Re: Sociable Soccer - Jon Hare's new football game is on KICKSTARTER!

More
8 years 7 months ago - 8 years 7 months ago #131257 by atchoo
SWOS is not Street Fighter: many players love Street Fighter III 3rd, but they are pro and they earned with Street Fighter IV, they earn with Super Street Fighter IV and they will earn with Street Fighter V. But they think SFIII3rd is a better game, too.

I don t play SWOS because nostalgia (I played it for the first time in 2011) and I haven t to protect a rank (I m ok, but not a genius). I play SWOS only because I think it s better than PES, FIFA and others and I have fun with it.

But I m agree with higgipoker: SWOS is live, but not so kicking. It s not for all, it s not easy to learn and it s very hard to master for current standards and Jon Hare knows it.
The topic has been locked.
8 years 7 months ago #131260 by ElMichaJ
Well ... i supported the project by 30 pounds. so letz see what happens

Hey Hey Hey .... El Micha J !!!
The topic has been locked.
More
8 years 7 months ago #131262 by Playaveli

It s so subjective - the hardcore players who have honed their skills rave about the sensi ball physics and criticise anything that s not exactly the same. Frankly, I think my own game has much better ball physics than the original sensi already.


I cannot agree to that.
SWOS has set a certain standard, including ball physics. So, every retro football game today which does not meet that standard (without the need of duplicating it) which has been set 20 years ago needs to be criticized.
SWOS fits on a 3.5 floppy! Think about it. Today, there are no limits to anything....

I think there s a psychological element to it too - they ve spent so much time becoming a great sensi player, they are afraid of losing their rank and maybe not being such a good player with a new game.


I don t see any logic in that!
Sociable Soccer is a different game, there will be different rankings (built in).
Whoever concludes Hey I am a world class here, so I have to be world class there is a bit... well... brainless? Stupid? ;)
The topic has been locked.
More
8 years 7 months ago #131263 by higgipoker

It s so subjective - the hardcore players who have honed their skills rave about the sensi ball physics and criticise anything that s not exactly the same. Frankly, I think my own game has much better ball physics than the original sensi already.

I cannot agree to that.
SWOS has set a certain standard, including ball physics. So, every retro football game today which does not meet that standard (without the need of duplicating it) which has been set 20 years ago needs to be criticized.
SWOS fits on a 3.5 floppy! Think about it. Today, there are no limits to anything....

Hence proving my point: It s subjective. I do not find the SWOS ball physics particularly awesome. Hardcore players seem to criticize anything that is DIFFERENT as if it is worse. In their eyes, not meeting the that standard is synonymous with it s different.

I think there s a psychological element to it too - they ve spent so much time becoming a great sensi player, they are afraid of losing their rank and maybe not being such a good player with a new game.


I don t see any logic in that!
Sociable Soccer is a different game, there will be different rankings (built in).
Whoever concludes Hey I am a world class here, so I have to be world class there is a bit... well... brainless? Stupid? ;)


Which is exactly my point. It is entirely logical. People are attached to the skills they have built up over the years, so want a game where those skills are still useful, where they are STILL a top player in the community and not getting their asses kicked because the old SWOS style doesn t work anymore. My point was, there is an element of this in people crying out of an EXACT clone but with better online play.

They don t want to start at the bottom of the ladder, and maybe just not be very good at all at the new game! When I said psychological, I meant more subconscious.
The topic has been locked.
More
8 years 7 months ago #131264 by atchoo
Well, SWOS ball physics is really tight and coherent (have you ever seen strange and unpredictable reactions?) and it seems to have the *right weight*. Controls are tight and coherent, too.
SWOS PC is different and worse, in my opinion.


The topic has been locked.
More
8 years 7 months ago #131265 by Playaveli

Which is exactly my point. It is entirely logical. People are attached to the skills they have built up over the years, so want a game where those skills are still useful, where they are STILL a top player in the community and not getting their asses kicked because the old SWOS style doesn t work anymore. My point was, there is an element of this in people crying out of an EXACT clone but with better online play.

They don t want to start at the bottom of the ladder, and maybe just not be very good at all at the new game! When I said psychological, I meant more subconscious.


Who are those people ? Where are they ? Here? Can you name any?
I haven t seen any.

Hence proving my point: It s subjective. I do not find the SWOS ball physics particularly awesome. Hardcore players seem to criticize anything that is DIFFERENT as if it is worse. In their eyes, not meeting the that standard is synonymous with it s different.


Who are those hardcore players? And where are they?

About the ball physics:
Of course you can compare any retro soccer game. And make a reference to Amiga SWOS.
You have certain criteria to define ball physic .
- Velocity of the ball, powerful shots
- Flying ball dropping down from the air
- Felt weight of the ball
- rolling out until it holds still
- Ball acceleration after shots / passes
- ...

Criteria have to match and coincide with the match engine / view or camera angle.
You can take these criteria and compare retro football games with them.
The topic has been locked.
More
8 years 7 months ago #131266 by higgipoker

Well, SWOS ball physics is really tight and coherent (have you ever seen strange and unpredictable reactions?) and it seems to have the *right weight*. Controls are tight and coherent, too.
SWOS PC is different and worse, in my opinion.


Yes they did a great job technically with the ball physics.

Now, subjectively for example, the weight is precisely one of the points I d disagree with. It s not a game breaking issue, but for me personally the ball can feel a bit baloonish sometimes, the infinite bounce hack is just a *little* too crude for me and the pitches have just a little too much friction.

Out of interest, can you point me to a 2d game of that era where the ball does strange and unpredictable things. Would love to take a look!
The topic has been locked.
More
8 years 7 months ago #131267 by higgipoker

Which is exactly my point. It is entirely logical. People are attached to the skills they have built up over the years, so want a game where those skills are still useful, where they are STILL a top player in the community and not getting their asses kicked because the old SWOS style doesn t work anymore. My point was, there is an element of this in people crying out of an EXACT clone but with better online play.

They don t want to start at the bottom of the ladder, and maybe just not be very good at all at the new game! When I said psychological, I meant more subconscious.


Who are those people ? Where are they ? Here? Can you name any?
I haven t seen any.

It is merely the impression I have gotten from browsing these forums over the years. Do you disagree? Do you not think top sensi players are proud of their ranking and enjoy being the best, and would rather have an updated game where their skills still apply? It is not a criticism, merely an observation.

Hence proving my point: It s subjective. I do not find the SWOS ball physics particularly awesome. Hardcore players seem to criticize anything that is DIFFERENT as if it is worse. In their eyes, not meeting the that standard is synonymous with it s different.


Who are those hardcore players? And where are they?

Right here on this forum. Often when a new project is announced, claiming to be sensi style at least one online player (I consider someone that still plays swos competitively today as harcore ) will appear and criticize the project. Either saying it is nothing like SWOS or that the ball physics are not as good. If I am not mistaken, this very criticism is often leveled at the PC and console ports.

About the ball physics:
Of course you can compare any retro soccer game. And make a reference to Amiga SWOS.
You have certain criteria to define ball physic .
- Velocity of the ball, powerful shots
- Flying ball dropping down from the air
- Felt weight of the ball
- rolling out until it holds still
- Ball acceleration after shots / passes
- ...

Criteria have to match and coincide with the match engine / view or camera angle.
You can take these criteria and compare retro football games with them.

Agreed, I use the same criteria and don t find the SWOS physics as good as many people do. It s subjective.
The topic has been locked.
More
8 years 7 months ago - 8 years 7 months ago #131268 by atchoo

Out of interest, can you point me to a 2d game of that era where the ball does strange and unpredictable things. Would love to take a look!


No, I m sorry. :)
SWOS, in my opinion, had the best weight, but every soccer game I remember was coherent, from Match Day on ZX Spectrum to International Superstar Soccer on SNES.
It s the 2d, I guess. With 3d this coherence was lost (because of 3d engines, I think).
The topic has been locked.
More
8 years 7 months ago #131269 by higgipoker
Back on topic, we just hit 1,500 backers. Just 13,500 to go!

:D
The topic has been locked.
Time to create page: 0.197 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum