If you register for free, you will be able to post threads, vote on polls and lots more. If you have problems with the registration or logging in, please contact the administrator.
I kinda see what wakers is saying...if the difference is so obvious, you don't need to analyse it. If I breath water instead of air, I don't need stats to tell me it sucks!
However all he is saying is that after his short tests it still seems to be holding true. Why shoot him down? He isn't claiming fact, just that it seems to be an unusual co-incidence and asking for help to verify.
I'll have a go when I get home and see if I notice any difference, if I do then MAYBE I'll do a full season test. But if the change is really obvious, I'll just play the game instead!!
Originally posted by Kriss:
Not often such a laughable theory makes a two page thread
It's as realistic a theory as the old have to keep the mouse pointer in the commentary line one.
The ME does the same things whatever mode you watch (or don't watch) it in.
The crux of the issue lies in whether you believe the match engine "tweaks" certain things depending on whether you are on commentary or 2D.....in theory I can see why programmers might want the 2D view to create more chances to increase the drama....and technically it must be possible to do.
Wakers test certainly seem to show an area worth someone tresting more scientifically...even if it is not proved one way or the other as yet.
It then boils down to whether you believe SI when they say it can't happen.
mmmm...SI admits match engine is a fraud?? Does anyone really believe they would just admit even if it was true.
I may not be a conspiracy theorist but I'm not a niaive idiot either....
1) if you watch a game with no highlights, then after the game in which say, a sending off occured, and the media ask you to comment, you will be able to watch the incedent. so wouldn't that suggest that even though you weren't watching, the 2-d match was still happening, if you get what i mean? just because you don't watch it, it doesn't stop it from happening.
although...
2) i've seen many people on these forums suggest that the 2-d display is just a representation of the match engine. so when your forward bursts through one-on-one, all thats really happening is that your team is having a chance on goal, and that its not that different from any old shot. so if you don't watch this, would your chances and scenarios within the game be more 'realistic'?
These are just observations. feel free to moan at me if you want, i don't expect any less from some people on here.
people are saying what a waste of space discussing this, but at least its more interesting than most of the crap that appears on here.
'theories' like this often have two sets of people, those who agree and those who totally disagree. all these people dismissing it straight away, thats your choice but you aare starting to sound almost scared he is right. why not give it a go yourself? in my humble opinion, watching without the 2-d shouldn't make any difference, but even in the small sample of results provided, you have to admit the results are odd.
Originally posted by homerjnick:
In every penalty shootout now I ALWAYS lower the speed of the Match Engine as I ALWAYS lose when it is up high.
I kid you not...
Lol, I await for the flurry of posts about this one ;D
Neilb242 - I have never been in either camp, I have just debated about it. I have often stated that based on logical thinking and lack of evidence to support otherwise that I don't think the whole commentary or 2-d match engine makes any real difference. I have tried it out and I didn't really notice anything majorly different, however I also have never had the "super keeper or 30 shots on target bug" that is claimed, ofc I have had games where I cant't score for the world and then the opposition has a couple of shots and scores but this is how it sometimes happens in life, so I expect this now and then. But I have not completly dissmissed Wakers or other peoples notion that this may be a problem or a bug. But I feel personelly until evidence suggests otherwise I don't see there being a problem.
This thread is much better than other stupid flame fests such as http://community.sigames.com/eve/for...1/m/1322037473 I am not saying this thread is perfect but there is a little bit more debate and construstice points made here then most recent threads, most especially when compared to that thread I have linked to
I'm under the impression that the two engines are not the same. Obviously, I haven't done enough testing, but some of the arguments don't make sense.
A sample size of 100 is good enough to approximate some awful things. After all, a sample size of 3,000 can justify the population of China for a basic statistic (I think it was boy-girl ratio) with I think to 95% certainty.
By the way, there is no covariance between both engines, partially because unless one switches between engines during the game, the games' modes are independent (if a commentary game can affect a full match game after the game is saved and restarted, we'd have computers that can manipulate files created in the future!)
The easiest way to probably debunk this is as follows: Take control of a rubbish team and a good team, arrange a friendly, save and play, then restart, changing modes every restart. One then has a good set of data which is sensible. One could probably use FMM to give each player a fully professional attitude with no dirtiness and not injury prone with full natural fitness and stamina, no substitutions and discarding any game which ends up with a sending-off or injury.
I think that a sample size of 100 is more than enough. The test statistic for a standardised normal distribution using the Central Limit Theorem is (difference in means*100)/standard deviation - quite a large standard deviation is required to start knocking this down to accept the two modes are equivalent. But we're not talking "commentary is 20-0, full match is 1-0" here.
Whether you choose to watch the entire match, fly through the game with only commentery, or even go on holiday for a day after seeing the first minute, the result will be exactly the same and whats more I can prove it
A few months ago I took it upon myself to muck around with the editor. I decided to Edit all of HJK's players so they all had Dirtiness and Aggresion at 20 as well as giving them 1 for Sportsmanship, Temprement...etc basically making them ultra dirty footballers, I also made every HJK player dislike (100/100) every FC Haka player as well as disliking FC Haka (100/100). Anyway when the time came for HJK to play FC Haka, needless to say not many HJK players lasted the full 90, infact sometimes the game actually crashed, due to the fact that the match engine works out in advance that not enough HJK players (i.e. 2) would be left on the field to take the kick-off, The game never crashed before I reached the end of the first half, but when trying to start the second half it would sometimes crash, whats more, is that sometimes when I had got the second half under way I decided to make a substitution or two around the hour mark, and now and then after I had confirmed the sub's, the game crashed, which means that the Match engine works out in advance that the players i'm going to bring on will change the game in such a way so that too many men get sent off.
So basically, this proves that the game is worked out in advance up to half-time, and from half time up to full time, unless you make a substitution, and it doesn't matter whether you chose to watch the whole thing or just have the commentary.
Linear Mode
