Public Beta Reaction Thread

[Jaded]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="danyp92" data-cite="danyp92" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="47578" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>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.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I played about with the in game editor a little and this is what I've found. (I had extreme starting variance on and edited a bunch of people to be 72, then 69, in different stats.)</p><p> </p><p> I THINK that if you have 69 in at least one of psychology, technical, puroresu or aerial you're okay. Flashiness DOESN'T help, neither does brawling.</p>

[spiffyone]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="BrokenCycle" data-cite="BrokenCycle" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="47578" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>The complaints from players about Products is just theory crafting at this point. It's impossible to tell from the 2 months in-game if the new Product system is good or not. <p> </p><p> This is a massive risk for the game, and I am willing to give it a shot because its flaws are rather obvious, and the positives, I think, could be very good. </p><p> </p><p> The best thing is that every promotion feels unique and has stuff you like or maybe not like as much about it and are forced to do. This is, in my opinion, great. Literally EVERY single promotion I played in TEW 2016 was booked the same with some very minor differences, mainly regarding things like having to put match aims on. My template for a show was the same across the board. </p><p> </p><p> Now, try booking TCW, a company that likes long matches and doesn't care how long angles are, to a company like USPW that yawns at every thing you do. It's great.</p><p> </p><p> I totally get all the reservations mod makers have about this.</p><p> </p><p> The product system in 2016 was kinda dumb. RatedRKO brought up the dumbest part of it-- you just change Comedy from low to very low to get a product that doesn't have something that doesn't perfectly line up with what you want, smile, and start bookin' away. This system has a lot of nuance, and I get that people love customization options, but sometimes it is fun being forced into things.</p><p> </p><p> That said... I do think something will be added in to customize the products. I don't think Adam realizes how much of a pain in the ass it will be dealing with it down the line.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> What you're talking about is in-game, though. I get that gaming the system in such a way that doesn't force (for lack of better phrasing) you to think through your booking for a particular product is indeed not really playing the game but "gaming the game". I agree. </p><p> </p><p> What does that have to do with creating mods, though? What does that have to do with allowing for deeper production creation/modification within the database editor outside of the in-game?</p><p> </p><p> A solution would've been to "lock" the user out of truly freely editing/modifying (or creating as the case may be) the products in-game (that is, during a game) but allowing them to do so if they edit the databases.</p><p> </p><p> And, yeah, it's kinda strange to you for such a thing to be done for those that want to modify things but...here's the thing: the mods are one of the primary drivers of the games in the series even selling to begin with. So why cut their shins off?</p>

[TeemuFoundation]

<p>My humble two cents to throw into the match length discussion. And I don't mean to be antagonisic.</p><p> </p><p>

I see two sides of this issue here. It's a good gameplay mechanic in my imo that there are bonuses and penalties in place with match lengths. It makes sense to challenge the player to navigate his way through them. I wouldn't want them removed, nor would I even call them bad gameplay features. Gameplay being key here.</p><p> </p><p>

However, having said that, as far as my own personal enjoyment goes in the TEW series, the micromanaging of match lengths has always been at the top of my pet peeves. Yea, always something I've managed to deal with it, it's nothing too severe. But something that's always struck me as something I've vehemently disagreed with. And this just a thing about schools of thought, I think.</p><p> </p><p>

I'm from the school of thought that the match length, per se, is not what matters. Not saying it's a non issue (it'd be very hard for 2 second match to be better than 2 minute match if we are to assume the workers in question are at least average) but it's not as big of an issue as some people in this thread have made it out to be.</p><p> </p><p>

A common thing I hear is that the Royal Rumbles are never good to begin with so they should never be good in TEW, either. And before I go further, I would like to say I'm not advocating for some battle royal rumble buff, I haven't even booked one yet in 2020, but I was happy with how 2016 handled them. It irks me because it's treated by some people here as an objective, universal fact that the Royal Rumble matches are of a certain quality. That they're not good. But that just can't be true, given how I know multiple people who have given up on wrestling altogether, but check out the Royal Rumble match every year. Because it's entertaining.</p><p> </p><p>

So, to them, clearly it's the most entertaining match concept out there because it's the only thing that even manages to draw them into watching wrestling anymore. They don't even watch WrestleMania. They just enjoy the Royal Rumble as a match type.</p><p> </p><p>

I'm bringing this up simply because it's a good reminder that how you view wrestling is not an objective fact because it's a subjective art form. The only objective things about wrestling are the bumps, and the money. Everything else is make-believe and personal taste, in all honesty. </p><p> </p><p>

My actual point I wanted to make is what I alluded to earlier; too much emphasis, in my opinion, is put on the length of the match, which isn't as relevant as it's made out to be. Really, the things that matter are:</p><p> </p><p>

* The ability of the workers in the match to tell an interesting story that keeps the audience and viewers engaged for the duration of the match, as well as the physical abilities to pull it off. This is handled in the game by psychology and stamina.</p><p> </p><p>

* What actually takes place in the match. This sounds so obvious, but it's actually not. A Royal Rumble match can be an hour long and easily keep the crowd's interest because of the concept of the timed entrances. They're instant gratification, and you always know another entry is coming in a minute or so. So it's almost impossible for the match to get boring. You can also look at two hour long WWE matches; the Iron Man match between Bret and Shawn, and the equally long Iron Man match between Rock and Triple H. Now, in the extremely (Xtremely?) ADHD era of early 2000, the Iron Man match that Shawn and Bret worked at 12 would not have worked, I'm fairly sure. But what Rock and Triple H did was work and entirely different match within the 60 minutes. Whereas Shawn and Bret had no decisions in the first 60 minutes of the match, Triple H and Rock had several finishes, including strategic DQs to keep things interesting. All the way up to final moments of chaos in the match. So the match style suited the era and worked for the audience. It also had Rock and Triple H, two top tier workers who can pull off an hour long match. I think the length made it harder for the workers involved to have a match that worked, but I just don't see the length, per se, making the audience less welcoming of it. Hell, the audience popped on the RAW they announced the 60 minute Iron Man stipulation. Surely they would have booed if they were against the idea? This was still the attitude era, kinda.</p><p> </p><p>

And I know what I'm going to get as a retort. I'm going to get told that just because the match gets penalties, even harsh penalties, doesn't mean it's unable to receive a high score, and this is true, but I still just don't see the thought process of a match length, by itself, being a factor preventing a wrestling contest from potentially receiving the highest possible grade. Like, in the Rock and Triple H example. The crowd was hot throughout. I do not see the length of the match being a detriment at all. If anything, it being a rare match type made it seem more unique and interesting. More must see.</p><p> </p><p>

I've played TEW for so long, I've learned to sort of train myself to not think of penalties as punishments, but in all fairness, that is the connotation of the word penalty. The definition of the word penalty is as follows: "a punishment imposed for breaking a law, rule, or contract". When you receive a penalty, it feels like you are being punished for wrong doing. So I don't blame people at all for wanting to avoid them. I mean, the whole of society kinda trains us to do that lol. Ever since we're kids. You learn the rules of a system and adapt because if you break the rules, you get zapped. And no one likes to get zapped.</p><p> </p><p>

And by the way, I was never a big fan of capping matches shorter than 15 minutes, either. I think a cap on short length is justified, but 10 minutes seems to me more like where the limit should be. You can have an amazing wrestling match that tells a story in 10 minutes and have the crowd eating it up with the right workers, build, etc. Sure, you could say that about 5 minutes, as well, but the limit does exist somewhere. It's just hard to draw the exact line. I watched that Mania match between Brock and Goldberg, and that was about five minutes or so, but it seemed like the best thing on the whole show, albeit I didn't watch the whole thing.</p><p> </p><p>

So, all in all, I guess this ramble can be summed up to: I think match length restrictions are a fine feature for a challenge run. But they do get in the way of a more casual fantasy book run in my imo. Or can get in the way, they don't necessarily get in the way. Hamper the experience, I guess is what I'm looking to say here. It's kinda like chemistry; fine for challenge runs, but mighty annoying for real world fantasy booking. That's why I'm happy chemistry can either be edited, or turned completely off. Allowing for both types of gameplay. I was also happy when TEW seemed to be moving towards the type of game design that allowed us to freely choose how we approach the game, and a given save.</p><p> </p><p>

But as much as I think the match length stuff is fine for said challenge runs, I don't see them quite as realistic as some people here in this thread have been wanting to make them out to be, hence the long-winded rant.</p><p> </p><p>

Also, how long did that This Is Your Life segment on RAW last back in the day? Two years? And wasn't that the highest rated segment in RAW history? <img alt="" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p><p> </p><p>

I'm done.</p>

[nerodragomir1]

Is there an easy way to see what tag team a wrestler is involved in? I noticed that on that cool menu that shows their disposition, size, what stable they are in. I noticed it doesn't have their tag team listed. At least im 99% sure it didn't have their active tag teams. Am I wrong on that? If it's not there, where can I go without needing to CLICK all of the way over to the tag team menu on the main screen?

[Bull]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="spiffyone" data-cite="spiffyone" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="47578" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>What you're talking about is in-game, though. I get that gaming the system in such a way that doesn't force (for lack of better phrasing) you to think through your booking for a particular product is indeed not really playing the game but "gaming the game". I agree. <p> </p><p> What does that have to do with creating mods, though? What does that have to do with allowing for deeper production creation/modification within the database editor outside of the in-game?</p><p> </p><p> A solution would've been to "lock" the user out of truly freely editing/modifying (or creating as the case may be) the products in-game (that is, during a game) but allowing them to do so if they edit the databases.</p><p> </p><p> And, yeah, it's kinda strange to you for such a thing to be done for those that want to modify things but...here's the thing: the mods are one of the primary drivers of the games in the series even selling to begin with. So why cut their shins off?</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I would argue that the simplification was done for the benefit of modders, as they aren't having to spend unnecessary time setting up companies and their respective products. </p><p> </p><p> The big phrase I keep seeing brought up is "Fine Tune" which again in my opinion just seems like a desire to dodge penalties by nudging them out of the product. . Ultimately if it can be put back in, in some form, then I don't see why it would hurt. People can stick with the current system or do the tuning how they please, People wanna play how they wanna play and that's perfectly fine. . I just don't agree that the current system is the handicap people are making it out to be. .</p>

[southside_hitmen]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Skummy" data-cite="Skummy" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="47578" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>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 <em>never </em>to alter the promotion so that it would better accommodate that match in future. <p> </p><p> 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. </p><p> </p><p> 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<em> light years</em> apart in terms of risk, violence and intensity.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Completely reasonable play style and one I employ quite a bit.</p><p> </p><p> Here's 4 other use cases that have also been completely reasonable, that would be a "reason" for wanting to edit the product instead:</p><p> - You are creating a mod and testing out different settings for each company to see how the user experience of that company is going to be. It's mostly there, but you want to fiddle with a few things to get it "just right" for your vision of the company and the people who play your mod.</p><p> - You just spent an hour setting up a local to global run, hiring workers, made a sweet graphic using Mario Paint and are ready to roll. You fire up your first show and see some dings for a preset product you don't agree with.</p><p> - You are a new player and you finally get the chance to implement that company of touring midgets doing rock opera on stage while a masked luchador battles valiantly against a cage fighter that you always wanted to create. You browse the product settings and, alas, your lucha-MMA facemelter of a promotion can't come to be.</p><p> - You want to? I mean, you can edit everything else in the game, right? I can make Abdullah the type of guy to bring home to mom, resurrect Brody, turn Sarge into an ayatollah supporter (oh wait... that happened) and make Hogan the slickest in-ring worker of all time. I can edit a pillow fight into an extreme danger match (the feathers!!!), why can't I tweak the product to get the vision of the company I want to play?</p><p> </p><p> Again, the point is that before ALL play styles were valid. It seems like we are gunning for EUIV Ironman runs instead this time around.</p><p> </p><p> If that's the goal. Totally cool. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't be surprised when people raise their hands then and say "hmm, that's different".</p>

[Skummy]

Firstly, I just don't see the products as being half as restrictive as you're suggesting that they are.

 

Secondly, when the majority of defences are "what if I wanted to create a promotion that's *insert the most "random" combination of styles I can think of*?", then I'd say that there's a product suggestions thread over in the Suggestions forum that I would direct you towards, which hasn't had a huge amount of uptake from people who are complaining elsewhere that their preferred product isn't represented.

