Is the 'community' isolating the majority ?

To begin with, I'd like to just say I am merely opening this up for sensible debate. I'm only giving observations as opposed to criticisms.

FM has an outstanding, loyal on-line 'community', and there's no doubting that the input from them has driven the game forward positively over the years.

I think I'm right in saying that over time some people have become 'testers' so that they can try the game out before it's released and give feedback to SI as the game is being developed. There are also those posters on forums that dedicate time to compiling 'tactical bibles' for the benefit of the community to help them gain a better understanding of the game, and then on top of that various other articles, tests and advice are offered on FM forums.

My belief is that for a long time, all of this was extremely beneficial. To SI, the community and everyone else that plays FM. But is it now reaching a point where the average Joe outside of the community is being isolated ?

I know loads and loads of FM players. Or at least I did. All of my mates that play FM bought 09 as usual when it came out.......but now, I'm the only one that's still showing any interest. I reckon that's because I'm the only one I know of that reads the on-line FM forums in an attempt to find pieces of advice that might just get me on track. And that puts me in the minority, because lets be honest, those that use on-line forums are in a tiny minority. I would say at least half of my mates don't even bother going on-line to get the 'patch' updates, never mind read the forums.

They don't want to read an 18,000 word 'tactical bible'. They don't want to spend ages fishing through forums, looking for relevant articles and advice that matches their queries. And they don't want to do things like watch a full match, 90 minute friendly, just to see if the finer details of their tactics are working properly. And can you blame them ? I know a lot of people are willing to do that, but the majority simply aren't.

In my view, in an attempt to become even more realistic, the ever increasing complexities of the game has made it more unrealistic. After years of positive improvement, I actually think FM is on a downward curve. As much as some of us like to think every piece of input a manager makes is crucial.......in reality, sometimes it's just all about having 11 players that are better than theirs in every position when the gulf in class is so big (Man United v Stoke, Rangers v Hamilton....etc). I'm not saying the big sides should win every time, but statistically, 99 times out of 100, the stats will favour them in real life against teams substantially weaker (shots, possession, etc), because their players are so superior, even if ultimately they don't win 99 times out of 100. But in my view this is one area where FM09 doesn't reflect reality.

To go back to the question of 'is the community isolating the majority'........is there a chance that because SI are largely getting their feedback from the community, that this is why the game is becoming too 'complex' or 'fiddly' for some ? A 'tester' will know the game inside out, so will keep wanting the game to get harder. As will the community who read the bibles, articles and advice to a point where they too know how to 'crack' the game.

But is the game getting harder actually meaning that SI are effectively simulating football management ? For me, no. Just because the game is harder, doesn't mean it's more realistic. Ultimately, a game can never get all that close to what it's really like to be a football manager. Making the odd notch on a slider the difference between winning and losing is really just turning FM more into a puzzle game, rather than an attempt at a real life simulation. "Oi, Rooney, mentality 13 mate ! You keep playing at 15 and you'll be leaving too big a gap between the midfield and attack, and Hull will be all over us like a tramp eating soup !"

I think SI need to continue to take on board the views of the fantastic community they have, and the hardwork and dedication of the 'testers'. But they also can't afford to neglect the majority of their market, the average joe who picks it off the shelf with no intention of ever reading a 'bible' in his life ! Because if they do that, they'll soon lose a heck of a lot of their market, particularly with CM expected to stride forward, and FIFA having the capability to improve their attempts.

I honestly think there are a large chunk of FM users out there that will give FM10 a chance......but if it's similar to FM09, they'll walk away and probably never go back.

Very interested to read the views of others on this subject. Cheers.

I think the trouble with the tactics is the lack of any decent tactics for people to use when starting the game, the default tactics are awful from my experiences. I think that surely the people that create the game should include some decent starting tactics for people that don want to read loads of stuff on these forums. A couple of my mates bought the game but they dont use the internet very often adn have found it very hard to make a working tactic and they havent played FM09 at all compared to the hours and hours they spent on FM07. Default tactics need to be improved in my opinion.

I think you are making very good points, I know I didn't get patches for lots of the earlier versions, thankfully they weren't so bugged, because I didn't have a clue about this site.

You also see it in the way some newbie on here will complain about the difficulty and some regular users say, its you tactics, read the TTF Bible etc.

P.S. love

"Oi, Rooney, mentality 13 mate ! You keep playing at 15 and you'll be leaving too big a gap between the midfield and attack, and Hull will be all over us like a tramp eating soup !"

I totally disagree that the added complexity of FM has made it less realistic. I believe the game is more in depth than it ever has been. I also agree, however that a lot of people don't want to go fishing around for tactical bibles; they just want to play. Many do though. Your friends are a tiny proportion of that market so you can't really make a basis on their feelings. I know people that play FM that wouldn't go anywhere near the forums but still happily dawdle along in their own little games.

Over the years I don't really think that FM has become harder. It's become more complex and there are more things to concern yourself with, but it's still as straightforward to put together a winning season as it has ever been. I've used the same tactic since day one of my current save game. I've had no need to change it because it works. If I move on to a new club I will probably pick a tactic that works there and keep that one for three years.

I've never, also, watched a full 90 minute match in order to check the finer points of my tactics. I've thought about, but I never did. As for the tactics bibles, well I scanned through them for an hours or so when I was struggling to get into the game. The small snippets I pulled out helped me immensely

Lastly, why does everyone that complains about the complexity of FM hark back to the mentality? This has been in FM for a while now, but only now does it really have any bearing. Is this the point that makes the game so hard for everyone? That was the major point I pulled out of the tactics bibles within 15 minutes of reading, and that has been the basis of my on-going tactic.

