• Major upgrades completed! Please report any issues you spot in here

eFootball (All Platforms)

mahanddeem said:
The way I look at eFoorball is a personal way. I have my opinion about it and it doesn't matter what B-Man thinks or C-Man does.
You can hate it for (a) valid reason(s) and you can also like it for some other valid reason(s).

I don't play it online, only had like 2 pvp games 4 months ago. But few days ago I entered the vs AI "starter" event currently going on. I have a team of mostly J League players (max 10k G ot whever points that I accumulated for free just logging in). I hate playing 5 star teams myself full of C. Ronaldo, Salah, Mane and Romario with D. Beckham.

Offline (pure offline) is still 9 limited teams only. But I am on PC so master race never stops at playing 9 teams only (at least unofficially)

Worth it or not it depends on whom you're asking. Some people get satisfied with a McDonald's burger and some only insist on spending the night at the Ritz with dinner gala and next day breakfast.

Without you fire it on and try for yourself you're not gonna know. This is something you have to try.
Click to expand...
9 teams unless it’s modded.. I have PC and PS5 so the option is there.. but 9 teams by design.. that’s not McDonalds or the Ritz.. that’s a dodgy kebab from a late night ambulance. Man I used to love those.. constantly gave me the shits though, and I’m sure it took years off my life. Bit like PES really..

Appreciate the feedback though, I’ll give it a bash when they give me something to bash.. until then I’ll just bash myse… yeah myself.
 
TommyC0ckles said:
9 teams unless it’s modded.. I have PC and PS5 so the option is there.. but 9 teams by design.. that’s not McDonalds or the Ritz.. that’s a dodgy kebab from a late night ambulance. Man I used to love those.. constantly gave me the shits though, and I’m sure it took years off my life. Bit like PES really..

Appreciate the feedback though, I’ll give it a bash when they give me something to bash.. until then I’ll just bash myse… yeah myself.
Click to expand...
You asked and I volunteered to answer. The rest is your sole decision. Have a great night.
 
robbieryan said:
There will be no master league. Quote this post when it is released and mock me.
Click to expand...
Thats a win-win for you.
smart-thinking.gif
 
I had another go at online. Played one match and drew 2-2. Played smoothly enough, but I just never feel in control of what I'm doing compared to offline. I play manual and judging the weight of passes is all over the place, it's so inconsistent. There's also lag on movement of players and direction of manual passes seems off too. The challenge online isn't the opposition, it's the actual trying to play the bloody thing. So frustrating and just makes for a collision fest and the ball bouncing all over the place, with severely hampered control of what you're trying to achieve. Don't know how anyone can find online play enjoyable.

Only a few days ago I played PES21 for first time in ages. Did an offline co-op world cup and had a blast with it. So much more enjoyable.
 
Played 4 games after pretty much not playing for 2 weeks. This game is bullshit still if you just jump in. You only can play good if you exploit the stupidness but not for playing football. All the annoying stuff apply from 1st second i have listed earlier.
And pass target locking is still shockingly ass, you have like 60% control over it.

Presspressrunpressrunpresspressrunpressrunrunrunpresspressrunwithlegends and you win. Stupid 1 bit minded game really. Too bad, started off so well. Lets hope for some miracle regarding gameplay tomorrow.
 
The_Knight said:
Unsavory truth: Video games have always been business investments made to generate money. Except maybe freeware from the 1990s made as passion projects, but even those are precursors to money-generating projects.
Click to expand...
It wasn't always like that, for the old timers who remember the 80s you had kids knocking up games and selling them on "because they could".

Case in point, the Oliver twins. They were creating games whilst still at school as they found coding interesting. There's quite a few examples of this back in the day.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Twins

The industry has however completely changed now
 
manmachine said:
I still don't see the wrong in the original "If you want a proper game, you should stop supporting this game in its current state. Especially with your money" statement.

It's not a statement about morality or ethics. It's just rational decision making. It makes zero sense to give a company any money if you no longer like where they're going or what you currently get in return. It's simply not actively supporting products you claim you don't want or like.

Yeah, not giving them my money today does not guarantee I'll get a "proper game" in return any time soon, but it's an essential baby step and the only thing I can do. The alternative, actually giving them money, is just daft in comparison.
Click to expand...
I think that's fair – it doesn't have to be read as some moral imperative (that's why I added the bit about it being potentially a piece of practical wisdom, I suppose).

But a few remarks either way – often people do slide from asserting a causal responsibility to a moral one (indeed in this thread it's happened quite a bit). Perhaps that's inevitable, but we can put that aside. We can question even the causal responsibility, regardless. E.g., the idea it's in your rational self-interest not to buy the game (/spend money on the game, etc), in the way you've put it, probably presupposes the idea that you are, in buying MTX/games, causally responsible to some degree for their continued success and their structure. (That's what you imply by the "baby step" idea of withholding spending.) But I just don't think even that point is true, really.

Unless you're spending hundreds-to-thousands, you're barely supporting this model and this franchise. Its success really trades on (as I understand it) exploiting the "whales" who do spend in such excess. I believe that's what drives this particular incarnation of the F2P model they've gone with (am I wrong about that?). So either you're not a whale, and so are not an impactful "consumer" for the company, or you are a whale, who does make such an impact. But even then, the archetypical whale lacks a relevant kind of agency to be considered even causally responsible: they act on whims and urges basically external to them, which means the causal chain starts with the manipulative behaviour of the industry. So, whale or not, gamers/consumers aren't really the cause of this model and its success – what is the cause is the array of techniques deployed by big publishers, and the surely many structural factors like governments failing to crack down on this exploitation or media failing to spotlight and critique it.

A larger ideological force probably pervades all these considerations too, and the attitudes of the ordinary gamer (or consumer of services and goods across many industries) are submerged in it: we are conditioned by a particular trend within the political economy to think there is no other way – what Mark Fisher called "capitalist realism". The reason so many gamers submit to the likes of EA, Konami, Activision Blizzard, Ubisoft, and so on – why people fork out for their entertainment products, or increasingly services – is that they just find themselves feeling helpless in the face of these behemoths. Gaming was a recreational or enthusiast hobby which provided some escape from the harshness of productive life, but it slowly got co-opted by a rapacious sort of capital that gradually squeezed the good-natured fun and aesthetic pleasure out of it. These forces are out of our control; we might convince ourselves that we can take baby steps by voting with our wallets, but really these kinds of non-protest serve to confirm our helplessness in the face of what feels like an impossible state of affairs.

We can of course look elsewhere, do other things, even in the space of gaming: turn to indie gaming; collaborate with others to create projects that serve our actual recreational gaming needs, or help to fund such collaborations. But such options don't seem viable in a climate of capitalist realism, even if they are, and this is another overarching factor that effectively disrupts our agency, making us barely even causally responsible for the successful gaming industry paradigms: we are acted upon, and our view of what is possible is restricted.

Long and poncy diatribe – I apologise to all who read it.

The_Knight said:
Unsavory truth: Video games have always been business investments made to generate money. Except maybe freeware from the 1990s made as passion projects, but even those are precursors to money-generating projects.

The issue here is that they discovered from experience with EA's FUT and MyClub that online makes more money. So their business model clashes with what offline players like myself would want. I can only *hope* that when they implement crossplay, they wouldn't be concerned about offline causing a hit to online player numbers in a way that impacts its appeal.

EA doesn't have this issue because they have a way, way, way bigger player base they aren't worried about offline modes cannibalizing their online player base.
Click to expand...
I don't know; I think that's quite naive. I think anyone looking in a clear-minded fashion at gaming industry trends in the last, say, three decades would spot very definite changes in terms of what capital is invested, how it is invested, how production incentives have changed, how profit margins have expanded, how that profit has been divested, and how workforces are divided and treated. And it wouldn't be a simple story of quantitative growth here either, as the only difference over time – a matter purely of degree.

We are presently in a stage that is quite unprecedented in the industry, one that would be too simply glossed as "business investments made to generate money". When shareholders of Activision Blizzard voted to approve that Bobby Kotick could take $150-200m in bonuses a couple years back (I forget the exact figure), simply for supposedly returning on shareholder investment (through dividends), and all while continuing to lay off staff in large numbers, introducing pay cuts, etc. – we are in a newer and uglier paradigm than businesses doing businessy things. I mean: the idea of the product or service at the heart of the business, and the values intrinsic to that venture, have at that point been completely sidelined. And that's where we're at with this industry and its "AAA" (a self-appointed nonsense designation) publishers and studios.

For all that, though, there are other avenues. There's the odd decent established developer or publisher; there's the indie game market. It's not just projects from the '90s that buck the trend – and going by my argument, much of the industry in the '90s would be considered a bucking of today's trend, because developers were not uncommonly given autonomy and support to implement an artistic vision or to develop genuinely engrossing products – even if cash-grab trash existed alongside these products.
 
janguv said:
I don't know; I think that's quite naive. I think anyone looking in a clear-minded fashion at gaming industry trends in the last, say, three decades would spot very definite changes in terms of what capital is invested, how it is invested, how production incentives have changed, how profit margins have expanded, how that profit has been divested, and how workforces are divided and treated. And it wouldn't be a simple story of quantitative growth here either, as the only difference over time – a matter purely of degree.
Click to expand...

Three decades? Yes, things have changed a lot since the 1990s. Like I said, back then there were several non-monetizable passion projects out there (freeware) just made to gain notoriety within the industry. It's quite naïve to use the 1990's standards to judge today's industry. Video Games is a multi-billion dollar industry with a lot of investments at stake. The main drive is to release a product successful enough to generate money. As I said, that has always been the case, with the exception of the few passion projects of the 90s.

It's extremely naive to blame a company for not making a game we want, and for pursuing an alternative money-making venture instead. Games are expensive to make, and player bases are difficult to assemble. Now a company like EA? Sure they have money to spare, but even they are openly dissing single player games. Their offline modes aren't really affecting online money making, and that's why they're there. Konami's player base dwarfs next to EA's. It's naive to wonder why game companies are chasing money-making ventures, as opposed to making a nice offline game with a sprinkle of passion. They're businesses.

The only reason to make offline modes, is the same reason that existed before: To make money off of sales. Now I wasn't a ML player. I only played offline leagues and I loved that, it worked for me. But I understand how unique ML was, and how it was the prime draw to the series for many offline players. The reason to make an offline game still exists: To make money. But it also compromises a bigger money making venture, and Konami won't release it unless the money making off online starts to dry off, or if the money making off online won't be affected by offline modes, which won't happen before crossplay is a thing.

So again, they're not releasing master league because they love us, or they love the mode. They're releasing it whenever they do, because it's a financial decision made by a business, as it always was over the past couple of decades.
 
EVOL_666 said:
What does it mean mechanic ? what is the relationship between coins and mechanics ?
you are complaining about "you don't have to spend money to play this game" when you are supporting "if you want to win spend money".
Click to expand...
The point I'm making is those who choose not spend any money to build a squad will eventually succumb to the pressures of this game.
 
Last edited:
I dont remember if this was confirmed before, but Celtic and Rangers were just announced as new EA partners, so for todays 2023 update it means 2 less stadiums.




And they havent even modeled the stadiums of their new partners like Napoli, Monza and whatever else they sadly got.
And a recycled San Siro/Meaza that they will pretend its 2 different stadiums like with Olimpico.
hICCo6X.png
 
Pyro said:
I dont remember if this was confirmed before, but Celtic and Rangers were just announced as new EA partners, so for todays 2023 update it means 2 less stadiums.




And they havent even modeled the stadiums of their new partners like Napoli, Monza and whatever else they sadly got.
And a recycled San Siro/Meaza that they will pretend its 2 different stadiums like with Olimpico.
hICCo6X.png
Click to expand...