I'd also suggest that the fact that people have to jump to absurdist and impractical conclusions to come up with a product that isn't in the game would indicate that the list in-game is actually fairly comprehensive, and that "what if I wanted to create something utterly unlike anything that has ever, or likely will ever, exist?" is a reasonable question, but an odd one to approach a simulator with.

 

 

 

The current range of products being hard-coded means there's far more to them than the flavour text you can see, and that the impact they have is far more pervasive than the box-ticking exercise of figuring out if WWE's focus on comedy was "Low" or "Very Low" and other such distinctions which, to the vast majority of players, would be negligible to non-existent. Even the most ardent mod makers would struggle to explain exactly what that difference, and judging from many mods I've seen, there were frequent misunderstandings over what many of the product definitions in TEW 2016 even meant, and I don't doubt that this is one of many reasons the system was changed to one more intuitive and considerably more nuanced.

It's not a case of arbitrarily choosing to take a feature away from people for shits and giggles.

 

 

As for people asking, "What about companies like WWE changing their product over time?" - that's accounted for in-game, that's why you have the option of both "Core Product" and "Current Product". Many of the questions people are asking are answered within the game, and many of the things people are complaining about either aren't true, or were equally if not more true of TEW '16.

 

 

As for your Lucha/MMA/Rock Opera, if you could point out what aspects of that can't be replicated by one of the existing products, I'm all ears

[ngz999]

Secondly, when the majority of defences are "what if I wanted to create a promotion that's *insert the most "random" combination of styles I can think of*?", then I'd say that there's a product suggestions thread over in the Suggestions forum that I would direct you towards, which hasn't had a huge amount of uptake from people who are complaining elsewhere that their preferred product isn't represented.

 

If this whole episode has shown one thing, it's that Ryland doesn't listen. We obviously want as much customisation as possible yet year after year we get new handcuffs in the form of products, gimmicks, and match aims.

 

Aside from the previously cited example of FMW which you have ignored, I also present the example of Sendai Girls - very serious, stiff and athletic main events, combined with undercard goofball comedy with Sakura Hirota and Aiger.

 

The current products would punish me for trying to attempt something like that in this "simulator."

[Jaded]

Is there an easy way to see what tag team a wrestler is involved in? I noticed that on that cool menu that shows their disposition, size, what stable they are in. I noticed it doesn't have their tag team listed. At least im 99% sure it didn't have their active tag teams. Am I wrong on that? If it's not there, where can I go without needing to CLICK all of the way over to the tag team menu on the main screen?

 

Click on their picture to view profile then personal.

[tnyrwn]

If this whole episode has shown one thing, it's that Ryland doesn't listen. We obviously want as much customisation as possible yet year after year we get new handcuffs in the form of products, gimmicks, and match aims.

 

Aside from the previously cited example of FMW which you have not ignored, I also present the example of Sendai Girls - very serious, stiff and athletic main events, combined with undercard goofball comedy with Sakura Hirota and Aiger.

 

The current products would punish me for trying to attempt something like that in this "simulator."

Head over to the product suggestion thread, suggest it and adam can add it to the game

[Skummy]

If this whole episode has shown one thing, it's that Ryland doesn't listen. We obviously want as much customisation as possible yet year after year we get new handcuffs in the form of products, gimmicks, and match aims.

 

Aside from the previously cited example of FMW which you have not ignored, I also present the example of Sendai Girls - very serious, stiff and athletic main events, combined with undercard goofball comedy with Sakura Hirota and Aiger.

 

The current products would punish me for trying to attempt something like that in this "simulator."

 

 

No, it wouldn't. It would prevent Aiger matches from getting as highly rated as Satomura vs. Hashimoto, that's all. And that would be accurate, in terms of how Sendai Girls' shows are presented - you said it yourself, the goofball comedy is the undercard, the main events are serious, stiff and athletic. With the "Main Event Spotlight" option on, which I believe would be appropriate for Sendai Girls, if there is any drawback to "undercard goofball comedy", it would be negated by the main event when calculating the show's success.

 

Sendai Girls, and the Joshi scene in general, was something I was specifically asked about early on in the Products set-up being established. The only Joshi promotion I feel can't be accurately reflected in-game at this stage would be Gatoh Move, and that's for reasons beyond the Product.

 

 

The same is broadly true of FMW. Though FMW is a poor example - the "Different Style Fights" were phased out precisely because the audience that came to FMW off the back of their deathmatches weren't interested in that style, and it was deathmatches that lent FMW its identity. As they moved away from deathmatches later in their run, they lost their audience. So at either end of the spectrum, deviating from their core product penalised them in the view of their core audience.

 

 

So many of the examples being used demonstrate, to my eyes, a lack of understanding of how the product settings work - and, indeed, how they worked in TEW 2016 too.

An angle as long as "This Is Your Life?" would be penalised for length, but the fact that it was carried by two of the most charismatic workers in the world at the height of their powers, and while both were incredibly over with a ton of momentum, meant that the positives they brought to the table outweighed the negatives of the penalty. Just like how a technical masterclass can still get over in an entertainment-based promotion when the people involved are good enough, booked well, and it's placed in the right spot on the card.

 

I gave an example earlier in the thread - I purposefully booked a match in a 1991 WWF game to run against several of the rules of my product, but because it was between Hulk Hogan and Randy Savage in 1991, it still got an 86 rating because their ability and star power was enough to outweigh the negatives of the penalties of running long etc.

[amdi331]

As I slowly get used to where things are (IMO, somewhat illogically) placed in menus I am starting to really enjoy the game. Some features that have been introduced make a huge difference to the gameplay (eg tournaments) and it feels like a better paced, smoother and quicker game than others in the series. After initial doubts, I am pretty certain that it will become my favourite in the series.

 

Switching skin to the Simplified skin has made a massive difference to my enjoyment of the game. I still hold out hope that one day there will be a game as good as this that is matched with a correspondingly good look and feel.

[Teh_Showtime]

If this whole episode has shown one thing, it's that Ryland doesn't listen. We obviously want as much customisation as possible yet year after year we get new handcuffs in the form of products, gimmicks, and match aims.

 

Aside from the previously cited example of FMW which you have ignored, I also present the example of Sendai Girls - very serious, stiff and athletic main events, combined with undercard goofball comedy with Sakura Hirota and Aiger.

 

The current products would punish me for trying to attempt something like that in this "simulator."

 

Have you tried playing with the match and angle focus? It allows you to weigh matches differently and in theory you could have Meiko having a classic on top be the only match that really matters, and you could book whatever you want underneath and it won’t hurt your final rating.

[Irishwhiskey119]

No, it wouldn't. It would prevent Aiger matches from getting as highly rated as Satomura vs. Hashimoto, that's all. And that would be accurate, in terms of how Sendai Girls' shows are presented - you said it yourself, the goofball comedy is the undercard, the main events are serious, stiff and athletic. With the "Main Event Spotlight" option on, which I believe would be appropriate for Sendai Girls, if there is any drawback to "undercard goofball comedy", it would be negated by the main event when calculating the show's success.

 

Sendai Girls, and the Joshi scene in general, was something I was specifically asked about early on in the Products set-up being established. The only Joshi promotion I feel can't be accurately reflected in-game at this stage would be Gatoh Move, and that's for reasons beyond the Product.

 

 

The same is broadly true of FMW. Though FMW is a poor example - the "Different Style Fights" were phased out precisely because the audience that came to FMW off the back of their deathmatches weren't interested in that style, and it was deathmatches that lent FMW its identity. As they moved away from deathmatches later in their run, they lost their audience. So at either end of the spectrum, deviating from their core product penalised them in the view of their core audience.

 

 

So many of the examples being used demonstrate, to my eyes, a lack of understanding of how the product settings work - and, indeed, how they worked in TEW 2016 too.

An angle as long as "This Is Your Life?" would be penalised for length, but the fact that it was carried by two of the most charismatic workers in the world at the height of their powers, and while both were incredibly over with a ton of momentum, meant that the positives they brought to the table outweighed the negatives of the penalty. Just like how a technical masterclass can still get over in an entertainment-based promotion when the people involved are good enough, booked well, and it's placed in the right spot on the card.

