Gameplay Mechanics of WE/PES

[RuneEdge]

I had no choice but you quote you cuz otherwise you wouldnt know what I'm talking about. If it bothers you so much, I'll spoiler tag them to prevent pointless spamming.

Spoiler

The guide says nothing in the game is pre-determined, is immediately dismissable because if it were not saying that then it's saying the game has scripting. Nothing the guide talks about is relevant here, IMO, it is an official guide, it's never going to offer anything other than a one-sided, biased argument on this particular topic.

Well if that was the case, they could have simply chose to not say anything at all about whether things in the game were predetermined.
And also with that logic, if the whole of Konami workforce all gathered around your front door and said in unison, "THE GAME HAS NO SCRIPTING! IT DOES NOT CHEAT!", and then they wrote that down on a piece of paper, signed it, and then framed it for you, you probably still wouldnt accept it. Cuz your arguement would be that they're only saying so cuz they cant admit the cheating.
You can only believe what you are told. If you're not gonna believe someone like that, then you're just extremely stubborn and not worth having conversations with...ever, even in person.

As for that quote that you dont believe you said:

It's not a question of reading someone's mind, it's coded into the fucking game that 'Match X' will be tough and 'Match Y' will be a breeze!

You're obviously saying that everything is predetermined and the matches are chosen beforehand. And if even if thats not what you meant, that quote alone has so many flaws and creates holes in your arguement that I dont even need to explain it for you to understand.

Spoiler

As for no one finding anything on this scripting in the game data, tell me where they've found how the AI works, what style of play the AI uses, how a referee decides on whether to give a foul or play an advantage, etc? These things are hard-coded into the game, because some guys who know how to manipulate hex code in order to edit graphics can't find it doesn't mean it doesn't exist, that is an extremely silly thing to say.

I never said they found out anything about the AI directly. I said that you believed the game decides which side to favour and once its made that selection, that little piece of data that gets stored in the console or PC's memory hasnt been found. But similar bits of data such as altering the play time (for demo extenders) or editing player growths in ML have been found.

Spoiler

I've also explained many times it's not about losing. I have played games where I've not won but really enjoyed the match, and other games I've won but it's been like pulling teeth. So before you post that I'm nothing more than a bad loser, you ought to take a look at yourself before you accuse others of being 'ignorant' and "not reading" your posts properly.

I never called you a bad loser. I just said that if you made up something like the game is cheating then one would assume that you are a bad loser. And thats exactly how you are sounding. I know that game makes it difficult for you (not in the same way), but I still manage to beat them often enough that its not even a problem for me. As a matter of fact, the more often to beat the CPU against it, the less often it seems to feel it its happening.

Spoiler

I said you were wrong because I'd read in an interview with Seabass that the AI compensates for it's limitedness on the ageing consoles by being cheap, and that was something they wanted to rectify for the next generation. You yourself have admitted the AI cheats, just not in the same way I believe it does. I still think you are wrong, but perhaps I was overly agressive in the way I stated that in the first place.

This limitedness of the AI was also explained in the guide and what he meant was that he wanted an AI that was even more realistic where they had different playing styles (like a Arsenal style or a Chelsea style) and he also said that he wanted a AI system where a side with greater team spirit (like a mid table team) was able to beat a bunch of inconsistant stars like the ones at Real Madrid. This is what the console is limiting Konami from doing and this is what he actually meant. If this interview was a major reason to believe in what you do then you sadly misunderstood the point here.

 

[ClassicD]

Well if that was the case, they could have simply chose to not say anything at all about whether things in the game were predetermined.
And also with that logic, if the whole of Konami workforce all gathered around your front door and said in unison, "THE GAME HAS NO SCRIPTING! IT DOES NOT CHEAT!", and then they wrote that down on a piece of paper, signed it, and then framed it for you, you probably still wouldnt accept it. Cuz your arguement would be that they're only saying so cuz they cant admit the cheating.


You can only believe what you are told. If you're not gonna believe someone like that, then you're just extremely stubborn and not worth having conversations with...ever, even in person.

Stop assuming what I would or wouldn't do. If Seabass himself said the game didn't have any scripting, I'd believe him.

As for that quote that you dont believe you said:

You're obviously saying that everything is predetermined and the matches are chosen beforehand. And if even if thats not what you meant, that quote alone has so many flaws and creates holes in your arguement that I dont even need to explain it for you to understand.

That quote is actually agreeing with your own view that some matches will always be hard, no matter how many times you play them - they're predetermined. I didn't say this about non ML-games, and your reluctance to simply quote me instead of linking directly to the post like I asked you to, tells me that you've taken it completely out of context. I never said that about non-ML games, which is exactly the picture you're trying to paint here. Grow up.

I never said they found out anything about the AI directly. I said that you believed the game decides which side to favour and once its made that selection, that little piece of data that gets stored in the console or PC's memory hasnt been found. But similar bits of data such as altering the play time (for demo extenders) or editing player growths in ML have been found.

"They never found anything out about the AI directly." It can't exist then, because they haven't found it, eh? :roll:

I never called you a bad loser. I just said that if you made up something like the game is cheating then one would assume that you are a bad loser. And thats exactly how you are sounding. I know that game makes it difficult for you (not in the same way), but I still manage to beat them often enough that its not even a problem for me. As a matter of fact, the more often to beat the CPU against it, the less often it seems to feel it its happening.

I've already explained it's nothing to do with losing. You're now insinuating that I'm lying, and making it up. What's the point in discussing anything if you just turn around and call someone a liar when you reach a point that you can't argue over?

This limitedness of the AI was also explained in the guide and what he meant was that he wanted an AI that was even more realistic where they had different playing styles (like a Arsenal style or a Chelsea style) and he also said that he wanted a AI system where a side with greater team spirit (like a mid table team) was able to beat a bunch of inconsistant stars like the ones at Real Madrid. This is what the console is limiting Konami from doing and this is what he actually meant. If this interview was a major reason to believe in what you do then you sadly misunderstood the point here.

The same guide that's official, by Konami, that won't ever mention scripting or cheapness. What else is he going to say?

 

[RuneEdge]

The problem here is that you're simply choosing to believe what you want to for the sake of the arguement. You want to believe Seabass in a interview you read but not when he explains the same thing further in a guide?
And you say that you'd believe Seabass if he said you were wrong to your face but you wont believe it when they say that nothing is predetermined in the guide (cuz apparently by not saying that, they admit the cheating which they arent allowed to do :roll.

 

[winston]

The cheats are not "scripts". They are not pieces of action that are entirely pre-determined to happen before the start of the match. They are not little bits of code that are stored in their own little compartments, waiting to be discovered. They are embedded at the heart of the entire AI model. They are intrisic to it. The game engine is a mass of numbers, stats, probabilities and calculations. In order to cheat, the balance of the numbers can be easily altered to favour one team. This can enshroud an entire match or can happen at any time during a match (for example, to give the AI a boost near the end of a match when they need to equalise). It's a simple programming concept. When you see an AI model at work without all the graphics, you appreciate that every frame has behind it a complex set of calculations which determine who will move where in the next frame and where the ball will go. It's all calculated on the fly, including the physics, but it can be easily manipulated by simply altering the numbers being fed in to favour one team, which is why things occur like the guy you're supposed to be controlling mysteriously slows down or changes direction to ensure the cpu reaches a loose ball first. This is where the AI model is currently creaking at the seems and where hopefully next-gen technology will provide a mroe robust and fair system rather than relying on cpu boosts but worse still, interference with your players.

RuneEdge, your arguments referring to the official guide have perfect merit, but only to a point. As Seabass says, everything happens for a "reason", it's not a predermined script from kick-off. But it's certainly not an objective AI and physics model. It's clearly designed with creating challenge and relies on cheats. Seabass is hardly going to admit that it's pretty crappy at times and we may as well not buy his game, least of all in the official guide.

ClassicD does not need to find official evidence from Konami to back up his claims. He simply uses his owns eyes and brain and can see the game takes control away from him at times. If he was alone in this claim, perhaps we could point the finger and say he is crackers, but the fact that the WE/PES internet fora are full of people making exactly the same observation backs up his claim. The fact that you have not noticed the cheating and have read the official guide is not proof it doesn;t happen.It happens, you just don't notice it. Be glad, I wish I could not see it because it ruins an otherwise wonderful game.

 

[ClassicD]

Amen.

 

[RuneEdge]

The cheats are not "scripts". They are not pieces of action that are entirely pre-determined to happen before the start of the match. They are not little bits of code that are stored in their own little compartments, waiting to be discovered. They are embedded at the heart of the entire AI model. They are intrisic to it. The game engine is a mass of numbers, stats, probabilities and calculations. In order to cheat, the balance of the numbers can be easily altered to favour one team. This can enshroud an entire match or can happen at any time during a match (for example, to give the AI a boost near the end of a match when they need to equalise). It's a simple programming concept. When you see an AI model at work without all the graphics, you appreciate that every frame has behind it a complex set of calculations which determine who will move where in the next frame and where the ball will go. It's all calculated on the fly, including the physics, but it can be easily manipulated by simply altering the numbers being fed in to favour one team, which is why things occur like the guy you're supposed to be controlling mysteriously slows down or changes direction to ensure the cpu reaches a loose ball first. This is where the AI model is currently creaking at the seems and where hopefully next-gen technology will provide a mroe robust and fair system rather than relying on cpu boosts but worse still, interference with your players.

All you've done there is explain how a game (and thats any game for that matter) could cheat if it did. That doesnt mean that this game actually cheats. :roll: Theres no need to give a lesson into how a game could cheat cuz ClassicD gave a more simple example of that when he said that the game just chooses to favour a team over another but slowing you down or whatever. All youve done is explain that further and I've already explained many times that unless you know that the game manipulates these calculations, all you're doing is being paranoid.
The whole basis of my arguement has been that when you thought these calculations were altered, they were probably altered for a reason such as your form and fatigue, etc.

RuneEdge, your arguments referring to the official guide have perfect merit, but only to a point. As Seabass says, everything happens for a "reason", it's not a predermined script from kick-off. But it's certainly not an objective AI and physics model. It's clearly designed with creating challenge and relies on cheats. Seabass is hardly going to admit that it's pretty crappy at times and we may as well not buy his game, least of all in the official guide.

Clearly relies on cheats? :roll: Its obviously not clear cuz you have no idea if the game is cheating or not. Just because you saw something happen that you couldnt explain, you and everyone else labelled it as cheating.
I've already explained many times that loads of games use tricks to create a challenge and increase the difficulty. This game does too by increasing the CPU's own ability, by increasing its speed, accuracy, etc. But nowhere does it directly control your own players. You still hold onto that control.
This is all that the game does. It only makes itself tougher. If thats what you want to call cheating then yeah its cheating. But never does the game take control of what you are doing and screw you over.

ClassicD does not need to find official evidence from Konami to back up his claims. He simply uses his owns eyes and brain and can see the game takes control away from him at times. If he was alone in this claim, perhaps we could point the finger and say he is crackers, but the fact that the WE/PES internet fora are full of people making exactly the same observation backs up his claim. The fact that you have not noticed the cheating and have read the official guide is not proof it doesn't happen.It happens, you just don't notice it. Be glad, I wish I could not see it because it ruins an otherwise wonderful game.

This point is completely useless cuz I havent said that I've never experienced it. My point has been that I have experienced it but what you and I have experienced wasnt "cheating", hence the explanations.
Theres no point in repeating everything ClassicD has said. We've kind of moved on from that. :roll:

There are too many things that dont make sense in your theory (thats all it is, a theory, not a fact). There are too many questions that dont make sense and cant be answered like the ones that I've asked here many times. And on top of that, there are too many holes in your arguements. First people say it only happens in the Master League, then people (like ClassicD) says it happens in every game, then he says that the n00bs always get assisted to even the score but then says the game chooses a side to favour. Its all a load of BS. Theres no point in getting all technical and trying to explain how it can happen. The fact is that YOU DONT KNOW. You can only believe what we are told. I dont care if Seabass isnt telling the truth. The point is that he made the game so he's the only one you can believe. When the game "cheated" you by making your players run slower towards the ball, it could have been ANYTHING that caused it. A glitch, a bug, maybe even cheating, we just dont know unless we made the games ourselves or if Seabass told us.
Just cuz you saw something, its not a good enough excuse to say it exists. All you saw was the game and a bunch of players on the pitch. Did you see the games data while it happened? Was the game in debug mode with loads of numbers all over the screen? Did the letters "WE ARE CHEATING!!!" flash on the screen? Of course they didnt. So how do you know that what happened in your experiences were the results of "cheating"?
Theres a very famous glitch in the game where one of your players would just collapse and hit the floor as if he was shot, and then suddenly jump back up again like nothing happened. Its pretty obvious that this was a glitch cuz it happened for no reason, it didnt really have a significant effect on the game such as directly favouring a team, etc. But because it cant be explained, are you gonna call that cheating?
There was one time when one of my players was offside and the ref blew the whistle. When the screen faded out and back in, the ref for no reason, carded one of the opposistions player for no reason whatsoever. Its pretty obvious that it was also a glitch cuz it just didnt make any sense. Is this cheating too? Of course not. But both of these situations are just as strange and when one of your players couldnt run as fast as he normally could. But you will call that cheating cuz unlike in those situations, your examples were more likely to lead to a defeat. :roll:
The only bits of information we do have are the facts about the game such as the ones in the strategy guide and basic common knowledge that you get from the manual, magazines, and reading descriptions within the game yourself (such as what different stats do). And if those facts can be used to explain something that cant normally be explained (like the examples above or your examples), its only logical to believe that then something as dumb as cheating cuz it cant be justified.

Its pretty simple. You can either believe something that makes sense and has been backed up by the few facts that we do know or you can believe something thats nothing more than a made up issue that people can whine about on message boards.

 

[winston]

Dear god, you really are an imbecile.

 

[lucasetor]

I second that

 

[RuneEdge]

Atleast if you honestly thought the game cheats, you'd have a logical reason why you think that way. Your reasons are pretty much as dumb as "I just think it does" or "my eyes cant deceive me", cuz you've said nothing more than that, compared to proper reasons that I gave.
I've said pretty much said all I can say on this matter. If Curly, Larry, & Moe want to continue being ignorant and believe in stuff they made up then go ahead. I think I'll leave you three here to invent new ways for the game to cheat on you. :roll:

 

[Luckz]

There are too many things that dont make sense in your theory (thats all it is, a theory, not a fact). There are too many questions that dont make sense and cant be answered like the ones that I've asked here many times. And on top of that, there are too many holes in your arguements.

Random bullshit to make up for lack of content?

You can only believe what we are told. I dont care if Seabass isnt telling the truth. The point is that he made the game so he's the only one you can believe.

Actually, even in medieval ages, a few certain individuals found out that, if you don't just believe what authorities tell you but rely on your eyes and mind (*gasp*) for a bit, you might find out that the world is not pizza-shaped. But nevermind, I see we're not that advanced yet.

When the game "cheated" you by making your players run slower towards the ball, it could have been ANYTHING that caused it. A glitch, a bug, maybe even cheating, we just dont know unless we made the games ourselves or if Seabass told us.

Are you, by chance, a misguided Creationist?

[.. cue further bullshit..] There was one time when one of my players was offside and the ref blew the whistle. When the screen faded out and back in, the ref for no reason, carded one of the opposistions player for no reason whatsoever. Its pretty obvious that it was also a glitch cuz it just didnt make any sense. Is this cheating too? Of course not.

You're aware that, if the play on rule is used, cards may be given later? Have you actually played the game?

Its pretty simple. You can either believe something that makes sense and has been backed up by the few facts that we do know or you can believe something thats nothing more than a made up issue that people can whine about on message boards.

So, by your logic, unless whoever made you (wasn't Seabass, I assume) gives me a signed statement that you do exist, I am supposed to not believe in that, instead considering you a ghost, no matter how many "people on message boards" (or outside of message boards) declare me insane for that?





Just for those who absolutely don't get it:
If you actually pay attention to the game for a minute, you are bound to notice that the same situations repeats itself constantly. Where balls bounce off to etc is scripted. But that's not all that horrible, I can live with that.
What bothers me is that, for an example, super-cancelling can make your player stop for a short bit, while the CPU does not have to deal with that. That the CPU occasionally has godlike stats probably is something that can't be evaded if you want a challenge with current sports game AI technology, but it's enough that I know that, when I'm 1-0 ahead or so, the AI will miraculously attack with full force at the very end of extension time. Even after doing nothing at all for 90 minutes of the game, they're by no means defeated. Because there frequently (hello, it's scripted) is that "last attack" - and that all would not be incredibly horrific if not for the fact that simultaneously with the AI players being boosted, your players also get worse and worse. What previously was a 100% effective and impressive defense of world-class players becomes a bunch of third-league stumblers who can't even walk straight. And that kind of blatant cheating just takes the fun away. I want a challenge, but I want a challenge under somewhat level conditions. Making the player lose due to absolutely unfair circumstances is nothing more than a very bad design decision.

 

[RuneEdge]

I thought we were gonna move on from the endless quoting but it looks like some idiots dont get the message. :roll: Looks like it'll have to go on forever then.

Actually, even in medieval ages, a few certain individuals found out that, if you don't just believe what authorities tell you but rely on your eyes and mind (*gasp*) for a bit, you might find out that the world is not pizza-shaped. But nevermind, I see we're not that advanced yet.
Are you dumb or something? We're talking about something here that cant be seen cuz its in the games engine. Its got nothing to do with whether or not you can see it cuz it cant be seen. Like I said, unless the game was in some kind of debug mode, how do you know what happens in the coding of the game? So many of you a lead to believe that the game has some kind of scripting and its coded into the game that a side is chosen before hand to favour. Now where exactly was this seen?

You're aware that, if the play on rule is used, cards may be given later? Have you actually played the game?
Uhhh...did you even understand what happened here? I was attacking and was offside. The game shows the replay of me being caught offside and awards a freekick to the opposition. But before resuming the game, a player from the opposing team that was halfway across the pitch gets a yellow card for no reason whatsoever. Now even if he had done something, I should have got a freekick for it but instead, they got a freekick in their favour for my offside. Its as if nothing ever happened and the player got randomly chosen to be carded for no reason. Not sure what sport you're watching but this doesnt happen around here.


So, by your logic, unless whoever made you (wasn't Seabass, I assume) gives me a signed statement that you do exist, I am supposed to not believe in that, instead considering you a ghost, no matter how many "people on message boards" (or outside of message boards) declare me insane for that?
:roll: Your level of understand is becoming a joke.
Yes I said that you can only believe what Seabass says as the truth. But I also said that since he hasnt directly said that the game doesnt cheat, you can still use the bits of information that he HAS said such as the stuff in the guide. Where he clearly says that nothing in the game is predetermined. ClassicD's arguement was that by not saying that, he'd be admiting that theres cheating in the game which he obviously isnt allowed to admit.
The point I'M trying to make is that if he said something in a strategy guide, its written in there for the purpose of explaining how the game works, which btw is much more reliable source than simply watching or playing the game yourself cuz we cant see how the came is coded. If you arent gonna believe Seabass, theres no one else in the world you can believe.
Now with you rather strange example, you're right. If the person who created me doesnt confirm that I dont exist, then as far as you know, I could be some kind of online bot that you're talking to. But what you can do is get bits of information from elsewhere (such as a birth certificate, etc or my dad wrote a strategy guide :roll: ) to give you an idea that I am in fact what I say I am.

Just for those who absolutely don't get it:
If you actually pay attention to the game for a minute, you are bound to notice that the same situations repeats itself constantly. Where balls bounce off to etc is scripted. But that's not all that horrible, I can live with that.
What bothers me is that, for an example, super-cancelling can make your player stop for a short bit, while the CPU does not have to deal with that. That the CPU occasionally has godlike stats probably is something that can't be evaded if you want a challenge with current sports game AI technology, but it's enough that I know that, when I'm 1-0 ahead or so, the AI will miraculously attack with full force at the very end of extension time. Even after doing nothing at all for 90 minutes of the game, they're by no means defeated. Because there frequently (hello, it's scripted) is that "last attack" - and that all would not be incredibly horrific if not for the fact that simultaneously with the AI players being boosted, your players also get worse and worse. What previously was a 100% effective and impressive defense of world-class players becomes a bunch of third-league stumblers who can't even walk straight. And that kind of blatant cheating just takes the fun away. I want a challenge, but I want a challenge under somewhat level conditions. Making the player lose due to absolutely unfair circumstances is nothing more than a very bad design decision.

Again, a lack of read skills has this time lead you to back up MY arguement. :roll:
People here like ClassicD have been saying that the game interferes by taking your control. I on the other hand felt that really its just the CPU getting tougher themselves by playing better (whether thats by increasing their own stats or the AI, I have no idea). Every shot they would take would be perfect, every pass they make would be perfect. This game's calculations take into account the margin of error in every situation but that seems to disappear for the CPU.
BUT, at the end of the day, you still have as much control as you've always had. Its only the opposistion that has gone tougher (whether or not that was done in a fair way is another issue). There might be situations where you might feel the CPU can do something that you cant but you have to rememer that this is a computer. It doesnt have to hold a pad to do things. Its just triggers the right command with accuracy whereas we have to actually do the work by pressing buttons meaning theres a possiblilty that the game might not execute what actually wanted in your head. Like in that exmaple where you have two players very close in the same direction, and trying to pass to player A usually ends up becoming a pass to player B.

Its pointless debating with you cuz you're argueing against the words I've used rather than the point I'm trying to make.
I've said it once and I'll say it again. Cheating is something you've made up. Did you read it somewhere? Did someone tell you about it? Did you even see it? The answer is no. You just saw something happen in the game that you couldnt understand the reasoning behind so you called it cheating. I on the otherhand who has experienced the same things as you lot decided to find out what might have possibly caused it and used facts to back up my arguement.

End Of Discussion.

 

[Chris Davies]

I don't want to get involved, I don't want to get involved... Ahhh crap.

Start a thread with a poll asking "does the game cheat, yes or no" (as was done a while ago) and the yes vote will win by a long shot. We all know the game cheats, bar a few of us who for one reason or another can't see it or call it something else.

The FACT is, the CPU will slow you down when running for a ball it doesn't want you to get. I'll sit and record a replay if you want, but there's no point because as I've said, if a seperate thread was made, person upon person would back me up. And it IS cheating, because you press sprint from the word go, and he runs, then jogs, then walks, then when the CPU guy is obviously going to get the ball, your guy speeds up again.

And "end of discussion"? Just who do you think you are, are you going to lock the thread Mr. Mod? Just because the majority disagrees with you? You really can't take it can you?

Look, I was enjoying this thread until you came in here and ruined it. Start a seperate thread, "does the game cheat, yes or no", give your arguments, let Classic give his arguments, then see what the public says. If the majority agree, again, and you STILL continue to say it doesn't and that the majority of people are wrong, then... Actually, come to think of it, you will anyway, so you don't have to bother. If Seabass himself posted you a letter saying "look, to be honest, the game cheats", you'd tell him to stop being a retard and tell him to stop playing the game with random arrows.

Bah. I shouldn't have got involved.

 

[RuneEdge]

I'm gonna make this simple. I'm denying that you sometimes will slow down or any other examples that people gave for that matter.
The big question is, is the slow running a result of cheating or something else. Everyone here says its cheating when they dont know that. I'm saying it could be many other things that could have caused this.

 

[winston]

Atleast if you honestly thought the game cheats, you'd have a logical reason why you think that way. Your reasons are pretty much as dumb as "I just think it does" or "my eyes cant deceive me"

My reason was clearly stated as to create challenge. Current AI cannot out-think or second guess a human mind, even yours, so relies on underhand tactics to make up for it's inadequacies. It doesn't do it on 1* because it's not supposed to be hard. It does it lots on 6* because it is supposed to be the ultimate PES challenge. 6* is not realism, it's not an evenly balanced contest, it's an artificial challenge.

Your arguments do not take account of the fact that many people, myself included, are complaining that players are being slowed down/direction changed when we're supposed to be controlling them, but then, once that particular moment has passed and the cpu has reached the ball first, suddenly full control is returned to the player who can run at full speed again, which is where you fatuous form arrows makes me laugh. The nearest legitimate offering you had was that it's a bug, but to my mind, a bug is something that is not supposed to be in the game in the first place, an error which was not picked up by the programmers and testers. The things we complain of, the things where control is taken away from us, are not bugs which cause the game to crash, they are holes in a limited AI model.

Indeed, there used to ba a glaring bug in WE6, the spasm bug where in particular circumstances where, for example, the ball was rolled along the box towards your stiker who would have an empty net to shoot into, the would suddenly go into a weird flickering spasm, you could not move him or control him in any way, the ball would roll right past his foot but you could not kick it, but as soon as an AI defender sprinted across and cleared up the danger, you would suddenly find you could move him again. This sort of "bug" has now been smoothed out so that rather than stand in a flickering spasm, a more subtle slowing down and gentle changing of direction occurs. Mind you, I know you would justify the flickering spasm (which I've actually still seen occur on 1 occassion in PES5) as a realistic epileptic episode.

 

[RuneEdge]

My reason was clearly stated as to create challenge. Current AI cannot out-think or second guess a human mind, even yours, so relies on underhand tactics to make up for it's inadequacies. It doesn't do it on 1* because it's not supposed to be hard. It does it lots on 6* because it is supposed to be the ultimate PES challenge. 6* is not realism, it's not an evenly balanced contest, it's an artificial challenge.
I dont think I explained that comment properly. I meant, why do you believe the game is cheating and what you're seeing is not a result of something else like a bug? We all know you saw it, lets move beyond that, shall we? Now since you cant see the coding, or speak to the developers or anything, out of all the possible reasons such as bugs, glitched, stats, etc, why is "Cheating" the answer that you chose? Because it gave the opposition an advantage? Cuz if thats the case, there are many other blatant glitches that gives away an advantage such as the one where your foot goes through the ball as if you kicked the air when taking freekicks with Thierry Henry.
I have a valid reason for what I believe in cuz I based my reasoning on facts that we know about the game. I've said many times before, that doesnt make me right. But out of the two different sides here, I have a more sensible answer.

Your arguments do not take account of the fact that many people, myself included, are complaining that players are being slowed down/direction changed when we're supposed to be controlling them, but then, once that particular moment has passed and the cpu has reached the ball first, suddenly full control is returned to the player who can run at full speed again, which is where you fatuous form arrows makes me laugh. The nearest legitimate offering you had was that it's a bug, but to my mind, a bug is something that is not supposed to be in the game in the first place, an error which was not picked up by the programmers and testers. The things we complain of, the things where control is taken away from us, are not bugs which cause the game to crash, they are holes in a limited AI model.
My arguement DOES take this into account. I've actually explained many times why I think this happens. Go back and read for a change. This is why its so frustrating. You ask a question, I answer it, and then you ask the question again as if I never answered it. :roll:


Indeed, there used to ba a glaring bug in WE6, the spasm bug where in particular circumstances where, for example, the ball was rolled along the box towards your stiker who would have an empty net to shoot into, the would suddenly go into a weird flickering spasm, you could not move him or control him in any way, the ball would roll right past his foot but you could not kick it, but as soon as an AI defender sprinted across and cleared up the danger, you would suddenly find you could move him again. This sort of "bug" has now been smoothed out so that rather than stand in a flickering spasm, a more subtle slowing down and gentle changing of direction occurs. Mind you, I know you would justify the flickering spasm (which I've actually still seen occur on 1 occassion in PES5) as a realistic epileptic episode.
I think you're drifting away from the point here. When these glitches happen, theres no logical explaination to why it happened in the game cuz its not supposed to do that. Now when you experience slower movement, that also isnt supposed to happen and cant be explained since its not something that Konami point out as a "feature" of the game.
So whats the difference between these two examples? Nothing. So if one can easily be classified as a glitch, why not the other example that you lot call cheating?

.

 

[winston]

ugh, never mind.....if this argument is now just boiling down to semantics, whether or not we interpret as "cheating" the flaws in the gameplay which take control away from the human player, then there is no real argument. You've already said yourself that the cpu cheats, you just wouldn't accept that the "cheating", or whatever word you wish to use, actually interfered with the human's control of his players, which we all now appear to agree that it does.


A happy ending.....or??

 

[RuneEdge]

There are many instances where the game takes control of your players cuz its supposed to. For example, if you crossed the ball, your players will move into position to recieve the ball, if you did a through ball, the striker will run onto the ball by itself without you having to do anything.
But when you said the game took over control, and decided to call it cheating, how do you know there wasnt a reason for it to take over control like in the many instances where its normal seeing that happen?
If you look back at one of my previous posts, I gave a perfect explanation as to why the game might have slowed your player, not knowing you wanted to run directly after the ball, resulting in the CPU picking it up before you and then you screaming "CHEAT! CHEAT!".
There are many more logical explanations for these things than "cheating". I explained most of them here but they were ignored.

 

[Chris Davies]

There are many instances where the game takes control of your players cuz its supposed to. For example, if you crossed the ball, your players will move into position to recieve the ball, if you did a through ball, the striker will run onto the ball by itself without you having to do anything.

Ah, I was going to say "oh fair enough, so it's just the way you want to word it" alá Winston. But evidently, no it's not. So there is actually a logical reason for two players from opposite teams running towards the same ball for the same reason (to gain possession, not neccessarily in a shooting position or anything else) and for YOUR player to stop running, completely, jog, stop, and then carry on? Oh right, I hadn't realised. Yeah, you're right, it's not cheating at all.

Fair enough, it might be a BUG, rather than the game CHEATING (which I doubt but is plausible I suppose). But how is this slowing-down ever an advantage? If you're running onto a through-ball I can see a reason you'd want to slow down, but A) you should be able to decide that yourself by letting go of sprint, and B) whenever it does slow you down, the defender's on you (or in most cases has got to the ball first).

Nobody's going to change your mind, you're opinionated and that's fine. But do you at least agree that this slowing-down crap needs to be removed for WE10/PES6 (not that it will be but hey)?

 

[Sunrise]

Tonight, I was playing Milan in the ML in a top of the table clash (2 points seperating the teams). I go 1-0 up, they equalise, then I go 2-1 up with 10 minutes left. I defend valiantly, they can't get through.

Then in the final minute, they hoof a long ball into my box from 35 yards out on the left-wing. I have 5 players in there, they have one, the ball is going nowhere near their striker. I press away from my goal and square, to header clear. Guess what happens? My player, bullets a header past my own goalkeeper, in the complete opposite direction to that I had pressed - this is such a great header I'm inclined to say I'd struggle to match it if it were my striker on the end of a cross at the opponent's end.

Athough this example is an extreme case, this isn't a one-off occurance, the AI has done this to me before and I am positive, that others will confirm it happens. For me, the AI 'cheapness' isn't up for debate because of what I've just described, and the fact the top man in the development team has admitted it's hard-coded into the AI.

Just wanted to highlight this, in order to be sure about it.

Not trying to argue with on your overall point, (I'm far too wise to get myself caught up in this entertaining yet seemingly never-ending discussion), but isn't the control scheme of PES5 built like no matter what direction you're pressing, square in a defensive situation will result in a clearance in a random direction?

It will help if your player has the ball at his feet facing the other goal, in which case he will play the ball upfield more likely. But in general it's completely random. The defender himself decides what would be the best option and based to his overall technique, this will happen accordingly. The longer you wait, the better his judgement will be.

It's not as simple as saying, I cleared and pressed forward, it should go forward. That's not the way PES5 works, directional commands don;t matter and it decides at random where the ball will go.

If that's a sensible choice, really narrows down to the game/realism argument. In a game, you're saying: I CAN SEE IT'S SAFE TO HEAD IT UPFIELD, SO DO IT YOU FECKING MORON!.

But in a simulation, you could argue that a defender under heavy pressure will not always have an evenly clear view of the situation as you have on your telly, on wide view with a radar present.

So you could argue that these random clearances are a fair choice by Konami.

----------------------------------------------------
It's what I've experienced, but it could be that my eyes have been deceiving me. But I will continue this post based on my own opinion of square clearances.
------------------------------------------------------

So in this situation, the defender felt like he was under pressure. (who can blame him, seeing as it's such a tense moment) He would have lost track of the positioning of his opponents, couldn't risk losing the ball to an opponent and tried to head the ball clear. Seeing as your directional command didn't matter, he decided to head it past his own goal to concede a corner. Unfortunately, calculating determined that he was going to feck this one up, resulting in a ill-timed own goal. Disaster, for sure.

Whether this calculating is determined at random or because the game is tilted against you, I honestly can't say. But that's more the point of your discussion, one I'm not willing to engage in because you cannot really agree or be sure.

 

[RuneEdge]

So there is actually a logical reason for two players from opposite teams running towards the same ball for the same reason (to gain possession, not neccessarily in a shooting position or anything else) and for YOUR player to stop running, completely, jog, stop, and then carry on? Oh right, I hadn't realised. Yeah, you're right, it's not cheating at all.

Did you even read my 'possible' explanation on this? Or course you didnt cuz I never said this incident was a result of a bug.
I had an idea that actually made sense. I'm not gonna bother typing it again and again cuz I already have many times. All of you should go back and actually read it rather than trying to act smart.

 

[Chris Davies]

I'm not trying to act smart, I swear to God. I'm not here to do the whole "LOL fukin retard" bit, never have and never will - I don't tend to insult because I'm not witty enough to form responses. And for what it's worth, Classic and I have always debated about what should come first in the next WE's - I've always said "keep the gameplay as it is and add a hundred teams" whereas he's always said "improve the gameplay because that's the most important thing". We've agreed to disagree and I'll agree to disagree with you as well, but I just want to debate some things first. I'm not trying to appear cleverer than anybody.

I understand that you have your opinion. But what I was saying was based on your "possible" explanation. Your "possible explanation" was that the game means to slow you down to help you. To my mind, slowing you down when you're both going for the same ball for the same reason, and only YOUR player slows down (never a CPU player), cannot have any positive effect.

In-fact, is that not the definition of cheating? The CPU players don't slow down for balls, but the human ones do? Surely does that not tell you that the game is making happen to you in order to beat you? Or else why wouldn't it be "fair" and happen to the CPU players?

Even if you consider it an advantage (or if you consider that it's *meant* to be an advantage), how come the CPU never does it?

My personal opinion is that it IS cheating, and that Konami have done this purposefully because (as I've just said in the What does Konami actually think? thread) they cater for the Japanese market and no other market full-stop (and I may be completely and utterly wrong here, but I believe I've read several times that the Japanese love their games to "cheat" as it challenges them more and they don't find it frustrating in the least - it's a completely different thing to us than it is to them). It's ported here, but if the Europeans don't like it, the things we want changing won't be changed. They'd just stop porting it here.

Unless Konami would ever think if PES stops selling so well "we'll make a team exclusively to make Winning Eleven but for the European market, with all of the European licenses and everything else". But I don't think that will ever happen.

 

[RuneEdge]

I understand that you have your opinion. But what I was saying was based on your "possible" explanation. Your "possible explanation" was that the game means to slow you down to help you. To my mind, slowing you down when you're both going for the same ball for the same reason, and only YOUR player slows down (never a CPU player), cannot have any positive effect.

Again, thats not what I said. I've never said that. Seems like I'm gonna have to try and explain this again.

In PES games, there are two styles of running. There the normal running speed (the one that you hoped for but didnt get), and theres a slower, more manual speed.
The first one happens when you're running after the ball, or holding X to pressure an attacker, sometimes when accepting a through ball (although sometimes you can run faster in this situation but thats another story), etc. Basically, the game locks your player onto a target and you just run towards it. If you were running towards a ball that was to the right of the screen, hold up slightly wouldnt make much of a difference cuz your player is kind of on a railroad track thats heading towards the target (the ball). This is just something in the gameplay engine that assists you whilst running. Now when you were trying to reach the ball, this is what you expected your player to do but he didnt.
The second type of running is a more manual run. If you hold the shoulder buttons to go into Super Cancel, and then ran around the pitch, you no longer have the assistance from the game like in the first style of running. On top of that, its also slower too. There are instances in the game where you are forced into this kind of control cuz the developers of the game might have felt it was best to give you that more manual control in certain situations like when you control your player manually during crosses or when you are controlling a defending player who doesnt have the ball.
Now there are many situations when the game has to guess what you want to do in the game cuz your controls limit you from making that choice. An example of this is when you have two players very close to each other in the same direction and which player your pass goes to has to be guessed by the game engine. Another example of this is when you're defending and you change your cursor hoping you'll get player A but instead get player B. Its a simple mistake the game can make.
Now back on topic. When the ball went loose, neither you or the CPU have the ball. So the game doesnt know who is the attacker and who is the defender. Now the attacker would naturally have the advantage of that locked on target and the faster dash that takes him straight to the ball while the defender on the otherhand get the more manual run similar to the Super Cancel.
Now if the game made the mistake of putting you in the defensive stance, you're obviously gonna stand there. But you can understand why the game did that cuz it didnt know you want to "attack" the ball.

Was that clear or do I need to repeat myself?

 

[jflores]

Can anybody give me clear precise instructions(other than the games book) on how to execute accurate headers in WE9FE.

To this day, I have yet to master this. I know you hold R2 down and square, but it doesn't work as much as others do it to me.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

-Jflores

 

[winston]

My personal opinion is that it IS cheating, and that Konami have done this purposefully because (as I've just said in the What does Konami actually think? thread) they cater for the Japanese market and no other market full-stop (and I may be completely and utterly wrong here, but I believe I've read several times that the Japanese love their games to "cheat" as it challenges them more and they don't find it frustrating in the least - it's a completely different thing to us than it is to them). It's ported here, but if the Europeans don't like it, the things we want changing won't be changed. They'd just stop porting it here.

Unless Konami would ever think if PES stops selling so well "we'll make a team exclusively to make Winning Eleven but for the European market, with all of the European licenses and everything else". But I don't think that will ever happen.

Interesting what you say (he says, ignoring RuneEdge) about the Japanese public enjoying a game that cheats to make it more challenging. Not sure where you got that from but, if true, then I guess it does show a completely different mentality.

That said, I can actually understand that mentality and indeed, when I've not played PES for a few days and so my memories of the frustrations of being cheated off the pitch are fading, I can find myself thinking that all the cheating is actually quite a good thing. Without it, without the artificial boosts the cpu gets at various moments throughout a match, without the "luck" and "break of the ball" all going the way of the cpu team, the game would be all the more dull and nothing but a procession of me camped around the cpu box scoring goals for "fun". How else do they simulate a cpu team "trying harder" than to give them a boost? How else do they simulate fatigue, mentality, etc other than to lower you guys stats.

Yet, when I sit down and play it, it doesn't take long for me to feel dissatisfied. It's a near impossible task for Konami, they need to cheat to make the cpu team competitive, but the feeling that you're being cheated completely takes away from the fun. The cpu boosts are just about bearable but implementing things like the blatant slowing-down/changing-direction-of-your-guy stuff and biased physics and referees does not endear them to me though.

One thing is for sure, if PES was not a football game, I would not play it because of the unfair cpu bias. I don't come back to PES time and again because it is a great game which gives nothing but pleasure, but because football is a great game and PES is the only half-decent football video game.

One thing I would say about Konami and their attitude to the European market, I don't think they ignore us completely. For a start, the game has loads of pishy wee teams from the French league, Dutch league, etc which are surely of little interest to the Japanese. The game is almost totally based on European football, and perhaps most important of all, they deliberately alter the gameplay from WE to PES to cater for the European taste (albeit that most Europeans seem to actually prefer the WE version).

 

[rockykabir]

Man...you guys really do take this game seriously don't ya!

 

[mathewsss]

Just wanted to add my opinion...
I've been playing WE since WE5FE, and onwards till WE9.

I think every version since WE6FE has cheating. You can call it by any
name, but it is interference in your own players' stats and control
which gives the CPU a huge advantage in certain matches or even times
within a match.

WE9 IMO, has this not only in ML, but also in Leagues and Cups.
I was just playing a World-cup simulation. In matches against smaller
nations, it was so much more difficult to get the ball or make any
good moves. I ended up drawing games with Tunisia, Costa Rica, Iran,
but I could beat Argentina, Sweden, Ukraine, etc.
When I played a smaller team, the control of my players was not so good,
and the other team was amazing, it was like watching Brazil, only problem
was it was Iran, or Togo or Costa Rica.
Whereas I could easily beat and dominate Argentina, Sweden.

I read somewhere, (in some other post), how the AI super compensates
when the matchup is between a good team and a lousy team, to make
the match more "interesting".

It just amazes me the amount of cheats there are in this game.
I could go on and on, but the way your players will go down-hill
in certain matches, to me proves it is AI cheating.

I agree with Classic, Jack, winston, and the so many people on this
thread. It's just because of the things we have seen and felt while
we played this game.