I have created a link with everything that is going to be deleted
Including the stadiums of Celtic, Rangers and Juventus
+
Ads from Serie A and Spor Toto Süper Lig
Link : https://www.mediafire.com/file/r7eeiyksqhm64lq/ELIMINADOS_2022.rar/file
 
So will we be able to play online vs friends or in divisions vs other ppl with normal teams or will this just be another dream team disaster ?
 
Pyro said:
I dont remember if this was confirmed before, but Celtic and Rangers were just announced as new EA partners, so for todays 2023 update it means 2 less stadiums.




And they havent even modeled the stadiums of their new partners like Napoli, Monza and whatever else they sadly got.
And a recycled San Siro/Meaza that they will pretend its 2 different stadiums like with Olimpico.
hICCo6X.png
Click to expand...

Loved playing in the Celtic stadium in the last few pes, the lighting during the day was so well done.
 
Sovereign Hope said:
How is the gameplay? Any offline mode added?
Click to expand...
I don't talk about my opinion here about gameplay. I don't open that can of worms :D
No offline modes. Removed Juventus and add Inter, Milan, Monza, Atlanta, Napoli and Lazio and Club América, Santos, Internacional, some other Latin American teams. And all their stadiums are unlocked for Authentic Team Trial Match.
5 and 10 min, Beginner, Regular and Superstar. One ball.

Oh and few nice music tracks
 
I think what sums up how much of a non-event the launch of eFootball 23 is, is the complete lack of it being mentioned on its opening page on the eFootball website. That should be plastered with info about it.
 
mahanddeem said:
I don't talk about my opinion here about gameplay. I don't open that can of worms :D
No offline modes. Removed Juventus and add Inter, Milan, Monza, Atlanta, Napoli and Lazio and Club América, Santos, Internacional, some other Latin American teams. And all their stadiums are unlocked for Authentic Team Trial Match.
5 and 10 min, Beginner, Regular and Superstar. One ball.

Oh and few nice music tracks
Click to expand...
Kits have been updated and so have the stadium interiors
 
Best improvement vs AI so far: when COM tries to knock you off the ball, you do not stumble every time and have the chance to keep the ball.
 
Not as many gameplay improvements in my opinion. Better passing and shooting and a bit more responsive but didnt notice anything huge in two games. But its getting better slowly. Main thing for me is that the basis is still better than fifas so I hope they keep improving it.
 
Played a few games so far. Glad we have 10 minute friendlies now with the licensed teams that are available. Far more enjoyable and can be patient with the build up play as it should be on pes games.

Although not any major changes, the gameplay and graphics do feel and look a bit more polished overall. I could happily play this in a Master League and wish it was available now. As it stands, I'll probably only play this a few times as there is no incentive to play it more with just friendlies offline. Dream Team against ai has no incentive bar building up your team with new players. There's no team based League s essentially just another bunch of friendlies with default kits which make the games look awful. Fully licensed or edited kits really make a difference to the enjoyment for me personally.
 
Superhoop said:
Played a few games so far. Glad we have 10 minute friendlies now with the licensed teams that are available. Far more enjoyable and can be patient with the build up play as it should be on pes games.

Although not any major changes, the gameplay and graphics do feel and look a bit more polished overall. I could happily play this in a Master League and wish it was available now. As it stands, I'll probably only play this a few times as there is no incentive to play it more with just friendlies offline. Dream Team against ai has no incentive bar building up your team with new players. There's no team based League s essentially just another bunch of friendlies with default kits which make the games look awful. Fully licensed or edited kits really make a difference to the enjoyment for me personally.
Click to expand...

Is there more variety to build up play now? Is there more 'detail' to the moment to moment gameplay? It previously felt smooth, fluid, but a little bland, devoid of intricacy, player detail...
 
Had a couple of games, one on regular and one on superstar, again I don't know why they lock out difficulty levels as both are not to my liking. At least it has day matches (maybe it already did in "Authentic" mode?) and although I always wait for a football game to move daytime shadows between halfs, it just never happens. There should also be moving clouds changing the lighting at this point. But this is of course a silly thing to ask for in a game that still looks last gen. Gameplay wise I didn't see much change, I'll be able to figure it out better once the Dream Team is back and I can pick Top Player.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom