Multiplat AFL 23 - Part 2 with added Pro Team

Remove this Banner Ad

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I know their career mode has no depth and was full of bugs but why remove what was already there?

They’re removing it to essentially tell people they’re not going to work on it anymore for this release?
No they removed the single player career mode that Ross said would be included in the release.

The bare bones Management mode is still in the game. I would guess there is going to be nothing added or done further with this except maybe team list updates.

Most in depth management mode in an AFL game my ass
 
This is my main frustration at the moment. Seems like it was better in an earlier patch, where the 'next player' selector icon would actually be the next player... but it doesn't seem that way at the moment.
Unfortunately it's too difficult to do the Radial Select quickly in play.... which does seem to work correctly, but I think is better suited to when there's an opposition mark or free kick.
I also felt it was better before the last patch. I moved onto hardest setting jist prior to the last patch and was either just winning or just loosing in most games. Now im getting pumped in most games and just winning maybee 2 or 3 games a season. It was actually reasonably fun even with the bugs before last patch, now it just feels frustating unresponsive and unenjoyable.
im also having problems more simce last patch with human controlled players spoiling when clearly an uncontested mark should have been taken.
Lots of spelling mistakes on the banners too ( eg. brisbane will kick the winnig score). Gameplay is most important at this point for me, but jeez..... i really hope they fix this gameplay and controls at the very least. Not really feeling confident they will honour us paid customers with this or many of their promises anymore. Ide assume all hands would be trying to patch the dogs breakfast cricket 24.. there is a pattern with big ants games this year thats for sure.
New business model. Lol
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I only play it when I’m struggling to sleep. It actually works better than a sleeping pill
I bought a new PC two months ago and haven't bothered to reinstall the game. Just going to collect dust in the Steam library. What a shitshow this whole thing was
 
I bought a new PC two months ago and haven't bothered to reinstall the game. Just going to collect dust in the Steam library. What a shitshow this whole thing was
I ended up giving Evo 2 more of a go, not a great game, but crazy how a much lower budget game could at least get the movement right, you're not fighting the controls. Stark contrast with 23 where players don't respond to basic user commands. Could be a game engine issue using a custom one the new employed programmers wouldn't get, made more sense to use Unreal Engine 4 like WW did for Evo 2.
 
After writing about the poor control and wierd ai behaviour and trouble marking on hardest in management mode (after playing a lot of even games prior), i thought i would wind back the difficulty to see what happens. Put it back to mediun, had all controls and ai acting like expected, and marking was easy again. Had a big win after being 6 losses no wins rnd 6 into a season. Though gair enough and moved up to hard next game, won easily with good controls, marking and ai. Smashed freo 10.4 to 1.0. So next game i put it back to hardest. Was close all game and i came back to win 4.5 to st kilda 4.2. Controls was still fine no ai running in circles and could win the marking contest again and no constant going the punch instead of marking.
I reckon there is a glitch in management mode where these things happen.. marking becomes near impossible. Ai team mates run around like headless chooks, handball and kicks are hard to control and seem to have no time when gain possession ever and also start getting thrashed by ai. If these symptons happen to you ever in management mode, try changing the setting down for a game or two then change it back (to hardest in my case).
I get the feeling it might clear an input/controls glitch, which everyone is taking as patch induced maybee. Once i did this it was fun to play again in most ways. Can some other people try this to see if it is actually a fix for some of these things?
 
Could be a game engine issue using a custom one the new employed programmers wouldn't get, made more sense to use Unreal Engine 4 like WW did for Evo 2.
That'd very much come down to the experience and expertise of the developers.
If their devs had experience with Unreal Engine (like maybe at previous employers), then yeah, would make sense to go with it.
If they have more experience with their own in-house engine (like on other Cricket or Rugby games), and they continue to build that engine up, then it'd probably make more sense to stick with it.

Plus factors of the cost of the engine license vs expected cost of in-house engine updating and maintenance, and it's reusability for future games they have.
 
That's actually on purpose... throwing back to when they actually had a spelling mistake on the banner.

