• We've just been notified that Microsoft have applied a fix for our server allowing email delivery again to their email services. It may take 24-48 hours to propagate across their systems. Thanks for bearing with us!

The Retro-PES Corner

Tinker said:
Happy to hear this (don't mean your loss, of course but that you're enjoying this patch and OF).

The cool thing is that it is relatively easy to apply that Alex gameplay formula to any PES6 OF. And as you perfectly know there are plenty of great patches for that game. In theory every major tournament from Euro96 to WC2014 (that one still in development) has been authentically reproduced by Shahrudeen plus there are these CL playoff patches from 99 to 2003, so there is just too much to play.

Myself in the meantime I am slowly shifting to WE9, with the latest gameplay-improved exe by Kingsley ( https://evo-web.co.uk/threads/pes5-we9-we9-le-v5-1-improved-gameplay-beta-for-we9-pes5.76214/ ). Plays some really nice football and is quite an improvement from the original - this in case you'd like to consider returning to your great WE9 OF, that I'm by the way still playing, with tactics :))
Click to expand...

Wow thanks for that link!
I tried some WE9 with the new gameplay and my approximations of the WC 98 patch's global stat edits (is that Alex's formula? do you have a link?) and while it plays well it falls clearly short of the WC 98 patch for me. I haven't tried WE9 in months so I'm not sure what exactly the new gameplay does 🙈 (other than reading the changelog). Maybe it's because I played the game for such a long time that it's faults and kinks annoy me even more now, don't know. WC 98 players feel heavier which I like a lot. WE9 players are still too twitchy, even with the edits. And passing feels much better in WC 98, pass interceptions too.
I'll repost my OF with the edits and a few tactic updates in my thread in a few mins.

I think I'll stick with 98 for a minute, there a few teams I want to try out still. Then one of the other tournament patches I think.
 
breezy said:
What are the gameplay adjustments you're making? I love these tournament patches and am looking forward to the 2014 one when it's released.
Click to expand...

Tinker put me onto them. Maybe he can clarify the exact changes.
My guesstimate is this:

global:
ATK +5
BB -20
STA -5
TS -15
ACC -80
RES +5
AGI -45
DA -5
DS -15
SPA -15
SPS -10
ST +10
FKA +15
CUR +5
HEA -10
JMP -5


and then AFTER the global edits some position based stuff (i.e. registered position)

CF, SS, WG, AM - DEF +10
CWP, CB, DM, CM - DEF -10
CWP, CB - BB +20
SB, WB BB - +10
AM, WG, SS, CF - BB -5
GK - STA +25 (that one's my own)
SM, WG - DS +5
SM, WG - AGG +5
 
I will post the exact changes tomorrow, as the original Alex gameplay thread seems to be lost somewhere. Luckily I've managed to save the changes back then.
 
You know me -- magic :SHHH:

In all seriousness, I believe it's because of Alex1912's username -- you may not remember it has 1912 in it, and if you look for just "Alex" in the Members section he doesn't appear in the suggestions, but his account is still there (don't ask me why I remember about the 1912 part, that really is magic)
 
Searched for it everywhere time ago (before Tinker gently gave me the excel file with Alex formula)! Grande Ciais:APPLAUD:!
 
Well this formula and making those changes looks complicated :CONF::))

@Chenghis.Khan Are you using the Shad Ruudeen WC98 patch? The one with Chumbawumba and the 98 EA menu? If so, can you upload your option file to test?
 
Last edited:
Flipper the Priest said:
And Figo four years earlier. Although I'm only half-English and the football half of me wasn't so gutted!

That Figo goal was odd in that no-one ever seems to pay attention to the massive deflection it took. I'm one of those who thinks a deflection makes any goal ordinary. Even a fingertip from the keeper spoils the fun.
Click to expand...