 

I gave an example earlier in the thread - I purposefully booked a match in a 1991 WWF game to run against several of the rules of my product, but because it was between Hulk Hogan and Randy Savage in 1991, it still got an 86 rating because their ability and star power was enough to outweigh the negatives of the penalties of running long etc.

 

Maybe i missed it but since you probably know can you dig into how the products in 16 actually worked?

 

I think that's a big part of the problem is not opening up the logic and formulas behind it. Not necessarily sharing code or trade secrets but understanding what is actually affecting what with those settings. Would probably help alleviate the criticism if people recognized how useless the feature was like you are suggesting.

[TOTKingNothing]

Head over to the product suggestion thread, suggest it and adam can add it to the game

 

And if he doesn't? Just tough tits?

 

If Adam had to add every single option possible, when he could have been working on other fixes and features, then what was even the point?

 

There is value in the new product system, but there is no reason to lock people out of being able to create their own product that doesn't just boil down to "your fun is wrong." For more than 10 years we've been able to book and play how we wanted in a big sandbox world, and now we are stuck only with pre-made products.

 

For people who like this system, and defend it, and say "hey this is good enough, you can just book around the new products. Just look for a product that fits your booking style!" are totally missing the point or just ignoring it: it does not hurt ANYBODY to have customizable products as a feature.

 

It doesn't affect people who don't use it. It only affects people who did use it. That is bad.

[Jabroniriffic]

Have noticed when converting a mod the personality can be a bit warped from the old slider method. Just saw that Al Snow was listed as "Heavy steroid user" after conversion. Something to be aware of when converting mods.

[jean-vic]

I might start manually raising my company pop when my show is over my current pop level even if it isn't enough to normally see growth. Why? Because it's fun to play a sandbox wrestling experience...

 

Where does the simulation/sandbox line get drawn? Can't have it both ways. I'd rather the game reflect the world, and the products available are and always have been narrow. It's wrestling. Not create a wrestler with every stat and physical proportion set to max. That's my humble opinion.

[D16NJD16]

Have noticed when converting a mod the personality can be a bit warped from the old slider method. Just saw that Al Snow was listed as "Heavy steroid user" after conversion. Something to be aware of when converting mods.

 

That isn't inaccurate though.

[TOTKingNothing]

Not create a wrestler with every stat and physical proportion set to max. That's my humble opinion.

 

Okay so then might as well just take the editor out completely so you can't do that either.

 

Probably should take mods out too, so we can only play the game as it is intended to be played. Doesn't matter that people have been able to mod the game since its inception, 2020 is the year to change that.

[Jabroniriffic]

That isn't inaccurate though.

 

I would put Heavy steroid user as Batista or someone similar, I think Al Snow or Funaki would be Steroid user. Still, mods are largely subjective.

[esteel20]

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.

 

"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."

 

I was one. Glad to see it was fixed!

[esteel20]

Not create a wrestler with every stat and physical proportion set to max. That's my humble opinion.

 

I've literally played that exact way with all of my worker's stats maxed since the EWR days. I turn off momentum, gimmick effects, crowd effects, match/angle ratio, booking times, etc. I'm here for the sandbox experience and to fantasy book in the crazy world I've made up in my head and I doubt I'm the only one.

[Donners]

Firstly, I just don't see the products as being half as restrictive as you're suggesting that they are.

 

Let's take a simpler example.

 

Say I love everything about the ACPW product aside from the requirement for a comedy match every show, because they're a pain in the arse to book.

 

In the past, I could tweak the comedy requirement of the product a bit lower to remove it as a requirement. Maybe for the sake of realism I could do it gradually - cop the penalty for a few shows, and then turn it down.

 

Instead, I am left with the choice of a much more substantial change to the product than I want, or being stuck with the penalty ad infinitum. A thousand shows down the track, fans are still expecting the comedy match that they haven't seen for the last 999.

 

I do find that restrictive, and in a way that makes no sense. It makes less sense when I am free to wipe out the face/heel divide in an old-school wrassling promotion at a whim, which is far more fundamental to the nature of the product than an expectation for one match type.

 

I once made the suggestion of a dynamic product, where your product evolved based on how you booked shows - with pre-existing expectations, but expectations which also adjusted as your fanbase changed in accordance with your booking.

 

That was probably wildly ambitious, but at least I could replicate that to some degree in the past. That feels less possible now.