Haha. They got me there then.. i recal seeing another banner spelling error somewhere too but cant remember who it was. I will have to pay attention to the banners now to see if i can find it and find out if its a historical copy too.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

That'd very much come down to the experience and expertise of the developers.
If their devs had experience with Unreal Engine (like maybe at previous employers), then yeah, would make sense to go with it.
If they have more experience with their own in-house engine (like on other Cricket or Rugby games), and they continue to build that engine up, then it'd probably make more sense to stick with it.

Plus factors of the cost of the engine license vs expected cost of in-house engine updating and maintenance, and it's reusability for future games they have.
That's what I mean, if you're bringing in new programmers as BA do all the time, an industry standard engine would be real easy to adapt to if programmers have experience in it elsewhere. From what I've read, BA do not keep the same staff, so they bring in new programmers who aren't experienced with their in-house engine, and they have to develop tools for their free software, instead of developing gameplay. BA already wasted a lot of money with post release development and photogrammetry/tours to stadiums, I don't think moving to a new game engine would have broken the bank like a small budget developer in WW did.
 
Haha. They got me there then.. i recal seeing another banner spelling error somewhere too but cant remember who it was. I will have to pay attention to the banners now to see if i can find it and find out if its a historical copy too.
Yeah Collingwood had one too, which they even made light of themselves...
 
That's what I mean, if you're bringing in new programmers as BA do all the time, an industry standard engine would be real easy to adapt to if programmers have experience in it elsewhere. From what I've read, BA do not keep the same staff, so they bring in new programmers who aren't experienced with their in-house engine, and they have to develop tools for their free software, instead of developing gameplay. BA already wasted a lot of money with post release development and photogrammetry/tours to stadiums, I don't think moving to a new game engine would have broken the bank like a small budget developer in WW did.
Yeah not sure what the internal conversations were like, but I'm sure there would have been deeper considerations than anything I could come up with here without knowing the tech.

If the game was already somewhat built on a game engine (custom or other), then moving to a different engine would be a monumental task. I was really surprised when WW announced they were doing it... which, I think added a year to the next release alone.
 
Yeah not sure what the internal conversations were like, but I'm sure there would have been deeper considerations than anything I could come up with here without knowing the tech.

If the game was already somewhat built on a game engine (custom or other), then moving to a different engine would be a monumental task. I was really surprised when WW announced they were doing it... which, I think added a year to the next release alone.
I was thinking more preproduction why wasn't there a conscious decision to use a industry standard engine? I read the producer saying it was easier to reuse the fanhub stuff, but if they're constantly changing staff, they're going to have to be taught the engine, which would cost money. Especially from what I've read, the programmers sometimes are developing tools instead of gameplay. It's just bizarre the glitches, user command problems and animation skipping/lagging, how they weren't able to fix it, after 5 months. Would be interesting to hear why WW made their decision to use an industry standard engine, a few years back.
 
I was thinking more preproduction why wasn't there a conscious decision to use a industry standard engine? I read the producer saying it was easier to reuse the fanhub stuff, but if they're constantly changing staff, they're going to have to be taught the engine, which would cost money. Especially from what I've read, the programmers sometimes are developing tools instead of gameplay. It's just bizarre the glitches, user command problems and animation skipping/lagging, how they weren't able to fix it, after 5 months. Would be interesting to hear why WW made their decision to use an industry standard engine, a few years back.

I asked this question directly once a few years ago and the reason is if there is an engine related bug then you would have to wait on the engine developers to fix it. From other developers I've followed and known for years though they've always told me that unless you have a specific use case then paying for an engine license is more economical than the time spent maintaining your own. There are good arguments for both cases.

I really can't be bothered getting involved with this thread but I figured I'd try and see if I can add some clarity on this particular topic as something I know a bit about.

There is no such thing as an industry standard engine so it's just take your pick and use what best suits your use case. If they've made an engine for a workflow that best supports developing sports games then it's probably going to be the best choice. Do you remember EA's Frostbite engine? Developed by Dice for Battlefield but EA rolled it out to their other studios and forced them to use it to make types of games it wasn't even designed for which didn't turn out too well.