Agreed 100%, the fact that Figo strike went right in the top corner with Seaman rooted gave it a good aesthetic value in real time. As soon as you see the replay and see it cannoned off of Tony Adams leg it makes the strike in terms of being a great goal completely redundant. Weird that people still think of that as a great goal, its a deflection by default in my mind it cant be a great goal. I understand that at certain times in a game a player may score a 'great' goal and people can question the validity of whether the player meant it or not. Examples like that Bergkamp goal against Newcastle, or that Ronaldinho free kick aginst England in 2002, but that is a completely different question, as in did they mean it or not? We may never know, but in those instances you have to give the player the benefit of the doubt, especially if they happen to be named Bergkamp, or Ronanldinho. With a substantial deflection though it's clear that the player (though obviously aiming for the back of the net) would not have meant the ball to end up where it does, given that if the strike had been left unimpeded by deflection, it would have been going in a completely different direction and on a completely different trajectory. Figo in this instance gets plaudits for his intention, and the fact he takes the strike, but it is not a great goal, because he did not deliberately deflect it off of Adams, it ended up in the top corner through pure fortune as much as anything else.

Which makes these contradictory lines from the BBC match report seem pretty farcical in my mind...

"It made no difference as a piece of individual Figo magic restored hope for the favourites after 22 minutes.

The electrifying midfielder broke straight up the middle of the pitch and fired the ball between the legs of Tony Adams, gaining a fortunate deflection that rattled into the top right corner of David Seaman's goal."
Click to expand...

The truly magical goal scored in that game, was the Steve Mcmanaman strike.... I jest, it was that Joao Pinto header, in terms of aesthetic value and execution of a skill that was about as good a header as you will ever see, very underated goal that is barely ever talked about, similar in a way to that Jared Borgetti header for Mexico (following a fantastic sequence of passes) against Italy in 2002 world cup, not that the goals are particularly similar, just that they are both great headers and great goals in their own right, but they arent really mentioned much.
 
mattmid said:
This is where the files are

The numbers are at the end of the required filename (more of that in a bit).

I don't know if you're familiar with any of the editing but you can put replacement sound files into the Kitserver/Dat/0_sound folder (if there isn't one in there then just make a new folder and call it 0_sound and that's a zero not a letter O just to clarify)

The files have to be in .adx format which you can do with PES sound file converter (you should find a link on here somewhere for that) That can convert a wav or mp3 file into the required adx format.

Once you've done that drop the file into the kitserver/dat/0_sound folder with the correct number for what one you want to replace. Best to just do one first and then start the game and make sure it's working. The edit one's ideal because that's just one tune, the main menu has a few different ones it plays at random.

They have to be named as follows: they can be named anything but MUST end with an underscore and then then the number. So for example if you chose to replace the song played during editing. It would be called songname_64.adx Of course you don't have to put the songs name that's up to you, you can call it Eric if you want :LOL:
Click to expand...

I finally got around to doing this and worked perfectly - just needed a .afs in the folder name (ie 0_sound.afs). Thanks!

For the aforementioned 98 World Cup patch, I put this banger in during the Cup menu and halftime (I was a FIFA guy for 98 and 98 WC only haha)

 
Chenghis.Khan said:
Wow thanks for that link!
I tried some WE9 with the new gameplay and my approximations of the WC 98 patch's global stat edits (is that Alex's formula? do you have a link?) and while it plays well it falls clearly short of the WC 98 patch for me. I haven't tried WE9 in months so I'm not sure what exactly the new gameplay does 🙈 (other than reading the changelog). Maybe it's because I played the game for such a long time that it's faults and kinks annoy me even more now, don't know. WC 98 players feel heavier which I like a lot. WE9 players are still too twitchy, even with the edits. And passing feels much better in WC 98, pass interceptions too.
I'll repost my OF with the edits and a few tactic updates in my thread in a few mins.

I think I'll stick with 98 for a minute, there a few teams I want to try out still. Then one of the other tournament patches I think.
Click to expand...

Kingsley's brings subtle changes - less AI pressing, better team shapes (now wing backs ir wingers fall back to a proper defending positions much better in defense for example), harder dribbling (I think). I like it.