[cwamaniac]

Customization

 

More optional Customization is an upgrade

Less optional Customization is a downgrade

It's not rocket science lol

 

But If I went a little more in detail TOTKingNothing explains the biggest issue with presets

 

1. They don't and can't possibly cover everything, if were being honest they probably cover maybe half of the products we could previously do in 16 and that's being generous.

 

2. People who used a heavily customized product in 16 are by default going to find this new system heavily restrictive (because it is), and some will just never make the jump from 16 which means less sales for a "new" idea, which means it isn't a good idea.

 

3. Adam Ryland is the be all end all in this product choice, If he were to say no to a product suggestion as he feels it's unrealistic then your out of luck, if he were to say no because he's busy trying to fix something else then your out of luck, if for whatever reason you somehow end up on Ryland's bad side (Which is unlikely as he's usually a saint ) then your also out of luck.

 

4. Even if Adam can add all the product suggestions, He won't be able to please everyone as the restrictions of certain product types is heavily subjected, don't believe me look into the discussion about Puro companies and tainted finishes. While it may make the game too easy perhaps Adam can allow us some limited access to under the game's hood so we can add our own products, as I imagine he made his own personal system to make products he could simply release it.

 

One last thing I don't mean to be argumentative or rude but jean-vic what are you talking about? Wrestling has always been extremely diverse with major differences and always has the possibility to evolve a present new products, For example if I wanted to start a new wrestling promotion tommorow that only had people in mascot outfits wrestle in extremely technical matchups I could, now if it would be successful that is debatable, but lets say it is and attracts a a new niche audience for the product, then in that example we have a new wrestling product.

[ngz999]

No, it wouldn't. It would prevent Aiger matches from getting as highly rated as Satomura vs. Hashimoto, that's all. And that would be accurate, in terms of how Sendai Girls' shows are presented - you said it yourself, the goofball comedy is the undercard, the main events are serious, stiff and athletic. With the "Main Event Spotlight" option on, which I believe would be appropriate for Sendai Girls, if there is any drawback to "undercard goofball comedy", it would be negated by the main event when calculating the show's success.

 

Sendai Girls, and the Joshi scene in general, was something I was specifically asked about early on in the Products set-up being established. The only Joshi promotion I feel can't be accurately reflected in-game at this stage would be Gatoh Move, and that's for reasons beyond the Product.

 

 

The same is broadly true of FMW. Though FMW is a poor example - the "Different Style Fights" were phased out precisely because the audience that came to FMW off the back of their deathmatches weren't interested in that style, and it was deathmatches that lent FMW its identity. As they moved away from deathmatches later in their run, they lost their audience. So at either end of the spectrum, deviating from their core product penalised them in the view of their core audience.

 

 

So many of the examples being used demonstrate, to my eyes, a lack of understanding of how the product settings work - and, indeed, how they worked in TEW 2016 too.

An angle as long as "This Is Your Life?" would be penalised for length, but the fact that it was carried by two of the most charismatic workers in the world at the height of their powers, and while both were incredibly over with a ton of momentum, meant that the positives they brought to the table outweighed the negatives of the penalty. Just like how a technical masterclass can still get over in an entertainment-based promotion when the people involved are good enough, booked well, and it's placed in the right spot on the card.

 

I gave an example earlier in the thread - I purposefully booked a match in a 1991 WWF game to run against several of the rules of my product, but because it was between Hulk Hogan and Randy Savage in 1991, it still got an 86 rating because their ability and star power was enough to outweigh the negatives of the penalties of running long etc.

 

You don't know what you're talking about.

 

Sakura Hirota vs Aiger in TEW2020 would be heavily penalised and the crowd would dump on it. That doesn't happen in real life. They are completely accepted based on their ability to do the comedy style. They don't get a bonus or a penalty for it irl. The crowd don't boo, they aren't silent, they react to that comedy match in the appropriate way.

 

Your argument is good workers can power through the penalties or the penalties won't significantly affect the overall show rating. However, those penalties will discourage people from accurately simulating real wrestling companies and were only added because Adam Ryland is an inept, control freak developer who knows nothing about wrestling outside of WWE. The penalties make no sense and shouldn't exist.