Teams play with mentalities. There may be a larger degree of crossover in the real world but FMs take on it is not really that hard to get to grips with. Just keep your gaps small. It makes sense to me that Bournemouth wouldn't play a defensive formation with Brett Pitman playing out and out attack and never seeing the ball closer than 25 feet away. He'd drop back.

It's nice to see you flesh out a well worded post with good observations, but I personally feel you're barking up the wrong tree. FM will always maintain a solid market. The only thing that could possibly stop it is the rise of CM. And, of course, I have stated before that my belief is CM will make SI look at whether they have started to get complacent. I don't think they can avoid not being so.

I think the trouble with the tactics is the lack of any decent tactics for people to use when starting the game, the default tactics are awful from my experiences. I think that surely the people that create the game should include some decent starting tactics for people that don want to read loads of stuff on these forums. A couple of my mates bought the game but they dont use the internet very often adn have found it very hard to make a working tactic and they havent played FM09 at all compared to the hours and hours they spent on FM07. Default tactics need to be improved in my opinion.

I think you are right on here.

well i think fm is now falling apart .

they have tryed to much in my few to change

the tactics set up is all wrong

your right many gamers dont even come on forums to read up on tactics

they just wanna play the game without fuss

and with the new look cm2009 coming out with new 3d and a much better tactic set up going back to the early cm tactics look

means a lot off fm players will move to cm

fm has had its day

it was good from fm2005 to fm2007

but has droped away since

and because we didnt have anything els we kept buying it

but now with the new re look cm things will now change

fm2009 has been a real killer for fm .

us has customers have now has enough

far too many bugs which hasnt change from fm2008 to fm2009

in my few fm2009 was nowhere near ready to come on the market and still isnt

i cant see the new patch changeing much aswell

Fantastic OP, respect to you! I'll add my two cents!

I think I'm right in saying that over time some people have become 'testers' so that they can try the game out before it's released and give feedback to SI as the game is being developed. There are also those posters on forums that dedicate time to compiling 'tactical bibles' for the benefit of the community to help them gain a better understanding of the game, and then on top of that various other articles, tests and advice are offered on FM forums.

My belief is that for a long time, all of this was extremely beneficial. To SI, the community and everyone else that plays FM. But is it now reaching a point where the average Joe outside of the community is being isolated ?

I think for me the major point to make here is that the 'community testers' are all doing it for the benefit of the game and not for any financial gain. However they are all 'Average Joes' some will want the hardest game possible, others would prefer it to be easier.Not all of the testers want the same thing as each other or SI.

I know loads and loads of FM players. Or at least I did. All of my mates that play FM bought 09 as usual when it came out.......but now, I'm the only one that's still showing any interest. I reckon that's because I'm the only one I know of that reads the on-line FM forums in an attempt to find pieces of advice that might just get me on track. And that puts me in the minority, because lets be honest, those that use on-line forums are in a tiny minority. I would say at least half of my mates don't even bother going on-line to get the 'patch' updates, never mind read the forums.

I understand this as I think FM07 was the first time I even realised patches were available. As such I can understand the reaction of anyone who stops playing the game because they don't like it, especially if they are playing 'straight out of the box'

sometimes it's just all about having 11 players that are better than theirs in every position when the gulf in class is so big (Man United v Stoke, Rangers v Hamilton....etc). I'm not saying the big sides should win every time, but statistically, 99 times out of 100, the stats will favour them in real life against teams substantially weaker (shots, possession, etc), because their players are so superior, even if ultimately they don't win 99 times out of 100.

I simply dont agree with this, even Rangers v Hamilton, I cannot believe Walter Smith would send his team out without tactical instraction. Even if it is minimal. The problem translating this into FM is that the game needs to know what settings you wish to use. It would be fairly tough to get the game to go ahead without all the instructions just because yor team would be expected to win 99 times out of 100.

there a chance that because SI are largely getting their feedback from the community, that this is why the game is becoming too 'complex' or 'fiddly' for some ? A 'tester' will know the game inside out

This may be true of the paid testers, but not for the 'average joe' testers. I certainly don't know the game inside out, and I was a tester until I withdrew due to lack of time to test.

But is the game getting harder actually meaning that SI are effectively simulating football management ? For me, no. Just because the game is harder, doesn't mean it's more realistic.

Totally agree here, FM09 is very hard in my opinion, having spent upwards of 40 hours on tactics I still wasn't happy with them. As a result I have found myself playing 08 again.

Making the odd notch on a slider the difference between winning and losing is really just turning FM more into a puzzle game, rather than an attempt at a real life simulation. "Oi, Rooney, mentality 13 mate ! You keep playing at 15 and you'll be leaving too big a gap between the midfield and attack, and Hull will be all over us like a tramp eating soup !"

I think here the issue is too many slider notches, I think half the number would be acceptable. I also struggle with understanding the difference between say 14 and 15.

I think that the OP has some vaild points, but I think this year the game is probably a little harder than last years one. You can't really do alot about that till the next version.

However, if we label FM as a strategy game, and then look at other strategy games Fm follows the pattern.

If we look at something like Civilization 4, there are lots of forums with indepth guides. But how many people do you think use them? The general majority will play the game without ever looking at them. The same can be said with FM.

I'd agree there are somethings which aren't realistic/ are too complex and stop people playing the game. However if you want a realistic game things are going to be complex.

EDIT: Oh and I do think that SI should make the game automatically start downloading a patch when a new one comes out just to make people aware of it. Obviously there would be a cancel button though.