On another matter, I'm not sure Alex gameplay sits well with WE9 (I haven't tried though). It was designed with PES6 in mind and tested exclusively for it. For my WE9 I use only one stat edit at the moment - Short Pass Speed -15. This, coupled with speeder value at 0.91 or 0.9, makes it very playable for me. In general, I think PES5/WE9 is better game than PES6 out of the box and it just needs to be slowed down, preferably without hurting already questionable AI attacking ability (it's telling that in comparison you need to apply such a complex formula to make PES6 decently enjoyable :)) ).
 
delapena23 said:
Agreed 100%, the fact that Figo strike went right in the top corner with Seaman rooted gave it a good aesthetic value in real time. As soon as you see the replay and see it cannoned off of Tony Adams leg it makes the strike in terms of being a great goal completely redundant. Weird that people still think of that as a great goal, its a deflection by default in my mind it cant be a great goal. I understand that at certain times in a game a player may score a 'great' goal and people can question the validity of whether the player meant it or not. Examples like that Bergkamp goal against Newcastle, or that Ronaldinho free kick aginst England in 2002, but that is a completely different question, as in did they mean it or not? We may never know, but in those instances you have to give the player the benefit of the doubt, especially if they happen to be named Bergkamp, or Ronanldinho. With a substantial deflection though it's clear that the player (though obviously aiming for the back of the net) would not have meant the ball to end up where it does, given that if the strike had been left unimpeded by deflection, it would have been going in a completely different direction and on a completely different trajectory. Figo in this instance gets plaudits for his intention, and the fact he takes the strike, but it is not a great goal, because he did not deliberately deflect it off of Adams, it ended up in the top corner through pure fortune as much as anything else.

Which makes these contradictory lines from the BBC match report seem pretty farcical in my mind...



The truly magical goal scored in that game, was the Steve Mcmanaman strike.... I jest, it was that Joao Pinto header, in terms of aesthetic value and execution of a skill that was about as good a header as you will ever see, very underated goal that is barely ever talked about, similar in a way to that Jared Borgetti header for Mexico (following a fantastic sequence of passes) against Italy in 2002 world cup, not that the goals are particularly similar, just that they are both great headers and great goals in their own right, but they arent really mentioned much.
Click to expand...

We're on identical wavelengths.

I actually read an article shortly after that post in which the writer suggested the identity of the scorer makes us less inclined to question a goal, focusing on that Figo goal and also citing the Bergkamp and Ronaldinho goals you mention, as well as Hagi's against Colombia in '94.

Another one is Messi's solo goal at the Bernabeu around 10 years ago. I remember being chided for pointing out that the shot wasn't even goalbound, and that if the goal wasn't off the back of such a great dribble or scored by such a brilliant player it'd be credited as an own goal. Ramos, if I remember correctly.

That Borgetti header is my favourite of all time from an aesthetic point of view. For 18 years I've been bringing it up in conversation, most recently last month in a WhatsApp group. To even consider it, let alone execute it, is impressive. Made all the better that it's Buffon who's left stranded.

Edit: the article I mentioned: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2009/jul/27/on-second-thoughts-luis-figo-goal
 
@Flipper the Priest which messi's goal are you talking about? The old solo one I always see him credited for the most is that against Getafe, and it looks clean. Can't remember this other!
 
Madmac79 said:
@Flipper the Priest which messi's goal are you talking about? The old solo one I always see him credited for the most is that against Getafe, and it looks clean. Can't remember this other!
Click to expand...

This one:



There's an angle (not in this video) which shows it more clearly.

Also sums up why I don't like Peter Drury. Smug, saccharin, mawkish nonsense.
 
Flipper the Priest said:
This one:



There's an angle (not in this video) which shows it more clearly.

Also sums up why I don't like Peter Drury. Smug, saccharin, mawkish nonsense.
Click to expand...


lol. I think you are a bit too strict. I had to slow it to 0.25 to appreciate the deviation and I'm still not sure I've seen it.

Not that I'm saying it isn't there, but I think you watch Messi dribbling Real defense that way and scoring live in a match watched by maybe hundred millions it probably comes natural to underline the great play rather than the deviation.
 
That article you linked was an enjoyable read, the Rob Hughes quote from the Sunday Times...