If you go take a game dev cert or diploma you'll more than likely work with Unity and besides just general experience it has very few real transferable skills. I've known guys 20+ years in the industry with very little UE experience as they've always used in house proprietary engines. UE also can vary wildly from version to version, like take the final UE4 build 4.27 and it's vastly different from say 4.23. Even UE 5.3 has some major changes from 5.1 like the way action input is handled. Not to mention that any studio that may use UE natively in house have probably heavily custom tooled it or filled it with middleware to the point where it's unrecognisable to the same version of UE that another developer may be using. Programming is a tiny discipline in the overall scheme of things and besides engines that work with high level scripting like C# and LUA then 95% of programmers are going to be already skilled in C++ (just about every game programming job requires a comp science degree and C++ is default) and already proficient in picking up new libraries. Learning UE from scratch might even be harder because it's a very universal and massive engine that's for more than just making games and has an absolutely monolithic codebase and custom library (I use it's visual scripting exclusively now so I don't have to spend hours digging through documentation and getting hung up on syntax errors). For many of the other disciplines they would hardly even touch the engine as they're working with other applications.

I don't really want to speculate what is going on with their releases at the moment because it is only guess work but I'll bet it has zero to do with the engine. I've never played this game and have absolutely no interest in changing that, but reading and seeing some of the examples of issues like even the ones you've listed I have a fair idea why they exist and it's more to do with design and execution rather than a specific engine issue.
 
I asked this question directly once a few years ago and the reason is if there is an engine related bug then you would have to wait on the engine developers to fix it.
I recall the producer mentioning this, earlier this year.

From other developers I've followed and known for years though they've always told me that unless you have a specific use case then paying for an engine license is more economical than the time spent maintaining your own. There are good arguments for both cases.
I read that was an issue, because they use free software instead of paid middleware, at least from a claim made in 2015.

There is no such thing as an industry standard engine so it's just take your pick and use what best suits your use case. If they've made an engine for a workflow that best supports developing sports games then it's probably going to be the best choice.
By industry standard I mean engine widely used throughout the game development industry, like Unity or Unreal Engine, rather than an internally developed one.

Do you remember EA's Frostbite engine? Developed by Dice for Battlefield but EA rolled it out to their other studios and forced them to use it to make types of games it wasn't even designed for which didn't turn out too well.
Right, I just read about that not long ago, their internal engine was an issue for EA. Although, Unreal Engine 4 worked out okay for Evo 2, it didn't have movement issues.

I don't really want to speculate what is going on with their releases at the moment because it is only guess work but I'll bet it has zero to do with the engine.
It is speculation from some developer claims I had read, which made me think the game engine or the software in general they're using is causing problems.
 
Im pretty sure that is the other one ive seen in the game. Pretty freaky they put that stuff in. I like it.
Did you try toggling the difficulty level. when the controls and ai are playing up in management mode? Keen to see if that remedies things a bit for other too. It was night and day difference after i did ot last night. Havent had another game yet today to see if it stayed stabalised. Will check again tommorow
 
Im pretty sure that is the other one ive seen in the game. Pretty freaky they put that stuff in. I like it.
Did you try toggling the difficulty level. when the controls and ai are playing up in management mode? Keen to see if that remedies things a bit for other too. It was night and day difference after i did ot last night. Havent had another game yet today to see if it stayed stabalised. Will check again tommorow
I play on Hard difficulty, not Hardest... and I haven't noticed any of the issues you mentioned about marking, or spoiling when going the mark.
It could be a Management Mode save issue somewhere...I wonder if this could be the same for Tactics (I always see AI teams use Defensive-Locate (Man on Man) and nothing else).
 
Cricket 24 only got such a low score because it’s a copy/paste job from 22.

AFL 23 (at least in its current state) is a good starting ground to build future titles from.

Cricket 22 was a way better game than AFL 23. It remains a really good platform on which to build great cricket games. Unfortunately Cricket 24 built basically nothing.

Really two different issues.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Multiplat AFL 23 - Part 2 with added Pro Team

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top