I think the OP has made some good points, i played the original cm's and fm 2005 and until now had never even considered looking online for guides of how to play it. Also the fact that i had to go online and get patches just to be able to get the game to start is not right for a shop bought product. But saying that i have still enjoyed playing the game even though it took several attempts before i had anything that could be considered a successful season.

I think the debacle that was the launch of FM09 will really hurt SI/Sega with FM10.

Its very difficult to balance the game between the hard core fans and the playability angle that alot of people want. It has been discussed various times about having a difficulty level and although there are pros and cons of this I feel it will never happen. The game overall I feel is sufficient and has been improved, personally I don't find it extremely hard but it is hard enough to make it interesting. However if SI/Sega ever launch a game in such an incompetent way again as they did FM09 then they are in huge trouble. The compatability of the game with PC's, the activation incompetency, and the continued unstability of the games on some PC's was and still is a complete and utter debacle.

I completely agree with GersFan. I have played CM/FM for years and I have found that the last couple of releases in particular have really started to go down the more complex route in terms of the match engine and the countless different variables that combine to form a tactic these days.

I dont play a huge amount of games so feel free to prove me wrong but i really dont think there are many games around that require huge amounts of research and tweeking/testing before you can actually play the game and enjoy it.

I think its a bit unfair on 'average joes' that they need to sit down and study the various settings on a tactic and their implications if you do or do not choose a certain passing style or tempo or width or mentality or closing down setting or defensive line.......

At the end of the day this is a game. You should be able to buy it, install it, off you go on your managerial career. Not buy it, install it, study manuals & forums for hours and then see if you can translate the information overload you just experienced into a tactic.

It reminds me of a free download game i played years ago called americas army (or american army i cant remember). The game made you go through this ludicrous training camp where you had to learn how to shoot your rifle, learn about the different enemy vehicles and weapons and even learn how to treat a wounded soldier before you could play. If you didnt pass the exams at the end of each section you had to repeat them.

Now some people may have thought that was an excellent addition to a game but the majority of people who came across this game thought it was a farce.

I just feel the search for the most ultimately realistic managerial game is coming at the expense of casual gamers. The game imo is slowly but surely moving away from being a game and more like a managerial simulator.

To be honest, there are other games on the market that are far less in-depth, complex etc. If FM has outgrown the "average joe" then so be it. Sales are still strong, it's just going for a more specific crowd.

It's SIs call on whether they're happy with this direction, and given the constant focus on realism, I don't see that focus changing any time soon.

At the end of the day this is a game. You should be able to buy it, install it, off you go on your managerial career. Not buy it, install it, study manuals & forums for hours and then see if you can translate the information overload you just experienced into a tactic.

I totally disagree, just because it's a game doesn't mean it shouldn't be complex. There are plenty of other games on the market in other genres that are just as complex and you can't just pick up and get on with.

To be honest, there are other games on the market that are far less in-depth, complex etc. If FM has outgrown the "average joe" then so be it. Sales are still strong, it's just going for a more specific crowd.

It's SIs call on whether they're happy with this direction, and given the constant focus on realism, I don't see that focus changing any time soon.

I totally disagree, just because it's a game doesn't mean it shouldn't be complex. There are plenty of other games on the market in other genres that are just as complex and you can't just pick up and get on with.

Your comment about FM outgrowing 'average joes' is your opinion and thats fine but if SI are thinking in a similar way i'd be concerned for the future of this product. I wouldnt consider myself a pro at this game but i would consider myself a long time follower of the game and if SI are starting to alienate some of their loyal supporters sales will start to decline drastically. If some of their longterm supporters find the game is getting too complex how do you think brand new buyers of this entire series will feel?

I'm not saying the game should be made simple but there is a fine line between a difficult game and a game that isnt enjoyable unless you take the time to study the ins and outs of every aspect of the game.

I would argue that the community is the majority.

When any game is released regardless of the genre, there will always be consumers that buy a game because of how it was marketed or because they think it will appeal to them etc.

You will always see a large chunk of people stop playing the game after a certain amount of time due to varying reasons.

I would think SI or any other developer try to appeal to both. I.e. n SI's case an in depth strategy simulation that appeals to their loyal fan base and a successfully marketed release that will shift units.

I would expect that over time the 'community' would grow and I am sure this would be the case with FM.

By SI listening to this growing community and giving them what they want in future releases they are creating a successful series.

Therefore the fact that the series has continued its curve towards adding realism and continued to grow means that they are appealing to the majority.

The trick for SI is to continue to grow the community and I think that they probably are.

As a gamer for 15 years but one that has never owned an FM game I decided to buy FM09 based on seeing it advertised on Steam.

I personally didn't find it so technically challenging that I couldn't get into it without the benefit of playing earlier versions. I merely found it fun to play and looked towards the community for tips on making my experience better.

Thus +1 for the community.

I appreciate that their would be others that may not do this and some may struggle with the game and simply stop playing altogether but I would think that would happen with any game. What’s meat for one is poison for another etc.

As long as the community continues to grow and SI keeps on listening then the game will continue to evolve in the direction the majority want.

Your comment about FM outgrowing 'average joes' is your opinion and thats fine but if SI are thinking in a similar way i'd be concerned for the future of this product. I wouldnt consider myself a pro at this game but i would consider myself a long time follower of the game and if SI are starting to alienate some of their loyal supporters sales will start to decline drastically. If some of their longterm supporters find the game is getting too complex how do you think brand new buyers of this entire series will feel?

I'm not saying the game should be made simple but there is a fine line between a difficult game and a game that isnt enjoyable unless you take the time to study the ins and outs of every aspect of the game.

The thing is people have been saying it's been getting more complex every year for the last 4 years, and still sales have been strong. I have no doubt that SI look at sales figures, combined with public opinion and reviews of their product. If sales start to slip it's their call if they think it's because they've alienated their fanbase or not.

The best comparison to another game I can think of it the wonderful world of Civilization, which whilst having the same core as the series has gone on has ultimately got more and more complex yet still sells really big.

You under-estimate the youth of today and what they can pick up, what might seem more complex to a loyal fan of the series might not to a new 15 year old trying it out for the first time.

I would also like to add that I think online gamers represent a significantly high proportion of PC gamers, if you regularly play PC games on your PC, there's a good chance that you are pretty in tune with the internet. Most gamers away from the net and "average joes" tend to be console gamers.

As Trux said, the community here grows with each new version of the game as mroe and more people register, and it's a sign of the times that people are looking around for guidse and hints and tips to play complex games.

The PC gaming industry has moved forward, I think some older FM players are having trouble adapting to that.

The complexity of Football Manager hasn't stopped Football Manager selling in big numbers. I don't actually see the complexity as a major problem, that may be because I don't take the game that seriously but I do not see it as a problem.

Members of Sports Interactive are constantly on these boards; they see all of the complaint threads and I am sure they take a long look at them. They want us to be pleased with our product and that is why they put such a lot of time in to do that.

My final point, or question is; isn't Football Manager known as an accomplished management simulation and isn't that why we all play it? It frustrates the hell out of us on occasion but the majority of us still go back. I suppose it is like a puzzle, but isn't it like that for managers. An example right now is the Fulham game; the Swansea manager now has to work out how to play in the second half and how to keep the team going after they desimated Fulham. Now that isn't too different to the propisitions we face in Football Manager, we have to make choices.

We could go and play other simulations like Championship Manager and Fifa Manager, but we would come back to Football Manager for the realism... And with realism, comes complexity.

The gist from the OP's post is that he feels the game has evolved into something too difficult and complex and he feels that is predominantly down to the tactical system. Am I right to say that?

If that were to case, and indeed if this is what a good majority of the 'loyal' fanbase want, do know that SI are not thick-headed and do not take your views and opinions into account.

There have been quite a few threads like this previously, and this particular one ran up to 247 posts long so there is some pointers you can take from it: http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=95463&highlight=sliders

Pay special attention to post #64 where PaulC says the following:

For me personally the most important thing we can do for the next version is make tactics more intuitive for those who dont want to go into detail with sliders etc.

We are in the process of discussing this internally and hopefully you''ll see the benefits in the near future.

Moreover, I think in actuality the good majority of the 'loyal' fanbase do not want an easier game, as opposed to the current claims that the latest edition of FM is a 'harder' game than its predecessors. They want a more intuitive game.

There is a major difference between the two.

'Easier' would more than likely lead to waning interest in the game due to boredom. Remove the proper challenges and realism and you could end up with an arcade game where you can do just about anything without careful consideration and still succeed in the long run. Then there would be floods of "Where is the realism/challenge?" posts on the forums, lambasting SI for their 'shoddy work' yet again.

'More intuitive' would more than likely lead to more gamers being able to enjoy the game without making reading guides a pre-requisite. Win or lose, you would be able to perceive where your team went right or wrong and make the necessary adjustments without having to first decipher exactly what does those settings in the tactics screen mean.

But realism and all the necessary complexity that it brings, should always remain a part of FM as it had always been a flagstone of the FM series.

People want to win games, but they want to feel like they've earned the right to win them.

It's a good thought, however I'm a more casual player- most of my posts on these forums came in the FM Live forum- and I've had my most successful game ever. I've not read the tactical theorem thingy, I've barely changed anything tactical, and my only download has been the 9.2 patch.

Despite this I'm having a very enjoyable Preston game- 9 seasons in now. It's not more difficult, in my opinion- but it CAN look that way if people see 18,000 word guides and think that not reading it is why they're not successful. Nobody wants to feel obliged to read something like that to enjoy a game.

It's complex, and we like that, but to be blunt a player can leave the training, press conferences and even the contracts to his Assistant and still be very successful, even with a small side. The complexity is there for those that want it, but it doesn;t have to be tapped into to enjoy the game.

People want to win games, but they want to feel like they've earned the right to win them.

exactly.

altough game manual should have some hint and tips or tactical intructions that explains things. people should need to be online and download alot of patches, fixes,read tactics forums to get MAN U to win.

game needs balancing or difficulty options imo.

I'm of the opinion that the game needs to be made harder, but at the same time more assistance needs to be offered to the player - once your team has clicked the game can become easy, however getting to that point or getting back can be a struggle as the game doesn't always make it clear what is wrong.

The advisor and assistant manager feedback systems are a good start. The assistant feedback could do with being extended to the tactics page outside of matches - so when you prepare your tactic outside of a match he can give you the same kind of feedback as in matches - and possibly explain how to fix the problem (so instead of just saying the gap is too big give a suggestion on how to fix the gap)

The tactics sliders themselves aren't bad, the game needs to feedback what they mean/do better either through description or has been suggested in the past graphical, they also need to feedback when they affect other instructions - something like a global setting which whilst you cannot adjust is adjusted to reflect the other changes (so say if adjusting mentaility affects defensive line that is reflected in the global setting.)

The meaning of teamtalk and press conference options could be made a lot more clear as well.

One option is to let people start with a better (or optional advisor who offers advise instead of the assistant if enabled) assistant who can offer more detailed infomation.

One thing that can improve the default tactics is to expand the pre-set player instructions (and make it easier to save modified ones) - include attacking full-back, fast winger, attack minded Mc, fast striker, target man etc...

Have your assistant manager suggest a template i.e. John Smith would be best employed as an attacking full-back, or john smith is poor going forward/doesn't like going forward and would best be employed as a defensive minded midfielder etc...

One problem with default formations is you depend on everyone to play the correct player in the correct position (say the default formation has the rST set as a targetman to win headers and you play a short striker there, its not really the formations fault) - possibly have an auxliary description of the position base on the sliders - so central midfielder starts as a MC, but you adjust some sliders and he now plays more attack minded than default/team so he changes to a MCa.

Another approach is to take a wizard method to creating tactics - the user selects the wizard method and the game aks what formation (4-4-2) then what kind of tactic (defensive, attacking, control, hold the lead, fast counter-attack), how they want to play (wide, narrow) attack method (cross from wide to target man, through balls from middle), then some advanced options to adjust per player. The game then tells you what kind of player is best for the position - you have set your left-back to get forward and cross the ball select someone with good dribbling, crossing etc...

Possibly also do it the other way around - select your 11 players, game then suggests formation and settings, or you can ask I want to play 4-4-2 attacking whats best.

A main problem would be getting a system that helps the player without playing the game for them.

To make the game harder (and at the same time more clear) the manager personalities still need more development, whilst they have shown improvements over the last few versions it is annoying when they all switch to the same formation to beat you, regardless of who they are, or what players they have - I haven't seen this happen on FM09 yet, but on FM08 when everyone suddenly started playing wing-backs against me regardless of whether they actually had any wing-backs at the club is disapointing.

Wrong.

Many play the game without ever checking these forums. I for one dont think I even looked for anything FM related the 1st 6-7 years of playing the game.

Wrong.

Many play the game without ever checking these forums. I for one dont think I even looked for anything FM related the 1st 6-7 years of playing the game.

And yet you're here now, proof that times have changed.

I would argue that the community is the majority.

When any game is released regardless of the genre, there will always be consumers that buy a game because of how it was marketed or because they think it will appeal to them etc.

You will always see a large chunk of people stop playing the game after a certain amount of time due to varying reasons.

I would think SI or any other developer try to appeal to both. I.e. n SI's case an in depth strategy simulation that appeals to their loyal fan base and a successfully marketed release that will shift units.

I would expect that over time the 'community' would grow and I am sure this would be the case with FM.

By SI listening to this growing community and giving them what they want in future releases they are creating a successful series.

Therefore the fact that the series has continued its curve towards adding realism and continued to grow means that they are appealing to the majority.

The trick for SI is to continue to grow the community and I think that they probably are.

As a gamer for 15 years but one that has never owned an FM game I decided to buy FM09 based on seeing it advertised on Steam.

I personally didn't find it so technically challenging that I couldn't get into it without the benefit of playing earlier versions. I merely found it fun to play and looked towards the community for tips on making my experience better.

Thus +1 for the community.

I appreciate that their would be others that may not do this and some may struggle with the game and simply stop playing altogether but I would think that would happen with any game. What’s meat for one is poison for another etc.

As long as the community continues to grow and SI keeps on listening then the game will continue to evolve in the direction the majority want.

Hi

You make some very good points and I agree with many of them BUT I have to disagree that this 'community' is the majority...

The community on here reperesents a small, albeit fanatical and often over-zealous, minority.

For every ACTIVE member of the 'community' on here I guarantee you there are hundreds of other players who never/very rarely come here.

Just because the over-zealous members of the community scream, shout and wail, doesn't mean they are a majority.

Having said that there are also some very balanced members too.

The problem is that whenever anyone dares to criticise SI or FM they get flamed by wailing gnashing zealots more often than not (and yes I am expecting to be flamed here...but do I care?).

And SI have made the mistake of listening to these same fanatical 'fans' and ignoring the other 90% who line their pockets.

Hence the version of FM09 we have which 10% love to death but a significant number of the remaining paying customers are turning their back on.

Fundamental error imho SI - ALWAYS know your customer - the diehards will always be there - the other 90% will walk away if you don't give them what they want. And that is what has happened with FM09.

And this 'community' is made up of the diehards - so don't take their demands/feedback as gospel.

And also sycophants are not the best people to ask.

And yet you're here now, proof that times have changed.

No, it is proof that I am a becoming an ever increasing forum whore, many of my friends, thankfully, are not.

The problem is that whenever anyone dares to criticise SI or FM they get flamed by wailing gnashing zealots more often than not (and yes I am expecting to be flamed here...but do I care?).

And SI have made the mistake of listening to these same fanatical 'fans' and ignoring the other 90% who line their pockets.

Hence the version of FM09 we have which 10% love to death but a significant number of the remaining paying customers are turning their back on.

Fundamental error imho SI - ALWAYS know your customer - the diehards will always be there - the other 90% will walk away if you don't give them what they want. And that is what has happened with FM09.

And this 'community' is made up of the diehards - so don't take their demands/feedback as gospel.

And also sycophants are not the best people to ask.

To be honest, the situation you have described what with the 'wailing' and 'gnashing' could not be further from the truth. The 'wailing' and 'gnashing' have mainly come from those who blindly criticise SI or FM, rather than those who try to temper those criticisms with constructive discussion.

Do note that this is not a 'flame' directed at you, merely a suggestion for you to perhaps be a bit more balanced and level-headed before making such strong accusations of the forum community.

Heh , i was questioning myself about am i wrong in saying that game is enjoyable to play untill last night. My cousin showed me FIFA manager 09, and to be honest, i got headache just from watching it.

It's like watching game of pinball, where ball is constantly deflecting of things in super high speed and it took him less then 30 seconds to setup everything. AI is terrible, and it makes FM AI look like Albert Einstein, despite all the flaws. At that point i was only thinking that i'll rather stick with FM series for awhile.

If you really want easy "just push button to win game" , that's the way to go.

People that are complaining that this game is not good should really try that game before judging this game. There are some big flaws in FM game , but even then in comparison to lets say FIFA Man it's far superior product.

I agree, if si make the game so "realistic" that the general game player will understand they will lose alot of there fanbase. i agree tactics are important but how will a 13-15 year old really crack the concept?

Well I just Re-installed 08 on my machine and will continue my old save game as FM09 is un-playable.

Ive played FM/CM since Champman 92/93 and this is the first time that ive actually rejected a new version totally and gone back to an old.

Congrats Sega / SI.

I would argue that the community is the majority.

When any game is released regardless of the genre, there will always be consumers that buy a game because of how it was marketed or because they think it will appeal to them etc.

You will always see a large chunk of people stop playing the game after a certain amount of time due to varying reasons.

I would think SI or any other developer try to appeal to both. I.e. n SI's case an in depth strategy simulation that appeals to their loyal fan base and a successfully marketed release that will shift units.

I would expect that over time the 'community' would grow and I am sure this would be the case with FM.

By SI listening to this growing community and giving them what they want in future releases they are creating a successful series.

Therefore the fact that the series has continued its curve towards adding realism and continued to grow means that they are appealing to the majority.

The trick for SI is to continue to grow the community and I think that they probably are.

As a gamer for 15 years but one that has never owned an FM game I decided to buy FM09 based on seeing it advertised on Steam.

I personally didn't find it so technically challenging that I couldn't get into it without the benefit of playing earlier versions. I merely found it fun to play and looked towards the community for tips on making my experience better.

Thus +1 for the community.

I appreciate that their would be others that may not do this and some may struggle with the game and simply stop playing altogether but I would think that would happen with any game. What’s meat for one is poison for another etc.

As long as the community continues to grow and SI keeps on listening then the game will continue to evolve in the direction the majority want.

To be honest, the situation you have described what with the 'wailing' and 'gnashing' could not be further from the truth. The 'wailing' and 'gnashing' have mainly come from those who blindly criticise SI or FM, rather than those who try to temper those criticisms with constructive discussion.

Do note that this is not a 'flame' directed at you, merely a suggestion for you to perhaps be a bit more balanced and level-headed before making such strong accusations of the forum community.

Thanks for your reply.

I think there's wailing and gnashing from both parties tbh.

I've been a member of this forum for a few years and have become fed up with the flaming of people criticising the game.

And yes some of the criticism is from idiots who deserve flaming, but it seems that there are people on here who genuinely believe that SI can do no wrong and that anyone criticising them is the antichrist.

It's them who need balance (and to get a job/grip/life...)

I think I have been balanced in as much as I have formed my opinion over a long period of time and I happen to agree partly with some of what you say.

My point was that this community is NOT the majority of FM players, that many of this community are annoying zealots, and that SI should understand the other 90% of their customers who line their pockets, rather than just listening to the die hards on these forums.

You're entitled to your opinion as much as I am and I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.

Cheers for taking the time to reply.

I agree, if si make the game so "realistic" that the general game player will understand they will lose alot of there fanbase. i agree tactics are important but how will a 13-15 year old really crack the concept?

But should SI make a game just so 13-15 year olds can understand it? Of course you are actually doing an injustice to a lot of 13-15 year olds who wouldn't struggle at all with FM.

SI make the game how they like. If you can get into then fair be it. If you think it's not for you then fair be it.

FM will always have a fanbase no matter how difficult people think it is.

I hope they make it harder, but, as Michaeltmurrayuk points out really well, they could undoubtedly make the game more intuitive and add more advice.

But should SI make a game just so 13-15 year olds can understand it? Of course you are actually doing an injustice to a lot of 13-15 year olds who wouldn't struggle at all with FM.

SI make the game how they like. If you can get into then fair be it. If you think it's not for you then fair be it.

FM will always have a fanbase no matter how difficult people think it is.

I hope they make it harder, but, as Michaeltmurrayuk points out really well, they could undoubtedly make the game more intuitive and add more advice.

Thats a fair point, BUT if SI want to make money they need to make the game appeal to a broad fanbase. Different people want different levels of difficulty - that's only natural.

The difference is most games offer you several levels of difficulty why not do that with FM? eg beginner, medium, hardcore etc...?

Well I just Re-installed 08 on my machine and will continue my old save game as FM09 is un-playable.

Ive played FM/CM since Champman 92/93 and this is the first time that ive actually rejected a new version totally and gone back to an old.

Congrats Sega / SI.

What is the point in replying to a well written OP with thoughts that include nothing about what is wrong, but include a blatantly sarcastic comment on the end?

Why don't you like FM09? Have you tried to get into the game or have you given up after not finding it as easy to win as previous versions?

It's not unplayable.

Thats a fair point, BUT if SI want to make money they need to make the game appeal to a broad fanbase. Different people want different levels of difficulty - that's only natural.

The difference is most games offer you several levels of difficulty why not do that with FM? eg beginner, medium, hardcore etc...?

FM is not a game that allows itself to be given differing levels of difficulty. That point has been discussed to death and discounted time after time. If you can think of a brilliant way in which to include this then by all means mention it.

In contrast there are ways in which FM allows the user to make it easier on themselves without the tedium of beginner to advanced levels of difficulty. There's an editor and there's options to let assmans etc do the work.

Thanks for your reply.

I think there's wailing and gnashing from both parties tbh.

I've been a member of this forum for a few years and have become fed up with the flaming of people criticising the game.

And yes some of the criticism is from idiots who deserve flaming, but it seems that there are people on here who genuinely believe that SI can do no wrong and that anyone criticising them is the antichrist.

It's them who need balance (and to get a job/grip/life...)

I think I have been balanced in as much as I have formed my opinion over a long period of time and I happen to agree partly with some of what you say.

My point was that this community is NOT the majority of FM players, that many of this community are annoying zealots, and that SI should understand the other 90% of their customers who line their pockets, rather than just listening to the die hards on these forums.

You're entitled to your opinion as much as I am and I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.

Cheers for taking the time to reply.

Thank you for considering my post and replying civilly. As for agreeing to disagree, I am afraid it does indeed come down to that for some parts.

However I agree with you in saying that this forum community is in no way a representation of the majority of the customer base. What I feel though, is that SI has not taken an unfair slant towards the 'die-hard loyals' of their game. They have not ignored any criticisms so far and I do believe they do put in effort to try and suss out what the majority of their customer base wants and then try and ascertain if those wants are practical and viable inclusions into the game.

Even when it came to the activation fiasco that was FM 09 launch, Miles et al put up their hands and apologised for the mess up and gave their assurances that they would take a good hard look at the process and try to deliver a much better launch for FM 2010.

In my books, SI have never been known for belligerently messing about with their customer base really. They know the customers have made them into what they are today and I think they would cherish that too much to throw it all away.

But should SI make a game just so 13-15 year olds can understand it? Of course you are actually doing an injustice to a lot of 13-15 year olds who wouldn't struggle at all with FM.

SI make the game how they like. If you can get into then fair be it. If you think it's not for you then fair be it.

FM will always have a fanbase no matter how difficult people think it is.

I hope they make it harder, but, as Michaeltmurrayuk points out really well, they could undoubtedly make the game more intuitive and add more advice.

FM is not a game that allows itself to be given differing levels of difficulty. That point has been discussed to death and discounted time after time. If you can think of a brilliant way in which to include this then by all means mention it.

In contrast there are ways in which FM allows the user to make it easier on themselves without the tedium of beginner to advanced levels of difficulty. There's an editor and there's options to let assmans etc do the work.

There are several 'brilliant' ways - add a tactics wizard to the game to help beginners, add a novice setting where the tactics are simpler and sliders made simpler, tweak the ME to reduce the impact of morale, tactics etc...

Yes it would mean more work for SI but it might also make more people want to buy it and play it = more customers...

The best comparison to another game I can think of it the wonderful world of Civilization, which whilst having the same core as the series has gone on has ultimately got more and more complex yet still sells really big.

Civilization is very formulaic and you can therefore always work out why something has happened. The amount of resources gathered, population growth, building speed, and so on can all be worked out exactly and there is no random element. Even with battles it tells you the % probability of victory.

FM09 on the other hand is not like this. You can be on a good run then suddenly you won't score for several games, even against weak opposition. Strikers with easy chances will miss where previously they would score. Changing personnel doesn't help. Is this due to the AI working out your tactics, bad team talks, players not getting on, fitness, morale, something else? The cause of people's unhappiness is that they can't tell.

I'm terrible at FM09. I have tried my own tactics and training or downloaded ones. I follow the advised (on this forum) team talks. Yet as Palace I struggle to get in the top half of the table despite a media prediction of 3rd (with 9.2).

This is clearly down to me. Others cope and I don't. But the point is that if there is no feedback to say why I'm doing so badly then I can't really improve. I don't want to be able to win everything easily, but I want to be able to do OK. As I can't I have (as of today) given up playing the game. I'll restart when 9.3 is released, but if I can't get to grips with it then they'll lose a customer for FM10 (especially if the CM09 demo is good).

Thats a fair point, BUT if SI want to make money they need to make the game appeal to a broad fanbase. Different people want different levels of difficulty - that's only natural.

The difference is most games offer you several levels of difficulty why not do that with FM? eg beginner, medium, hardcore etc...?

Majority of people that are complaining about game being to hard is generally population that got spoiled using all those ME flaws in last year, that made that game very easy to win.Is game still flawed ? yes it is , but is far from unplayable.

i am still using same tactics that i was using since FM 05 and they work fine. But those tactics were not based on exploiting ME flaws of some specific edition , so they are easily transferable to next edition.

Majority of games that EA or Ubisoft made last year was 'tailored" towards "casual " players who demanded very easy game. And yet they all posted huge losses and games were not selling.Some MMO's like AoC and Warhammer dumbed down their content to satisfy same category of players and they were pretty much depopulated in short time , due to being way to easy and as such they failed big time.

On the other hand company named AGEOD, that makes hardcore strategy games posted significant profits.Even easy level on AGEOD games is several times harder from any FM.Even EA is realizing that, and they are postponed several releases to improve difficulty in their games(see Dragon Age)

Not to mention that same population that wants "easy games" is one of the most non loyal communities.They get bored by the game as soon they accomplish what they want and move on to some other game.Losing 2-3 games in a row and pronouncing game "being unplayable " due to that is prime example of that.

And this is coming from someone that has very demanding job , very young kids and wife that hates PC games , lol

There are several 'brilliant' ways - add a tactics wizard to the game to help beginners, add a novice setting where the tactics are simpler and sliders made simpler, tweak the ME to reduce the impact of morale, tactics etc...

Yes it would mean more work for SI but it might also make more people want to buy it and play it = more customers...

I'm not being at all sarcastic.

Simpler tactics? Tactics are tactics. How do you make them simpler?

Tweaking the ME to reduce the effect of tactics is just saying 'here you go, you want no effort so this is a win button'.

It would be more work for SI, and that extra time could be put to much better use working on the match engine that gets constant complaint. So for FM10, when the ME has the same much talked about problems as now, will people be saying 'at least I can win now'?

Good post from the OP and agree with most except i wouldnt say the is too hard just more time consuming. Gone of the days where you could say ive got a hour spare ill get a few games in on FM, instead now it appears to me that i have to dedicate hours and hours of constant tweaking and adjustments. Im afraid the game has certainly lost its pick up and play IMO.

Hi

You make some very good points and I agree with many of them BUT I have to disagree that this 'community' is the majority...quote]

Not just these forums but the whole online FM community.

However you are correct and I did contradict myself a little.

Obviously in terms of sales v's the number of people that post in online fansites the number of units sold would be greater.

But as I said earlier you can expect a significant drop off of the number of people still playing this game or any other several months after initial release.

My point was to stress that IMO the game is and has followed a path that favours a more in depth and strategic line due to the majority of die hard fans wanting exactly that.

SI's marketing have to ensure it still appeals to the masses on release day.

After a few months the percentage of people still playing the game will have reduced but the community would have grown IMO and those still playing are likely to be the ones that post on fansites.

That said however I do acknowledge the point that there may be a significant number of fans that don't voice their oppinions online at all.

Thats a fair point, BUT if SI want to make money they need to make the game appeal to a broad fanbase. Different people want different levels of difficulty - that's only natural.

The difference is most games offer you several levels of difficulty why not do that with FM? eg beginner, medium, hardcore etc...?

I think the game does offer varying levels of difficulty. You can take any league in the game and there will allways be teams that are easier to manage than others.

There is the editor, assistant advice and choices for the amont of user input at varying levels.

Some find FM09 too difficult and others find it very playable.

(Personally I find it very playable. The problem is that I keep on winning, but I did read through the tactical guides.)

SI will have to find a way to satisfy both the people who want more simple, straightforward game 'right-from-the-box' and those who want a more in-depth, more realistic football game.

As was mentioned before Civilization seems to have been able to help solve the problem by having difficulty levels.

FM could use that or it could have more options. These would turn on/off different aspects of the game that you want to play.

Perhaps someone doesn't want to bother with crossing. There could be an option where Crossing would be turned off and the AI would take care of it. Those who want a more in-depth game could have the Crossing option left on and he would take care of it himself, as is done currently in FM09. (Any situations where you ask your Assistant Manager for advice would still always be there. That would not be removed in any option where you decide to do things yourself.)

There are many other option possibilities (e.g. running with ball, through balls etc.) and even mentality, passing style etc. could have on/off options.

In this way the more casual players would be satisfied while the more 'hard-core' would also be happy.

Just wondering why so many people think they speak for the majority with no evidence to support it.

Just wondering why so many people think they speak for the majority with no evidence to support it.

Don't think anyone is saying that mate its all about individual opinions. Some are right some are wrong.

It's a forum. that's what its here for. I wouldn't worry so much.

Civilization is very formulaic and you can therefore always work out why something has happened. The amount of resources gathered, population growth, building speed, and so on can all be worked out exactly and there is no random element. Even with battles it tells you the % probability of victory

There is a random seed in Civ meaning battles to an extent are quite random. It's not an exact science, nothing that involve the rolling of dice is.

But the point I was making in comparison to Civ was that the game has got more complex as the series has gone on and it hasn't dropped sales as a result. FM is showing the same, so why would they suddenly change the difficulty or complexity now?

FM is never going to be scientifically beatable, the issue at the moment is a lack of intuitiveness of where you're going wrong.

There are some situations in FM09 where there are no clues as to what went wrong or right, or how to correct it if something went wrong.

There is a random seed in Civ meaning battles to an extent are quite random. It's not an exact science, nothing that involve the rolling of dice is.

But the point I was making in comparison to Civ was that the game has got more complex as the series has gone on and it hasn't dropped sales as a result. FM is showing the same, so why would they suddenly change the difficulty or complexity now?

FM is never going to be scientifically beatable, the issue at the moment is a lack of intuitiveness of where you're going wrong.

My point though, is that CIV has got more complex, while still letting the player know what is going on. FM has got more complex and the player often doesn't know what's going on.

In other words CIV is more complex but no less confusing with each iteration.

FM is more complex and much more confusing with each iteration.

What is the point in replying to a well written OP with thoughts that include nothing about what is wrong, but include a blatantly sarcastic comment on the end?

Why don't you like FM09? Have you tried to get into the game or have you given up after not finding it as easy to win as previous versions?

It's not unplayable.

Sigh, fanboy alert...

As for the whole "not as easy comment" like i said ive been playing FM probably longer than you have been alive or out of nappies. I like to take teams from the very bottom to the very top. Ive played 1 season on FM09 and got promoted first time with Kings Lynn.

I didnt post my complete reason for hating FM09 as ive voiced my opinion on the game a number of times.

I suggest you search some of my recent posts and take a look at http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?p=2436289#post2436289as this more or less covers it.

In a nut shell... where to begin.

Midfield Ratings are broken SEVERELY

Man City are broken

Press conferences are redundant and have no real bearing on the game and become boring and repetative after you have done maybe 3 or 4.

I had to upload a fan media patch to get around the non-personalities in the media

Regens are WAY to good, after a season in the BS N / S I managed to land 7-8 15 -17 year olds who killed the majority of my first team

So, stop drinking the magic cool aid and dont contribute if all you can do is wave pom poms.

To be fair Lower League Only, your first post wasn't particular constructive.

And we really don't want to turn this thread into "these are the bugs that ruin the game for me", as the thread isn't about that.