One moment captured the ballet of Portuguese football, and the emotions, too. It came with Figo's phenomenal opening goal. It was not just an example of force propelling the ball too fast for Adams to get out of the way, or for David Seaman to react to the flight. It was the inspiration, the vision from Figo. Even as he struck that shot, a figure clad in a grey suit danced near the touchline. This was Eusebio, the legend of Portuguese football.
Eusebio showed, on the playing fields of England during the 1966 World Cup, that football – real football – can indeed be a performing art in which genius can be expressed. Second only to Pele he could, at a stroke, turn a lost cause into triumph. He knew that Figo had delivered such a stroke.
Click to expand...

...is almost beyond parody, embarrassing in its attempt to shoehorn sentiment into describing what was essentially a piece of good fortune.

Also from that article...

As a consequence, we wanted it be a great goal. It is no coincidence that most of football's signature did-he-mean-that goals – Dennis Bergkamp at Newcastle, Gheorghe Hagi against Colombia, Ronaldinho against England – come from the game's greats. When mortals do it we know it was a fluke, or at least we think we know, but we unequivocally trust the word of genius. Never mind luck; great footballers also make their own judgment.
Click to expand...

...I think the reality is that we do all question these goals and whether or not they were meant because even great goals that end with not so great finishes are still judged as great goals, ones that finish off great passing moves that are packed full of precision for instance. You wouldn't say 'thats a great finish' but you would still call it a 'great goal'. Whereas with these individual strikes from distance they could be construed as overhit crosses rather than lobs, it is really difficult to decipher if the player actually meant it or not given the fact that players (even the most cultured) are prone to overhitting a cross from time to time, not everything they touch ends in precision. If I am honest my instinct is to say that Hagi goal and more so that Ronaldinho goal were both flukes, that is my initial impression of them, and like that article suggests if those goals had come from the foot of a Nigel Winterburn then they would be written off as wayward crosses that got lucky as opposed to being hailed as a great goal.

The Bergkamp goal is a bit different in terms of even if he did not intend to do exactly what he ended up doing, his quick thinking in the moment deserves credit either way, in terms of improvisation whether he intended what he executed 100% from start to finish, or he mistimed his original touch and then improvised, you can still respect the quick thinking and level of improvsation, it's a great goal either way, it is elevated to potentially the best goal of all time if you believe he intented exactly what he executed from the moment the ball is in his vicinity. The thing with Bergkamp is the way he instantaneously reacts moving in sync with the ball and understanding what is required in the moment, making several quick decisions in succession as opposed to just one motion as in shooting or crossing towards goal (like the Hagi or Ronaldinho goals). As that article insinuates I can not deny that I am much more inclined to believing he meant it from start to finish because of the cerebral player he was, but that's not because I think everything he touched is gold, it's just because I want to believe he meant it, despite my critical mind doubting it. That Van Basten volley against USSR in Euro 88, did he mean that? I guess he did, and he had the ability to pull it off but try it 100 times how many times would he execute it? Same thing for the Bergkamp goal is true, except his intention is not as apparent as Van Basten's, which arguably means it is better as it was so unexpected. The enigmatic nature of a discussion like this is as frustrating as it is indulgent due to the fact that we will never know for sure.

That all said, at the time I was very sceptical about whehter Bergkamp meant it or not, the truth is we will never know, but I think as cynical as I am, to some degree you have to recognise that Hagi, Ronaldinho and Bergkamp did show time and time again that they were capable of great feats on the football pitch and therefore if they say they meant it, then we have to give them the benefit of the doubt, because if we can't trust these type of players who conclusively down the years proved their ability to produce sublime moments that exuded a masterful level of panache, then who the hell can we trust? Cos we sure as shit would not trust Nigel Winterburn despite that bizzaro world goal he scored against Chelsea that time, so through (admittedly) gritted teeth I have accepted that Ronaldinho goal and that Hagi goal and that Bergkamp goal as goals that were meant.


Also sums up why I don't like Peter Drury. Smug, saccharin, mawkish nonsense.
Click to expand...

