore, Wild Brawl, Car Crash, or Mayhem

 

I'm not trying to "convince" anyone that the way I see a specific promotion is the "correct" way or anything like that either. For some, heck for most, the above may be the perfect representation of FMW in their mind.

 

For me, it's not. FMW of course had explosions at the top of the card, but it also had "different style fights" pitting MMA/boxing folks against wrestlers, Megumi Kudo putting on technical wrestling clinics that would be perfectly in place in AJW, and goofy lucha six mans where the primary focus WAS comedy.

 

You can see a taste of that here: https://www.cagematch.net/?id=1&nr=10128

 

But, before I get lost in the weeds, the debating minutae on what is in or not in a promotion is my exact point. The way I see a promotion is, can, and frankly in a lot of cases should be different than how the collective "you" may see it. We are all shaped by our tastes in wrestling.

 

The rub here, is that a lot of people are coming off like they "know" wrestling better than you, me, or someone else. Things like:

- This thing "should" penalize A, B, or C because of X, Y, or Z.

- Angles should be limited to X minutes or else you lose the crowd.

- Of course you can't run this match in this promotion, etc...

 

I've never had a TEW tell me that there is a right or wrong way to play.

 

Before, if I disagreed, I could remedy that and get back to playing. Now I can't.

 

However, I also am self-aware enough to realize I may be coming off as a negative nancy here.

 

There are various nits to pick on certain products, yes, but there is a great game under the hood. I mentioned this in previous posts, but I adore the new stables system. I love that my baby BCG survived and is thriving in the CVerse. TCW is still going strong, etc...

 

The new product system may not be my jam at the moment, but the reason I'm posting about it is because it is sooooo close to being right on. There is a lot to like for a lot of people and Adam DOES HAVE a great track record of incorporating user feedback into making his game better (it's why we all love it after all). I'm confident that he'll put out and improve upon a great game like he always has.

 

A lot of good points here and I think this discussion is worth having. I think we should pick nits and get into the weeds because that's what this feature demands. (If Adam implements a system where we can edit products by adding/deleting penalties, I will have wasted sooo many words but I would be very happy.) I don't think the current Product system is perfect by any means, but I do feel that a lot of the problems are stemming from 1) consequence descriptions that aren't easy to decipher and 2) player expectations about penalties not being managed. With regards to the specific notes you mentioned:

 

- Fans expect dangerous, gimmicky matches at all times All this means is your Injury Risk needs to be set to High. You can still run Regular matches or Comedy matches without triggering this penalty.

 

- severely penalize comedy matches In the specific case of FMW, this is probably too harsh. However, I think a better way to look at the penalty isn't that you shouldn't run any Comedy matches, but that the Comedy matches you do run will inherently score less than the more on-brand content. Like those FMW shows weren't main eventing with those goofy lucha matches, right? Now, the harshness of the penalties themselves or the idea that a user would want to book anything that would cause a penalty is a game design issue that I think needs more thought.

 

- require that all matches be aimed as Deathmatch, Hardcore, Wild Brawl, Car Crash, or Mayhem Same as above. You can book other stuff (I think) but it won't rate as well. Kind of like how guys with low Hardcore skills aren't as valuable to FMW; matches that veer away from the house style won't be either.

 

Also, maybe part of the problem here is the FMW tags aren't applied to the best product. Check out Hardcore Evolved or Junior-Deathmatch Combined. Do those better fit what you're looking for? EDITED TO ADD: Also, just because we might find a product that fits one definition of FMW doesn't mean these problems are solved! I just think it's useful to really dig into this.

 

From a game design perspective, I think the goal here was to stop users from tweaking products with the mindset of removing penalties. Not because Adam wants to penalize everyone, but because those products end up very same-y and middle of the road, and users are thus missing out on the richness potentially offered by product variety. I think that's a good goal! But, the way it's presented right now doesn't feel very fun and often comes off as a handcuff.

[Hollywood]

I think a few is fine, but with ACPW, it's literally over half the roster, including people like Jamie Atherton who's been there 10 years plus, won the Junior Heavyweight title 3 times, and was generally one of the best choices for figurehead in 16, and Dagger, who has 5 title runs in the fed and whose bio says he's part of an excellent tag team. It seems REALLY strange when guys like this who were previously top people are getting that note. (And, personally, I'm not overly bothered because I'm still getting ridiculously good ratings compared to ACPW's size, but I think it will confuse newcomers to the series and it's a shame, especially as ACPW is a really good fed for people to get to grips with usually.)

 

This is also an issue for EXODUS 2010. The bios indicate that Dial K For Kotani and Sumiyuki Samura are future stars and a good fit for the future of the roster, but the fans absolutely hate every time they step into the ring.

 

Vocal crowds need to be less vocal, companies need to be properly balanced, or products need an overhaul. I'm not sure what would work best.

[Donners]

Totally agree. I didn't try to figure out what triggers the penalty. I'm not sure whether it's better addressed under the hood in products or in the database itself by messing with worker stats. Your specific example about Atherton is particularly glaring. Definitely not balanced!

 

It seems to be looking for an aerial rating in the mid-70s, which definitely needs to be addressed at the product end. I don’t know how that slipped through; booking one show reveals the problem.

 

 

From a game design perspective, I think the goal here was to stop users from tweaking products with the mindset of removing penalties. Not because Adam wants to penalize everyone, but because those products end up very same-y and middle of the road, and users are thus missing out on the richness potentially offered by product variety. I think that's a good goal! But, the way it's presented right now doesn't feel very fun and often comes off as a handcuff.

 

The problem is that this approach really disregards player psychology.

 

Presenting the player with bright, bold red text after a match advising of a penalty is telling us we did something wrong. We don’t like being told that, so we look to avoid it. In the past, a granular adjustment to the product would often do the trick.

 

Now that’s been taken away, so we feel constrained - we perceive we are being punished for playing the “wrong” way, which is particularly frustrating if it doesn’t accord with what we perceive are real-life examples of such booking.

 

I think that things might be better if the lesser penalties were relegated to the dirt sheet - that way they’re not as confronting and are less likely to provoke such a reaction. By all means alert us if we’re doing something to tank the rating, but don’t overplay a penalty of a few points.

[Irishwhiskey119]

So the one thing that I noticed while doing some testing (kept running the same show over and over again by exiting out and not saving) is that the angle variance can be really hefty at times. For example: I had Rocky and Scythe have a 6 minute angle. The scores were 84, 79, 85, 95, 83. None of the angles had any red negatives in them, and they all had a green positive about Rocky doing good (freedom of not having a script or something like that). While I do appreciate some variance, this just seems a little steep. It's not a deal-breaker or anything, just something I noticed.

 

On the other hand, matches seem to be pretty consistent with some wiggle room being a point or two in either direction unless somebody is off their game which makes sense.

 

I actually very much like that type of variance because a lot can happen differently with angles, acting and promos. I'd imagine consistency skill can work in unison with the show variables to fight against it.

[danyp92]

It seems to be looking for an aerial rating in the mid-70s, which definitely needs to be addressed at the product end. I don’t know how that slipped through; booking one show reveals the problem.

 

I think just having at least 70 in a key skill is enough at the moment. For exemple Ant-Man has 38 in aerial but it doesn't trigger the note. i guess is because of his 72 in psychology.

[Irishwhiskey119]

I agree with all of this and, to reiterate, think the issue with match length is more centered around user psychology than accurate simulation.

 

That said, the Royal Rumble is a weird beast because, while you're right that it's rarely "a good match" (although, uh, I loved this year's?), it's the highlight of the wrestling calendar for a lot of fans. I think that prestige/excitement can be reflected in other ways, but I understand why people might find that length penalty hard to stomach. On a realism level, fans don't complain that the Rumble is too long.

 

Which is because of the surprise factor and the star factor of seeing so many pop out after the countdown. Along with well choreographed (for the most part) sections of the match for eliminations. You're almost booking a bunch of different short angles within an on going match to get to the result.

 

I do think the game needs a unique surprise element for debuts and Rumble entries, which may or may not exist in 20. I haven't messed with it enough yet to identify but i'm going to assume that it's something that probably could be done better and would counteract the "poor match" opinion and all it's dings to provides a good rating. Really every modern Rumble should have a good rating because of all the well done spots and psychology they applied to the mini angles throughout.

 

The early melee battle royals, not so much.

[Jaysin]

One thing I'm really loving is the autoname feature for title lineage.

[Jaded]

I think just having at least 70 in a key skill is enough at the moment. For exemple Ant-Man has 38 in aerial but it doesn't trigger the note. i guess is because of his 72 in psychology.

 

Ohhhh that’s interesting! I’d only tested aerial.

[Skummy]

Presenting the player with bright, bold red text after a match advising of a penalty is telling us we did something wrong. We don’t like being told that, so we look to avoid it. In the past, a granular adjustment to the product would often do the trick.

 

Maybe this is just me, but if in TEW 2016 I got a note that the match wasn't well received for whatever reason, my instinct was never to alter the promotion so that it would better accommodate that match in future.

 

Often because I was playing as a booker rather than an owner, and my owner wouldn't allow me to change the product, but also because it just wasn't my instinct at all.

 

I would shy away from booking that kind of match again, or figure out which workers on my roster would be able to deliver that match in such a way that the penalty has less of an impact, or ways in which I could alter the match to better fit the product - if a cage match was too bloody or violent for my audience, my solution wouldn't be to make the company as a whole more "hardcore" to suit it, it would be to pick a version of the cage match that's less risky. Because Abdullah The Butcher vs Bruiser Brody in WWC is a cage match, but then so is Big Boss Man vs. Hulk Hogan on Saturday Night's Main Event, and they are light years apart in terms of risk, violence and intensity.

[spiffyone]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="steev42" data-cite="steev42" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="47578" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I believe (though I'm not certain) that this has been removed for two reasons. First, the Young Lions/Loyalty that was previously tied to an area is now tied to the federations, so that wasn't needed. Secondly, regional importance has been removed (and seems to be tied to certain Locations in each region?). Industry Level and Economy Level can be found in the Database Details, the button at the bottom of the editor. Community Size is the only thing I can't find...and I'm not sure how used that was to begin with.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Ah, I see Industry and Economy Level now. But, again, if the whole idea of the UI redesign was designing so end users click <em>less</em>, why am I now clicking <em>more</em> for certain menu options?</p><p> </p><p> In 2016, every option we're now discussing was under "Game World". Now with 2020 there's some over here in "Database Details", some over there in "Eras", and within the latter what's left of "Trends" is not even user definable but now, like with company products, is a "choice" of set defined options.</p><p> </p><p> That makes for less options when modding, quite frankly, whether for the community or for personal use (as I sometimes modify mods that have been released to the community for such purposes).</p><p> </p><p> As for "Community Size", this was actually pretty damned vital for my own personal use real world mod edits (mods of mods?) because that was really the only way to mimic eras wherein the general audiences for pro wrestling shrunk to a niche or caught fire with much broader audiences.</p><p> </p><p> I've said it before, but there's making things more user friendly, and then there's dumbing down. When the database editor has less overall options for deeper user modification than the previous iteration of the series, that's just dumbing things down.</p>