Ashes Cricket 2013 General Discussion

[cricket_online]

yap we could go on and on for hours !!! i know mate i have played first class cricket for 12 years now and have first hand experience on how nice umpires can be !! then again i was NO 9 or 10 so really didn't matter to me !! lol !!! yap well lets agree to disagree with respect !!

You need to play Madden NFL series to see how challenges have been implemented and what they bring to the game. Ashes Cricket is supposed to be a simulation and leaving out DRS detracts from the simulation/game.

I can very well see a scenario in the game where during a tightly contested match (against AI or online) you have a close shout for LBW declined. You can go for the challenge and if it works you are in the driver's seat but if you are wrong, you lose the challenge for the rest of the game! This is an important aspect of the modern game and not some gimmick and has to be included in future iterations. Just saying that AI umps are 100% accurate is a cop-out and not a well simulated game.

I would have implemented the feature in such a manner that there would be 50% chances of line decisions being given out which would bring the DRS in. Occasionally (5% of the times, I.e., 1 in 20) I would also throw in a clanker where it would help if you used your DRS reviews wisely and penalize you if you had blown away your reviews on cr@ppy challenges.

 

[Nikhil V]

Will there be a manual appeal system?

 

[vaibhavtewatia]

Why don't you read the whole thread before asking questions.
^This has been asked many times and confirmed by Chief. It won't be there.

 

[kingoffuel]

Will there be a manual appeal system?

Not in this version (Ashes 2013)

 

[SibiNaayagam]

Not in this version (Ashes 2013)

As long as they strictly follow their own lists, that feature won't see the light even in future releases.

Seriously, why would they make the feature(because we asked obviously) and suddenly find a logic from nowhere to force it out of the game? Appealing for DRS is different from manual appealing for general stuff. You appeal for lbws, bat-pad catches and caught behinds. Why would they be so reluctant to withhold the umpires decision, allow the player to appeal and give a decision?

And I'm pretty sure BigAnts no apple. They wouldn't say Trickstar copied from them; if I'm not wrong this feature was available in a game in the 90s?

 

[Fast bowler]

i have asked the question so many times but yet to get a answer. is all the cricketers in the game going to have the same body type !! same height!!! ????

 

[MattW]

if I'm not wrong this feature was available in a game in the 90s?

But in all the games it has appeared in it did nothing apart from trigger a sound clip and animation - any time it was actually out, the game appealed for you. Continually mashing the appeal button had no negative impact - so it was essentially a noise button.

An appeal button itself would be negligible to add (the appealing code has to exist regardless, you're just forcing it to run with the button) - provided there's not other uses for the buttons at a given time that would make it difficult - the issue is adding value to it, it is obvious on almost all occasions when something warrants an appeal - so it's very hard to think how you would implement a button on its own - if you can just appeal anything, you will appeal everything - but if you attempt to factor in umpire annoyance, you need to think about how to add in enough user feedback to make a value judgement on whether it's worth pressing.

To add the feature is simple, to give the feature value beyond making noise is another thing. Would pressing the appeal button give you half a shout from the bowler, or would the whole team rise in unison? How harsh would you make the non-auto appeal, could you miss obvious wickets because you didn't hit the appeal button in time? Would appeals make umpires make the wrong decision - if so how do you balance that? What balances out the appeal button for the batting team?

The obvious response would be 'but you could turn it off' - but the same goes for a bunch of features. I always liked the idea of turning off fielding so that the game just did it - but AC09 made the catching good enough that I liked having it on. You don't build features by assuming the use of an off button, you have to try and make it compelling enough of a feature that people will want to use it.

 

[SibiNaayagam]

But in all the games it has appeared in it did nothing apart from trigger a sound clip and animation - any time it was actually out, the game appealed for you. Continually mashing the appeal button had no negative impact - so it was essentially a noise button.

An appeal button itself would be negligible to add (the appealing code has to exist regardless, you're just forcing it to run with the button) - provided there's not other uses for the buttons at a given time that would make it difficult - the issue is adding value to it, it is obvious on almost all occasions when something warrants an appeal - so it's very hard to think how you would implement a button on its own - if you can just appeal anything, you will appeal everything - but if you attempt to factor in umpire annoyance, you need to think about how to add in enough user feedback to make a value judgement on whether it's worth pressing.

To add the feature is simple, to give the feature value beyond making noise is another thing. Would pressing the appeal button give you half a shout from the bowler, or would the whole team rise in unison? How harsh would you make the non-auto appeal, could you miss obvious wickets because you didn't hit the appeal button in time? Would appeals make umpires make the wrong decision - if so how do you balance that? What balances out the appeal button for the batting team?

The obvious response would be 'but you could turn it off' - but the same goes for a bunch of features. I always liked the idea of turning off fielding so that the game just did it - but AC09 made the catching good enough that I liked having it on. You don't build features by assuming the use of an off button, you have to try and make it compelling enough of a feature that people will want to use it.

3 paras of post doesn't make it an excuse to be left out. In a competitive world when your opposite number does something you always look to make it better.
But my whole point is why make a feature and then have to cut it down? A journey starts with a small step. So let them include it even if its a less compelling than they thought initially, they can build upon it later. They are in the final stages and why cut down anything? It isn't a movie where you try to make it crispier, is it?

 

[MattW]

3 paras of post doesn't make it an excuse to be left out.

My point is to get you to think about how a seemingly simple feature has deep implications to overall gameplay, the potential for bugs and imbalance.

In a competitive world when your opposite number does something you always look to make it better.

So implement a partially complete portion of a wider feature just to say you have it? Instead of looking good it would be the opposite, you inevitably would compare the implementation, not the dot point on the box.

If AC13 does what it does do well, it will overshadow not doing many things. Perhaps the list of things it does do is too short for many*, but if they tried to rush in semi complete features to try and 'compete' they are destined to fail.

Perhaps Big Ant have thought of everything and will get it right the first time - then by all means vote with your wallet and avoid - but both games would have gone through their own development process and their own attempts to find answers to the gameplay mechanic questions that can make or break a game. 'We don't have time to do it right' is just as valid of an answer to a feature question as 'Yes'.


* For what it's worth I agree - I think it's inevitable that AC13 will lack the longevity that EA's games had through domestic cricket/long tours or that Big Ant's will have with the Career mode. Having the better gameplay could make up for some of that - but it may not be enough.

As someone who has followed things closely over the years I can understand how they've gotten to this point, I can understand how much work they will have put in to get this far - but as a consumer I certainly can see why people would look at AC09 vs AC13 and expect 4 years of improvement and feature gains that won't be there.

Something will need to wow here.

 

[Allrounder18]

Manual appealing is the only cosmetic feature which I care about , I really loved C97 manual appealing system even though it was just a noise maker and animation trigger.

 

[cricket_online]

Manual appealing is the only cosmetic feature which I care about , I really loved C97 manual appealing system even though it was just a noise maker and animation trigger.

Without DRS manual appeal button has no practical use but plenty of downside. I can see the feature being used to slow down and annoy opponents online when you are about to lose in the hope your opponent will quit.

Unless manual appeal is coupled with DRS or unless there's a mechanism to penalize persistent appealers by AI umps less likely to give decisions in appealers' favor, it shouldn't be in the game.

I would rather wait for next iteration of the game where the feature is implemented well rather seeing something in there just for the sake of it which adds nothing much to the game other than annoyance factor. Omitting DRS was a huge oversight though.

 

[Chief]

Without DRS manual button has no practical use but plenty of downside. I can see the feature being used to slow down and annoy opponents online when you are about to lose in the hope your opponent will quit.

Unless manual appeal is coupled with DRS or unless there's a mechanism to penalize persistent appealers by AI umps less likely to give decisions in appealers' favor, it shouldn't be in the game.

I would rather wait for next iteration of the game where the feature is implemented well rather seeing something in there just for the sake of it which adds nothing much to the game other than annoyance factor. Omitting DRS was a huge oversight though.

Oversight implies something un-intentional.
It's actually been designed, prototyped and ultimately omitted in order to improve our game.

 

[79cricket]

Let's hope chief and trickstar put in player heights in this version at the least.
It can not be that hard, a slider going from say 5 feet to maybe 7 feet would be great, i could create Slats and play with him in my team and listen to his commentary at the same time, how tall was he again, maybe 5.3 feet.

----------

Oversight implies something un-intentional.
It's actually been designed, prototyped and ultimately omitted in order to improve our game.

People need to let the DRS problem go but one last question chief from me on DRS, what made you let it go. Please don't say to improve the game, maybe a balance problem or you guys could not get it working 100%.

 

[srk121]

People need to let the DRS problem go but one last question chief from me on DRS, what made you let it go. Please don't say to improve the game, maybe a balance problem or you guys could not get it working 100%.

you not leaving Chief with much of a choice are you Mr 79cricket?

 

[79cricket]

you not leaving Chief with much of a choice are you Mr 79cricket?

It's not my choice or yours Mr srk121, we all would love to have DRS in there but it's not going to happen. Maybe we will see how bigant does it, if they get it right then maybe trickstar will be forced to do a update like DLC.