On the subject of commentators we were blessed in the 90's, for me it's in order Brian Moore, Peter Brackley, Barry Davies, marks me out as a child of the 90's i suppose. I'm not a fan of Motson. I heard ITV have promoted Matterface to be their prime time commentator over Tyldesley, not that I am a big fan of Clive but I think he surpasses Matterface by a country mile. Talking of Peter Drury and his mawkish shtick that Manolas goal for Roma against Barca a couple years back was something else, for some reason that was credited in certain places as great commentary, to me it was pretty cringeworthy, to each their own i guess.
 
breezy said:
Well this formula and making those changes looks complicated :CONF::))

@Chenghis.Khan Are you using the Shad Ruudeen WC98 patch? The one with Chumbawumba and the 98 EA menu? If so, can you upload your option file to test?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think that's the one but honestly I just play whatever Tinker links me :LOL:
I attached the OF.
I originally got it from Tinker and made some tactic and stat edits, mostly for the big teams.

EA FIFA WC 98 was my 1st ever footie game, good memories.

Tinker said:
Kingsley's brings subtle changes - less AI pressing, better team shapes (now wing backs ir wingers fall back to a proper defending positions much better in defense for example), harder dribbling (I think). I like it.

On another matter, I'm not sure Alex gameplay sits well with WE9 (I haven't tried though). It was designed with PES6 in mind and tested exclusively for it. For my WE9 I use only one stat edit at the moment - Short Pass Speed -15. This, coupled with speeder value at 0.91 or 0.9, makes it very playable for me. In general, I think PES5/WE9 is better game than PES6 out of the box and it just needs to be slowed down, preferably without hurting already questionable AI attacking ability (it's telling that in comparison you need to apply such a complex formula to make PES6 decently enjoyable :)) ).
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info.
6* AI definitely presses a bit more relaxed which is a good thing. Now I'm also noticing teams withdrawing into defensive shape, nice.
I tried it a bit simpler and yes I don't think many of the complicated changes are necessary.
I still want these for aesthetics:
ACC -60
DS -15
SPS -15
LPS -15 (this one is amazing, finally some lofted balls and not always those overhit zingers)

The ACC reduction poses a bit of a problem as it negatively impacts defensive reactions (slower closing down) and thus it's a bit easier to pass through teams. Still not sure how to deal with it.

And then some gameplay ones.
I love alex's BB changes, making defensive players much stronger than attacking ones, so it's harder to keep the ball which I find fair considering dribbling and turning is still too easy.
Right now I play with these:

BB:-30, then only for GK: +30, only CBT and CWP: +20, only SB +12, only
DM: +8, only WB: +6, only CM: +4 /
for all except GK: +5,then only for GK: -50% [alex1912 formula]

[GK only] STA +20
ST +10 (really like it, also helps AI)
FKA +20% [alex1912 formula]
CUR +10% [alex1912 formula]
HEA +10 (had this for years)
TW +10
[SB, WB] AGG +5

Gameplay feels good with these but I haven't payed too much attention to AI attacking performance yet.
 

Attachments

Madmac79 said:
lol. I think you are a bit too strict. I had to slow it to 0.25 to appreciate the deviation and I'm still not sure I've seen it.

Not that I'm saying it isn't there, but I think you watch Messi dribbling Real defense that way and scoring live in a match watched by maybe hundred millions it probably comes natural to underline the great play rather than the deviation.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong: I was wowed by the run and finish at first, but when I saw the replay from that certain angle (found it here, 45 seconds in) I remarked that it was an own goal and almost got hounded out the pub. The finish doesn't diminish the brilliance that preceded it, but at the end of the day the shot could be going out for a throw in meaning the goal - all things considered - shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as his individual goals against Getafe and, especially, Bayern.

delapena23 said:
I think the reality is that we do all question these goals and whether or not they were meant because even great goals that end with not so great finishes are still judged as great goals, ones that finish off great passing moves that are packed full of precision for instance. You wouldn't say 'thats a great finish' but you would still call it a 'great goal'. Whereas with these individual strikes from distance they could be construed as overhit crosses rather than lobs, it is really difficult to decipher if the player actually meant it or not given the fact that players (even the most cultured) are prone to overhitting a cross from time to time, not everything they touch ends in precision. If I am honest my instinct is to say that Hagi goal and more so that Ronaldinho goal were both flukes, that is my initial impression of them, and like that article suggests if those goals had come from the foot of a Nigel Winterburn then they would be written off as wayward crosses that got lucky as opposed to being hailed as a great goal.

The Bergkamp goal is a bit different in terms of even if he did not intend to do exactly what he ended up doing, his quick thinking in the moment deserves credit either way, in terms of improvisation whether he intended what he executed 100% from start to finish, or he mistimed his original touch and then improvised, you can still respect the quick thinking and level of improvsation, it's a great goal either way, it is elevated to potentially the best goal of all time if you believe he intented exactly what he executed from the moment the ball is in his vicinity. The thing with Bergkamp is the way he instantaneously reacts moving in sync with the ball and understanding what is required in the moment, making several quick decisions in succession as opposed to just one motion as in shooting or crossing towards goal (like the Hagi or Ronaldinho goals). As that article insinuates I can not deny that I am much more inclined to believing he meant it from start to finish because of the cerebral player he was, but that's not because I think everything he touched is gold, it's just because I want to believe he meant it, despite my critical mind doubting it. That Van Basten volley against USSR in Euro 88, did he mean that? I guess he did, and he had the ability to pull it off but try it 100 times how many times would he execute it? Same thing for the Bergkamp goal is true, except his intention is not as apparent as Van Basten's, which arguably means it is better as it was so unexpected. The enigmatic nature of a discussion like this is as frustrating as it is indulgent due to the fact that we will never know for sure.

That all said, at the time I was very sceptical about whehter Bergkamp meant it or not, the truth is we will never know, but I think as cynical as I am, to some degree you have to recognise that Hagi, Ronaldinho and Bergkamp did show time and time again that they were capable of great feats on the football pitch and therefore if they say they meant it, then we have to give them the benefit of the doubt, because if we can't trust these type of players who conclusively down the years proved their ability to produce sublime moments that exuded a masterful level of panache, then who the hell can we trust? Cos we sure as shit would not trust Nigel Winterburn despite that bizzaro world goal he scored against Chelsea that time, so through (admittedly) gritted teeth I have accepted that Ronaldinho goal and that Hagi goal and that Bergkamp goal as goals that were meant.




On the subject of commentators we were blessed in the 90's, for me it's in order Brian Moore, Peter Brackley, Barry Davies, marks me out as a child of the 90's i suppose. I'm not a fan of Motson. I heard ITV have promoted Matterface to be their prime time commentator over Tyldesley, not that I am a big fan of Clive but I think he surpasses Matterface by a country mile. Talking of Peter Drury and his mawkish shtick that Manolas goal for Roma against Barca a couple years back was something else, for some reason that was credited in certain places as great commentary, to me it was pretty cringeworthy, to each their own i guess.
Click to expand...

I have no advance on your observations on goals, great or otherwise. Well put and I agree wholeheartedly!

Barry Davies was a fine, fine commentator. Passionate yet understated - the perfect combination. See: Bergkamp against Argentina. Yes, that Manolas goal was Drury at his very worst. I was shocked to hear it go viral, and it's looked to have propelled him up the ladder of the commentary world. So over the top. He makes football out to be more important than it actually is, which is an awful trait in a commentary. As is the statistician. My fellow Aberdonians Graham Hunter and Derek Rae fall into those respective categories. Another Don, Liam MacLeod (BBC Scotland) is an excellent commentator and deserves to move up the BBC ranks. Always thought that Dave Farrar is vastly underrated, too.

delapena23 said:
Absolute perfection. Love goals like that, love trying to lob or chip the keeper on PES too, always mistiming it through one on one.



Lovely one from Bergkamp.
Click to expand...


The chip is becoming a relic. Keepers are getting taller, faster and more agile; attackers less maverick. It's a shame because they're so pleasing on the eye. My favourite type of goal to score in real life, too.
 
Anyway, PES.

Splashing around in WE6:FE is giving me tremendous joy. It really is excellent, with the best of PES2 and PES3.

Armed with Google Translate's camera function, I think it's worth a Master League after I've edited the player names...
 
@Chenghis.Khan I was initially skeptical about this patch but I played a quick couple of halves, one with France and one with Brazil, and the player's individualities stood out. Zidane also felt the most "Zidaney" I've ever really felt from a video game - great control but also awkward with his stride like a baby giraffe.

Is this the real game play or the Alex1912 gameplay adjustments? Do you have these OFs adjusted for the other World Cup patches?
 
breezy said:
@Chenghis.Khan I was initially skeptical about this patch but I played a quick couple of halves, one with France and one with Brazil, and the player's individualities stood out. Zidane also felt the most "Zidaney" I've ever really felt from a video game - great control but also awkward with his stride like a baby giraffe.

Is this the real game play or the Alex1912 gameplay adjustments? Do you have these OFs adjusted for the other World Cup patches?
Click to expand...

It's a myth that if you decrease (intelligently) stats, you lose individuality. Don't forget these games, as much as we appreciate them, still had their arcady part to appeal the masses. Sometimes you can even enhance individuality - as you noticed with Zizou.

These are Alex1912 adjustments. First, you apply real game play edits to your default OF and after, Alex ones. From other tournaments I think I have Euro 2004 OF. But to apply these to any PES6 OF is not that hard - you need to spend like 10 minutes with PES Editor and that's it.
 
Hello guys!
It took a long time but I finished the second season of the Master League at the helm of Juventus. I obviously speak of my save of PES 5.
Nothing to do...Milan has won all but two games, and moreover it eliminated me in the UCL quarterfinals with the usual Pippo Inzaghi.
I ended the season without titles and then I decided to make a small revolution: no more 4-4-2, it will be played with 4-3-1-2.
To contend for the role of playmaker in Nedved there will be Pablito Aimar, Kallstrom will be another alternative in the median and Maxwell will alternate with Chiellini.
The most important move, however, was an equal exchange: Ibrahimovic for Fernando Torres.
I would like to show you some clips but for some reason they have not been saved!

Anyway...
A.C Milan: may the best win :COOL:
 
So here's a question. I'm, sadly, trying to recreate those old times of firing up old-school PES with friends.

Would anybody on PC be up for trying a few online friendlies one night?

Your choice of... (You don't need to install them - read on!)

PES3 (The Wolf EPL & CL Patch 04/05)
PES5 (FLS Patch 05/06)
PES6 (World Cup 98 Patch)*
WE9LE (Geezer 05/06 Patch)
PES 2012
PES 2013
PES 2014

*This is my preference, it is an absolutely fantastic patch and game. :D

You'd have to download Parsec and make an account, which is a game sharing platform that I find works really well in my experiments so far (I've got a long-distance FIFA career mode going with friends, complete with voice chat thanks to Discord).

You also need a controller that will connect to the PC - if you've got a PS4 controller it's as easy as hooking it up to the PC with a cable (which has to stay in) and, potentially, running Steam in the background (which provides controller support). I think it's the same with Xbox One controllers (without the need for Steam) but I could be wrong...

Give me a shout if you're interested in giving it a go - I've not tried it with the old PES games yet so it could be great, it could be a disaster... But I'd love to take these games for a spin against another human again.
 
Last edited:
Chris Davies said:
So here's a question. I'm, sadly, trying to recreate those old times of firing up old-school PES with friends.

Would anybody on PC be up for trying a few online friendlies one night? Your choice of...

PES3 (The Wolf EPL & CL Patch 04/05)
PES5 (FLS Patch 05/06)
PES6 (World Cup 98 Patch)*
WE9LE (Geezer 05/06 Patch)

*This is my preference, it is an absolutely fantastic patch and game. :D

You'd have to download Parsec and make an account, which is a game sharing platform that I find works really well in my experiments so far (I've got a long-distance FIFA career mode going with friends, complete with voice chat thanks to Discord).

You also need a controller that will connect to the PC - if you've got a PS4 controller it's as easy as hooking it up to the PC with a cable (which has to stay in) and, potentially, running Steam in the background (which provides controller support). I think it's the same with Xbox One controllers (without the need for Steam) but I could be wrong...

Give me a shout if you're interested in giving it a go - I've not tried it with the old PES games yet so it could be great, it could be a disaster... But I'd love to take these games for a spin against another human again.
Click to expand...
I'd give that a go one night for sure. I have all of those games but none of those patch versions haha. I can look for them in the Sany thread though presumably?
WC 98 does sound good even though pes6 is my least favourite of those 4 games. I have fond memories of that tournament.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom