Open letter to SI

Dear Sports Interactive,

Hi, my name is Zoli and I’m sending you this e-mail in behalf of the FM community on the internet. The “scene”, if you wish. Many of us love your releases, but we also think that you lot should improve some of the features. Please don’t release more patches for FM09, instead keep these in mind for FM10. A game which we are looking forward to by the way and we would REALLY appreciate if you would give us some info about. I mean only a few months till release! Come on, give us something to talk about on our humble forums! Some of us(them actually) are starting to get bored of the game and we don’t know what to expect, therefore we are already planning on the purchase of the new CM. I mean come on, everyone loves scouting with an actual World map and being able to upload videos with a touch of a button!

However I am not interested in giving you ideas for the next release. I am quite sure you won’t change the future game because of our ideas, so I will just talk about the features which are already in FM, but definitely need to be revamped. The things that we/them are annoyed about and are seriously making us consider putting the game down. Annoying things. Issues for which the likes of Maximilian Evans decided to send pornographic images to one of your employees, a while back. Issues which you lot should have fixed, but you have decided to add a half-prepared 3d match engine instead.

First of all, don’t release another version of FM with bugs. For the love of God, please don’t! From what I can tell, you get no money from people downloading 3 patches and if you want us to use your updated databases, you could just release them. Smaller files, no people moaning for having to download something from yous once every 2 months and definitely no people spamming up your board with 25 bugs they’ve found. Just give more time to your developers, let them work in peace and harmony and make us wait another month or two for the new release. Don’t forget to keep us updated on the progress though! Release bug free games. Hire more testers, or just make sure you pay the existing ones.. Don’t add more flashy features, if you know the old ones are not perfect and they can’t satisfy customers. If people would know how to, I am sure they would send some complaints to the Customer Support and would ask their money back.

Secondly, make sure you double-check on your scouts. Not sure how much you paying them, but sometimes they have the tendency not to communicate with each-other. Arsenal are probably the best team in the World. In FM that is! The great SI scouts overrated their whole youth squad and meanwhile Manchester Utd. Will go bankrupt in a decade, Arsenal will actually win UCL’s. 3 times in a row. Le Arse is just one example, there are others around. Not saying that you don’t put any effort to your scouting, but more communication is definitely needed. Meanwhile in some cases you are spot on(Dani Alves from Bahia springs to mind), but in other cases bias is clearly visible. Probably not everyone is sharing my view on this, but I think you should put more emphasis on such things. Speaking of releasing new data updates. Why are you updating your database every month? In my opinion the potential of a player won’t change overnight. Aaritalo springs to mind. On one version he is a god, on the other one he is a nobody. Did his club fail to deliver his protein shake and he lost his skills. Please..

Focus more on your skins and other graphics. I am sure many like the creamy, light brown disaster you call a default skin, but for many of us, the game starts becoming playable after the first custom skin is done. I know there are some trademark and licensing issue, but come on now, don’t tell me that the colour you are using is the only available one! Communicate with skin makers across the scene and they will help you a lot. In terms of design especially and maybe with coding the skin too. I know people like Radestock actually work for you on the forums, but why can’t you ask him to let yous use some of his mods? They would enhance the gaming experience of many players and people wouldn’t need to download everything separately. Also, about graphics, please stop taking away something that keeps our gfx community going. Kits and kit makers have been essential for FM forums and you took it away! You evil people! I don’t care if it conflicts with your flashy, yet very ugly 3d match kits. I am sure there is a way to make them a separate identity.

Now, something that might make no sense to you whatsoever, but I thought I’ll drop it here. Stop making the game eat as as many resources as FIFA. Many revert to the old CM games, or the early FM’s, because their computers aren’t good enough to run FM09. In the past FM became so popular because it was the “game of the people”. No 2gig RAM was needed, no Quad core processor and no flashy-fancy gForce or Ati graphics card either. Maybe make the game smaller and less resource eater by making some components optional, don’t know.. Just don’t make me buy a new PC for FM10, please! I’d rather spend my money on whores and booze, rather than buying more RAM and a new motherboard for running my favourite game. Was never a fan of returning to previous versions, as I consider FM to be a series which are improving, so please don’t make me change my mind. I know I’m just a humble creature in your big sea of customers, but this is like the elections. Every vote/buyer counts. Ztxs.

I know you try visiting FM fansites, but you are not trying hard enough. In my opinion at least, but I’m no webmaster, so you lot might actually communicate a lot. Make it obvious. Release information to them, arrange more meetings, give them ideas for competition. Make webmasters participate in co-projects. Make a community of the FM community. Or at least try to do so. A leader would do wonders, as it would make sites be more united. Nowadays there is bitterness everywhere, sites fighting with each other over minor issues, rivalries where there should be co-work . Blogs about how **** a site is, without a slight humour and with the obvious aim to attack, to destroy. Hell, webmasters are even hacking other sites, just to make sure everyone knows who is the boss on the interwebz. Which definitely is a serious business by the way. What the scene needs is a helping hand, someone to ask advice from. A mentor.

Finally, focus more on minor things.

Confidence system is a brilliant idea. Make it perfect! It still has flaws.

Focus more on minor leagues and the development of minor teams. After winning the Champions League, I don’t want my board to tell me that I can only scout in Europe + Argentina and Brazil. After I win 5 UCL titles, I don’t want a player to tell me that I’m not good enough for him, even if I’m from the snowy and rather cold Russia.

Focus more on player development. It’s not perfect, despite many people having great ideas.

Show us a thing or two about the upcoming tactics system. We are curious and it sucks not being able to prepare for it. Hopefully yous manage to allow us to place players in every position, not just in the 20 dots you are allowing us to do now.

Update training. New 7 star coaching is a step on the right direction. Make training even more important though. Make players having a hard time fulfilling their potential.

Multiplayer games are boring. Add spice, or limit system resource-needs, to make it accessible for people with bad connections.

Stop focusing so much on England. Majority of people play there and I think you are to blame. Partially. We have 20 or something English leagues and 3 from Spain or Italy. You think other people don’t buy your games? Newsflash, the internet is full of foreign sites!

If possible, give us more options in the Editor. Many essential things are hard-coded and a touch of an expert is needed to realize simple things as adding nations.

Get a proper forum software

We love your game SI, but please keep our opinion in front of your eyes! Not everyone of us has mental retardation and many people can actually help you in developing this World-wide phenomena which is Football Manager. No company has value without the fans and instead of trying to giving us a product and expecting positive feedback, make our opinions count!

Kind Regards,

Zoltán-Tibor Simon of http://www.loswonderkids.com

Oh lord, where to start?

"don't release a game with bugs"

Never going to happen. It's a piece of software, and software has bugs, it's that simple.

"make sure you double-check on your scouts"

SI don't have a network of paid scouts, all research is done by unpaid volunteers. Furthermore, the sheer volume of research that has to be done every year means it is impossible for SI to check every detail, and so they have to rely on the data that is provided.

"focus more on your skins and other graphics"

To say the game is not playable until a third-party skin is release is just ridiculous. The default FM09 skin is perfectly useable. May not be to your taste, but hardly makes the game unplayable. Be thankful that they allow third party skins at all, otherwise you'd be stuck with it.

The rest is just TL;DR.

Never going to happen. It's a piece of software, and software has bugs, it's that simple.

Aye, because FIFA releases 3 patches to cut down the number of moaners.

SI don't have a network of paid scouts, all research is done by unpaid volunteers. Furthermore, the sheer volume of research that has to be done every year means it is impossible for SI to check every detail, and so they have to rely on the data that is provided.

Doesn't change the fact that scouts make mistakes. That was the aim for that pharagraph.

To say the game is not playable until a third-party skin is release is just ridiculous. The default FM09 skin is perfectly useable. May not be to your taste, but hardly makes the game unplayable. Be thankful that they allow third party skins at all, otherwise you'd be stuck with it.

As I said, I am sure many like it. Doesn't take away my right from moaning about it though.

First of all, ZoL!, you're not writing for the entire FM community as I belong to it, and you don't speak for me nor do I share your ideas (or at least a decent amount of them).

Second of all, you're writing about not wanting SI to release another patch... they're not going to do that. As always, they patch till January/February (almost always 3 patches).

If you want more FM10 news, sit tight and wait. I, for one, still come time short in trying to become an EPL first class team, using a lousy BSS team, I'm still short on time to get a Belgian 3th class team to win the CL etc. and I still am trying to finally start up a Peruvian game... much to do I say if you leave your comfy zone.

Third of all: a game without bugs? Good luck! Be realistic: a game can never be bug free. Besides, as far as I heard, they have been using more beta testers already. I'm not sure if SI themselves have said this, but again: they beat you to it.

Fourth of all: if you have followed the Arsenal discussion you would have read that it was due to the match engine giving more "power" to strong physical sides like Arsenal. Besides, in all the games I have played Man utd never went broke (I only saw 1 EPL team go broke and it wasn't even a big one).

Fifth of all: since you're speaking for the entire FM community apperently... how come I don't give a darn about the skin? The skin is just something extra... even if they went back to the skin of the '97 game, I wouldn't care.

About your minor things: you don't want to buy a new pc for FM10 but you want more minor leagues? How are you going to pull that off?

You apperently also don't like reality. Since Zenith Sint Petersburg won the UEFA Cup, I haven't heard them getting many worldclass players in... I say they rather go to sunny warm Madrid as opposed to your snowy cold Russia...

I also wish to give you a newsflash: I'm Belgian and I can play up to the 3th Belgian league. Considering the structure of the Belgian FA I say that's more than a darn good job of them.

However, the solution to your "English focus" is easy: collect scouts that will scout the leagues of Spain and Italy that are currently missing. It's easy to comment on it, but do you have the resources to pull it off? Oh yeah, since you put so much emphasis on payment: don't forget to pay those new scouts of yours either!

Doesn't change the fact that scouts make mistakes. That was the aim for that pharagraph.

Congrats on discovering humans aren't perfect.

ZoL!, your arguing skills are very, very poor

I'd rather SI don't bother adding new features, and instead update the game, cut out what errors they can and work on current features such as press conferences etc, still a good game though.

I'm quite peeved that I am being spoken for, using opinions and views that aren't mine.

Thanks for you opinions ZoL!, we take our community very seriously and when we can we all take time out to read what you guys say and think. For future reference though I wouldn't speak on behalf of everyone - just yourself! Obviously we can't respond to every post and idea but we do as said, try to read as much as we can. In terms of fan sites and the infighting etc, I'd be interested to hear what you have to say regarding this in more detail so please email me at neil.brock[at]sigames.com about it.

Thanks.

Thanks for the reply. I wasn't expecting anyone from SI replying, but my aggressive style was mostly a way of attention seaking. glad you replied and I am sure I will send you an e-mail.

As for everyone else.. I used my name 2 times, making this personal. Also, my aim was gathering some opinion from some of the scene members and writing them down. For example I am neutral about the 3d, but many complained, so I added it. Also, everyone who doesn't agree is not part of the people I wrote this in behalf of this. I was speaking very generally, but if it's not your coat, don't get it on.

My arguing skills might be bad. I will try improving it

Also, I am glad this is getting replies. Won't be able to respond to all of you, but I am hoping to start discussions.

Arsenal certainly are not the most over-rated team. All the criticism on here seems to ignore the fact that they are capable of many world-class performances and have numerous quality individuals. The main reason they appear over-rated seems to be that the match engine, coupled with Wenger's management stats and the players he has for the roles his tactical outlook requires, results in a greatness. It does in reality too, but on a lesser scale due largely to inconsistancy rather than a lack of ability or quality performances. On the game attack is the best form of defence, while in reality defensive weakness leaks to more widespread poor performance.

Furthermore, how can you say that they won't win anything in the future? A team that everyone says is 'for the future' and has performed pretty well for a team everyone seems to unjustly call poor, really, can only improve; and probably only needs to in terms of consistancy and mental frailty. In the game they don't neccessarily have success anyway.

Regarding factors such as debt and bankruptcy, it may seem unrealistic, but figures are figures, researched to the best level they can be using released financial records. The fact the game interprets these in such a way that doesn't entirely accurately account for the financial situation of some clubs is indeed something that needs to be addressed, but finding the right balance can prove tricky. Manchester United in particular rely on success, and the financal situation they experience ingame without it probably wouldn't be too far from the truth. Again however, rather than the team being poorly researched, it's probably more a case of how the manager's stats and tactics are translated into the match-engine, with Manchester United's more direct style perhaps less successful than in reality.

@bollekewol:

yes, but wouldn't it be normal for people to be able to scout the entire World after winning a UCL? I think this is far for being realistic and it has an effect on league development. If this isn't spot on, then the way of rep being assigned to leagues is not correct.

At the Arsenal debate. The fact are that Arsenal can safely win the UCL 2 years in a row with their current squad. I think Arsenal's first team is better than any other team's in the game.

@bollekewol:

yes, but wouldn't it be normal for people to be able to scout the entire World after winning a UCL? I think this is far for being realistic and it has an effect on league development. If this isn't spot on, then the way of rep being assigned to leagues is not correct.

At the Arsenal debate. The fact are that Arsenal can safely win the UCL 2 years in a row with their current squad. I think Arsenal's first team is better than any other team's in the game.

Their team, in teams of ability in the game, both by stats and CA, put them at 3rd/4th best in the Premier League, as in reality. There are star individuals which are better, but on the whole this is how it is.

The fact they perform well, as I have said, has more to do with the success of their tactical approach, and too the AIs transfer decisions, to a lesser extent.

20 english leagues? What so your fm plays all the way down to grassroots does it? More like 7, the Italian one has 4, which is split into like 7 same with the Spanish, and you must expect it to be towards England as its made in England by English Developers and is mainly aimed at English buyers!

Their team, in teams of ability in the game, both by stats and CA, put them at 3rd/4th best in the Premier League, as in reality. There are star individuals which are better, but on the whole this is how it is.

The fact they perform well, as I have said, has more to do with the success of their tactical approach, and too the AIs transfer decisions, to a lesser extent.

You might be right and in this case I will admit that i was wrong on my affirmation. However, wouldn't you be up to testing it? I don't have much time, but I might do it. We can check CA's, PA's and we can even come up with a rating system. I wouldn't want to check hidden stats, as I'm "clean" for about 6 months, but I might, for the greater good

@peters: The Spanish low leagues would be used though, don't you think?

I agree with Zoli :ninja:

You cant make a game without bugs, there bound to pop up

Aye, because FIFA releases 3 patches to cut down the number of moaners.

Actually yes, yes it does. My copy has had at least 3 official updates since i got it upon release!

You might be right and in this case I will admit that i was wrong on my affirmation. However, wouldn't you be up to testing it? I don't have much time, but I might do it. We can check CA's, PA's and we can even come up with a rating system. I wouldn't want to check hidden stats, as I'm "clean" for about 6 months, but I might, for the greater good

@peters: The Spanish low leagues would be used though, don't you think?

Its already been tested by numerous people using editors, genie scout and others. As Hershie said, the Arsenal aquad comes out with a combined CA that is about the 4th best in the EPL. To make it more rounded as a test, hidden stats would need to be checked as these can alter things in game. On that basis, the 'test' your proposing would give inaccurate results.

Also, and most importantly, i find it immensely annoying you have the balls to be the mouthpiece of the whole community, which im a part of! I certainly dont share all your views, and a lot have been covered already!

I actually prefer 1 new thing in each release, however big or small but would ideally love contracts for managers of National sides !

@cplpeters1900: So, the game is made by English developers for a Japanese company (Sega) and sold in America under another name, Yet is aimed almost solely at English buyers? got it twisted a little bit there i think!

And Zol! speaks for a large number of fm-ers. maybe not the majority, but definetly an awful lot. ok the bugs might not happen. the scouts giving less biased data would be far better for realism. And I don't just mean them making players too good. How ridiculously bad is Gabriel Agbonlahor for scoring so many goals in the 07/08 season? Also quite how bad do they think they are trying to make Stephen Ireland?

More graphics and less resource draining isn't a contradiction either, surely it could be an option during the install to install more graphics, such as other skins, more faces, and proper kits and badges?

Good grief, I absolutely detest people that come on public forums, mouth off and then claim that they speak for the 'majority', let alone 'the community'! Please! You are attempting to sound high and mighty, with the backing of 'public opinion', but all you are doing is stating your own opinion. Don't try and dress it up as something else, it's extremely annoying.

Now, on to some of the points that you raised:

1. Bugs in Release

It is a sad reality of software development that there will inevitably be parts of the software that do not operate as intended. The more complicated the program, the more likely that there will be a moving part that just doesn't quite work. I am yet to play a game without a bug in it, even games regarded as being remarkably stable such as Call of Duty have graphical and audio glitches from time to time. It's a reality, anyone that expects a '100% bug-free release' is dreaming. SI can certainly improve to stamp out more game-breaking bugs, but to expect anything more is simply unrealistic.

SI does not get more money from releasing 3 patches every year. Yet, in those patches, not only are there gameplay adjustments and balances, but we get updates to squad lists, databases, which is very time consuming. I am yet to see another sports-related product that puts this level of effort into keeping their player data up-to-date with free patches. In that sense, we should be grateful that they bother to release the 3 patches, as opposed to some companies that abandon the product after release.

2. Scouts

As others have noted, all the data that is generated for FM comes from unpaid volunteers who love the club and go to see them play on a regular basis (apart from the situations where a member of SI doubles as the researcher). To those that say and think otherwise, I suggest you visit the Data Issues forum and meet some of the people in there. When you take that into mind, FM has an amazingly accurate database given the information is for the most part coming from non-professional scouts. The quality is excellent.

Yes, they don't always get it right (they are people, they cannot predict the future exactly as to when/if a particular player will suddenly come good or take a step up) and there can always be improvements, but that is one of the reasons why you get 3 patches per version of FM every year.

3. Skins and Graphics:

While true that the basic default skin is not the best in the world (I prefered the original green skin from older versions of FM) to claim that the game is 'not playable' is beyond silly. It's perfectly playable. I play with it. I'm quite good at the game too. I have no problems finding exactly what information I want. Compared to some other interface nightmares (new Microsoft Office for the first time, anyone?), FM stacks up pretty well.

The lack of logos probably bugs me most, as I like seeing them, but most of the missing ones is a licensing issue and out of the hands of SI. Plenty of good packs out there to deal with the issue, however. Player photos are nice, but again, a licensing issue, also plenty of community work out there to deal with it (it's not hard, either, FM is very easy to visually modify). I think the 3D engine is still naff, so I don't really care about 3D kits and all that other nonesense. Those 2D dots are still rather smexy!

4. Game's use of Resources:

This game uses as much hardware resources as FIFA? What evidence do you have for making that statement? Rubbish. The game runs sliky-smooth on my computer, with around 20 leagues loaded, large database. And unlike various EA franchise programs, I can alt-tab back and forth as much as I like with no issue and the game will run and update data in the background while alt-tabbed out with no problem. I use this feature a lot as well given these days I am ususally writing an FM-related story while I play.

FM uses an extraordinarily high number of statistics and data, far more than any other game that I've seen. When you consider how many stats each individual player, manager, staff etc have, and then how many players, managers, and staff there are in the game, how many leagues, that is a lot of information. Information takes space and takes resources to access. That's a reality. If you want better performance, load fewer leagues and fewer players. If you don't want to do that, then here's a bombshell: maybe it's time for a new computer.

5. Lack of Communication:

I trawl game forums a lot, but I am only a member on a few, including FM. One of the reasons is that SI are actually remarkably good at communicating on the forum. Several members post here, they visit most sections of the forums, and for the most part, are amicable and constructive. Again, could they be better? Probably. But those that sit there and complain that SI doesn't visit their random fansite, grow up. How do you expect SI to visit every fansite out there? When would they ever find the time to do any work on the game if they did that? They are vocal and visible here on their own forums, that is already well above the standard of a lot of other developers.

6. Focus on the Details:

Finally, there are some sensible points in here. Indeed, FM09 was rather tainted by the 3D match engine and several other areas of the game have as such been left feeling somewhat neglected.

Like you point out, the confidence system, the transfer market, and my own personal bugbears of press conferences, media, and player+manager interactions need work. But SI are considering some of these things, and unfortunately some of us may have to wait for several versions until we see our personal gripes addressed. Tactics are getting a major overhaul this year, which was a major concern for many. Also, as you point out, the 'development' and flow of the game needs work too, some aspects need to be dynamic but they are not, and there are still issues with regens.

Overall, I can understand that you want to provoke discussion, but ultimately it seems you have been attracted to the flawed, poorly thought-out, and ultimately rather foolish 'problems' that every half-wit with a big mouth, a minor grasp of the English language and an internet connection has come on here and ranted about. They are not issues that the 'majority' of 'the community' feel are the areas that SI and FM can improve in.

I can't stand anything other than the default skin.

This will probably come across as very negative Zol sorry.

It takes a lot of time to get rid of bugs. I can recall one bug that was recognised in FM08 and is still in FM09 because they couldn't figure out how to fix it, so taking a few months to release a bug-free game is unrealistic. Patches also take a lot of time and effort to release.

I think scouting is mainly spot on. The reason FM is so successful is because of it's database which is miles better than any other managements game databases. If there are any issues they are usually ironed out in patches. And the Arsenal example: Arsenal are so successful because their style is suited to the match engine of FM. There would be no point in re-vamping the whole tactics and match systems to make one or two teams be more realistic, when it works so well. And what do you mean they are updating the database every month?

I for one have never, ever downloaded a custom skin, I'm quite happy with the default one. It could definately be made flashier, more hard-hitting, but I don't think it's a huge issue. Maybe they could incorporate some custom skins into a patched version of FM10 to please more people.

I agree that the game requires a high end computer, but I have no idea how that could be remedied. If you want a huge game like FM then you usually need a good machine to run it on.

Your scouting issue is probably to do with the number of leagues and nations you have loaded. More league loaded = More places to scout. This is to use up less resources. Also I assume you can scout regions like East Africa, North America etc.

You point out that the majority of players are in England, so naturally they will have more leagues there. I think the other leagues are in-depth enough, I've never really wanted to manage at a lower level than I have been able to. And I have never wanted to manage in the Zimbabwean league or whatever, I think they have the right amount. And of course, more leagues mean more resources used.

Sorry for all the negetivity.

Now, something that might make no sense to you whatsoever, but I thought I’ll drop it here. Stop making the game eat as as many resources as FIFA. Many revert to the old CM games, or the early FM’s, because their computers aren’t good enough to run FM09. In the past FM became so popular because it was the “game of the people”. No 2gig RAM was needed, no Quad core processor and no flashy-fancy gForce or Ati graphics card either. Maybe make the game smaller and less resource eater by making some components optional, don’t know.. Just don’t make me buy a new PC for FM10, please! I’d rather spend my money on whores and booze, rather than buying more RAM and a new motherboard for running my favourite game. Was never a fan of returning to previous versions, as I consider FM to be a series which are improving, so please don’t make me change my mind. I know I’m just a humble creature in your big sea of customers, but this is like the elections. Every vote/buyer counts. Ztxs.

I do agree here.

Actually your comment made the most sense, jld, so I'm going to comment on that. Sorry for not doing the same to others, but I feel that we are on very different frequencies and arguing would be useless. Also, I tend to avoid comments which start with "don't speak for us".

First, about the bugs. This year we got a patch right after release. Wouldn't you have preferred to get the game and not download anything? What about people who have no internet access, or people who have bad connections? I'd rather wait a few months for a game which requires no patches. I know patches take time to make and I respect SI for it. I never said I didn't and as I already said, being harsh was the point of this letter. To make an impact.

About the second paragraph. I already explained the majority of it in this thread and I still stand by my point, so I'll just answer your question. I mean that a new database update comes with every patch.

The skin. As I said, I am sure many like it. Still, if 50% don't, then there is a problem.

Resources. By not installing some components, we might gain resources. I think this is something which can be done. I mean older FM's had very similar db's and they ran smoother. There must be the other features..

Scouting regions.. I am pretty sure that the leagues loaded have nothing to do with it. I can only scout Europe and the 2 S American countries. I only have Russia and Ukraine loaded.

FM is well beyond England imo. For example we can find great discussion on Hungarian Madrid forums. Not FM, just Real Madrid. Also, there are lots of great "foreign" sites. I for one would preffer playing in the Spanish 4th Div, instead of the BSN. I am very sure that lots share my view. If you go almost all the way down in England, than please do the same in other major countries.

Sorry for sounding harsh again

Good post Zoli.

FM09 for me took a turn in the wrong direction, it was slow (even on a good comp), bug ridden and the poorest activation methods (one thats now seen my game just stop working, great investment of my money).

2010 edition will be make or break for many, if 09 wasnt already.

I agree that the game needs to be better tested and looked over before rushed for release with annoying bugs that pure and simple, shouldnt be making releases. Some bugs have been ones that have featured in previous version and yet still cant get gotten right now. Its quite poor really, to spend $90AU on a game thats near on unplayable out of the box and forces you to download a 200mb or so patch straight off the bat, to play something you should already be enjoying. Fair enough patches down the line after a few months, most games have that. But at least get the game in a solid shape prior to releasing.

Scouting of clubs is also quite poor at times, far to many people overrated their clubs youth (Arsenal a big culprit of this).

Many researchers over exaggerate how good their clubs players are (Arsenal), particularly towards the youth they have.

Whoever does the Chelsea research for the game and rates the players does it imo the best. He doesnt do it with such bias as others and actually rates the youth in a more realistic fashion.

Even a more promising player like Stoch has fairly poor in the game stats, despite having decent potential. Kakuta is another player highly rated and been brilliant in the youth side and in the reserves, however his stats havent been over done either.

They both have the ability to be decent players (more so Kakuta) but a lot of it pans out how well you train and look after them. Which is the way it should be.

Which to me I think is great and more realistic, to many teams like Arsenal or ManU have their youth players overrated and become decent players regardless (be that for current side or others). Because they already have stats that are far to advanced for their actual ability.

While the youth particularly in Serie A/Italy seems to be fairly poorly researched, then again maybe it just seems like that compared to how highly youth from other areas are rated.

Also wouldnt mind seeing the co-ownership rule fixed a little. For instance, IRL Juve sold 50% of Davide Lanzafame to Palermo at the start of the season in the Amauri deal. Now he wasnt getting games at Palermo so Juve requested that Palermo send him on loan to Bari, so he could play.

However in the 9.03 db, Juve dont even own him at all, instead Palermo has his full ownership and have sent him out on loan themselves to Bari. Little things like that ruin the game, because if your playing at Juve you've now lost a good little player for the future and home that is home grown.

So I wouldnt mind seeing the co-ownership system reworked a little.

4. Game's use of Resources:

This game uses as much hardware resources as FIFA? What evidence do you have for making that statement? Rubbish. The game runs sliky-smooth on my computer, with around 20 leagues loaded, large database. And unlike various EA franchise programs, I can alt-tab back and forth as much as I like with no issue and the game will run and update data in the background while alt-tabbed out with no problem. I use this feature a lot as well given these days I am ususally writing an FM-related story while I play.

Game runs like an absolute dog on mine, somethimes taking 20 seconds just to change screens. I'm afraid it can be very different for different people.

Game runs like an absolute dog on mine, somethimes taking 20 seconds just to change screens. I'm afraid it can be very different for different people.

Then the issue is most likely a hardware and compatibility issue, not an inherent flaw of the game code. Trying cleaning up your computer. Even small upgrades somewhere can make a big difference. For the record, the only version of CM/FM that has ever struggled for performance on any of my various computers down the years was CM4 (now that was an awful version of this game).

The skin. As I said, I am sure many like it. Still, if 50% don't, then there is a problem.

But then this is no longer a statement of 'the majority' then, is it? It certainly is not 'unplayable' due to the interface either, which is also what you claimed.

Be thankful that the interface for FM is easily changed with a mod, and that it has a vibrant community that gives many different options if you are one of those that do not like the interface.

Resources. By not installing some components, we might gain resources. I think this is something which can be done. I mean older FM's had very similar db's and they ran smoother. There must be the other features..

We already have this option within the game; number of leagues, league detail (background/full detail) and database size (essentially number of players/staff). If your computer cannot handle it, then the option is to reduce the amount of data loaded when you create a new game, which makes the whole thing less resource intensive. I'm not sure where other 'components' could be found that could be swapped in/out.

The bulk of the processing needs of the game come from three sources - number of players/characters; leagues running in the background; the match engine. The first two can be already reduced as I mentioned. The final one comes as a complete package, I don't see how you could 'reduce' components of it (apart from sounds, which can be taken out iirc).

More stats are provided per player/character compared to some of the older versions. The match engine is the other main point; clearly it is more complex than previous versions of the game, and hence takes more processing power. It could probably do with some optimisation (I get the odd slowdown here and there) but I don't see how else you could reduce resource requirements. All software, games in particular, are on a constant upwards trend in terms of resource requirements. The reality is that one day, you will have to buy a new computer to play the latest version of FM.

I never said I didn't and as I already said, being harsh was the point of this letter. To make an impact.

Personal gripe, but being 'harsh' achieves nothing in the long run. Being 'constructive' is much better, might actually achieve something, and encourages SI to respond.

Its quite poor really, to spend $90AU on a game thats near on unplayable out of the box and forces you to download a 200mb or so patch straight off the bat, to play something you should already be enjoying.

Perhaps my memory fails me, but I do not recall the launch-day patch for FM09 being 200mb in size. The subsequent patches yes, but that is because they contain the full database will all the associated updates.

Funnily enough, the game was also very, very playable for me right out of the box. Advertised features worked, the match engine was sound, and the database appeared accurate to my eyes.

Scouting of clubs is also quite poor at times, far to many people overrated their clubs youth (Arsenal a big culprit of this).

Many researchers over exaggerate how good their clubs players are (Arsenal), particularly towards the youth they have.

Do you actually have other clubs apart from the constant Arsenal example, that as others in here have noted, is not a database issue, but rather a match engine issue? What about specific players? Why are they overrated? In what areas? Is it a general stats issue, or a CA/PA issue?

If you actually have some examples, go to the Data Issues Forum and contribute it there, in the appropriate team/nation thread; that is what it is there for. SI do actually encourage community participation into the database. In fact, if you think the quality is so poor, you should volunteer your time and energy towards improving the FM10 database and go for one of the research posts for FM10 that is vacent.

Perhaps my memory fails me, but I do not recall the launch-day patch for FM09 being 200mb in size. The subsequent patches yes, but that is because they contain the full database will all the associated updates.

Funnily enough, the game was also very, very playable for me right out of the box. Advertised features worked, the match engine was sound, and the database appeared accurate to my eyes.

9.01 patch = 165mb, close enough and not really the main point either.

The game was playable if you want to play a game of pulling your hair out.

- GK long kicks over your defence for strikers to score.

- Strikers would miss a good 8/10 1-on-1 situations.

- The tactic screen bug with the player positions having a extra player showing. (Didnt effect the game, but annoying none the less).

- Tactically the match engine was really touchy and inconsistent. Despite that I personally was still able to do well, but it was hardly a joy to deal with.

Just some issues, that spring back to mind.

Some of those things should never have made the game as far as Im concerned. Iron those things out during beta testing, they wernt hard to miss.

Obvious they were fixed later on but for me those things should have been sorted pre-release.

FM09 was the worst state any of the FM series has been released at.

Do you actually have other clubs apart from the constant Arsenal example, that as others in here have noted, is not a database issue, but rather a match engine issue? What about specific players? Why are they overrated? In what areas? Is it a general stats issue, or a CA/PA issue?

If you actually have some examples, go to the Data Issues Forum and contribute it there, in the appropriate team/nation thread; that is what it is there for. SI do actually encourage community participation into the database. In fact, if you think the quality is so poor, you should volunteer your time and energy towards improving the FM10 database and go for one of the research posts for FM10 that is vacent.

Man Utd is another.

Its more just he bias ratings that are given towards players. Adebayor for instance is a machine in the game and one of the best forwards. IRL thats hardly the case, yet his ratings dont reflect that.

While players like Randall, Wilkshire (iirc from top of my head) are all pretty much certian to be good players on the game, because of the stats they get to start with.

I have no issue with them becoming good players but not right at the start of the game, when you've got players like Kakuta or Stoch from Chelsea who are on similar levels, yet given half the ratings.

Its more about just having researchers provide more of a realistic rating of players, rather then make them better then they are because its their club.

I dont really play in England so cant give much more insight into other clubs, but I know that compared to other leagues like Italy, the youth rating inparticular are quite skewed in the English favour.

Keep the same PA's and that, just make the chances of them being good more realistic and influenced by how much time you put into developing them. To many are just good, regardless if you dont train them at all. To me that is unrealistic and kinda does damage the game.

Great Post ZoL

I support what you have written.

I bought FM 2009 on its release day, it took me 2 days to install the game due to some game installation ****-up by SI. Some "smart" act by SI!

Anyway, I have fedback to SI, that it really makes no sense that a patch is already in place even before FM series is released. After installing Patch 2, I have not played FM2009 regularly. And even more frustrating when I see Patch 3, I asked for advice to download the patch, I tried for days and the Download Site keeps saying "quota error". What a heck!

I am not looking forward to FM2010, I can foresee the same problems coming back again, and again. As someone mentioned, some simple bugs remain unsolved.

SI has lost a fan, I have bought all the FM series since Champ Manager 1, and I will not be silly to throw my money into the drain in future.

Buck up SI if you don't want to lose more FM fans.

Ciao~

9.01 patch = 165mb, close enough and not really the main point either.

The game was playable if you want to play a game of pulling your hair out.

- GK long kicks over your defence for strikers to score.

- Strikers would miss a good 8/10 1-on-1 situations.

- The tactic screen bug with the player positions having a extra player showing. (Didnt effect the game, but annoying none the less).

- Tactically the match engine was really touchy and inconsistent. Despite that I personally was still able to do well, but it was hardly a joy to deal with.

Just some issues, that spring back to mind.

Some of those things should never have made the game as far as Im concerned. Iron those things out during beta testing, they wernt hard to miss.

Obvious they were fixed later on but for me those things should have been sorted pre-release.

FM09 was the worst state any of the FM series has been released at.

Man Utd is another.

Its more just he bias ratings that are given towards players. Adebayor for instance is a machine in the game and one of the best forwards. IRL thats hardly the case, yet his ratings dont reflect that.

While players like Randall, Wilkshire (iirc from top of my head) are all pretty much certian to be good players on the game, because of the stats they get to start with.

I have no issue with them becoming good players but not right at the start of the game, when you've got players like Kakuta or Stoch from Chelsea who are on similar levels, yet given half the ratings.

Its more about just having researchers provide more of a realistic rating of players, rather then make them better then they are because its their club.

I dont really play in England so cant give much more insight into other clubs, but I know that compared to other leagues like Italy, the youth rating inparticular are quite skewed in the English favour.

Keep the same PA's and that, just make the chances of them being good more realistic and influenced by how much time you put into developing them. To many are just good, regardless if you dont train them at all. To me that is unrealistic and kinda does damage the game.

Just a small comment on that 'cause I'm tired, but.. Wilshere >>>> Kakuta or Stoch. Have you even seen him or Randall to compare them to? Wilshere is probably the most talented youngster to come through the Arsenal academy since Ashley Cole, and just from a handful of appearances he has shown the quality that has merited him a first-team squad number and numerous cup and substitute appearances. The fact you don't even know his name suggests your level of knowledge of him..

Randall is nowhere near as good, but still seems a very talented player. The fact he was loaned to a Championship side (who are now a Premier League side - Burnley) and performed pretty well, although mostly appearing as a substitute, suggests why his stats a year on are roughly that of a decent Championship player.

As for the two examples of Chelsea players you have mentioned, I'd say both are pretty accurate. Particularly given the poor quality produced by Chelsea's youth system in recent years, the potential of the majority of players is suitably low.

Stoch has made a few sub appearances for the first team but has hardly shone or shown any real talent. His stats maybe appear a tad harsh, but his crucial stats such as dribbling are pretty decent for an average team, considering he's done nothing to show he's any better. As in reality, he's a very quick and flairy player, but with little end product at anywhere near the top level, nor shown the potential to improve significantly.

As for Kakuta, he's a pretty much unknown entity. He's said to be a good prospect, but even at youth level his scoring record isn't brilliant for an attacker, although he's not always a striker to be fair. He's also been injured quite a lot which could significantly hamper his progress. However, in game his potential is rather high, and he can turn into a quality player. He starts off rather good, and is probably one of the best attackers/strikers in any U18 side, and within a year becomes a decent Championship quality player. If his future performances suggest he'll be greater, or if he breaks into the first team set-up, I'm sure his attributes and potential will be suitably adjusted.

Its more about just having researchers provide more of a realistic rating of players, rather then make them better then they are because its their club.

I do not think this is the case at all. Just one look at the Data Issues Forum and the amount of trolling fanboys that are in there, and you will quickly realise that it is the researchers that often keep a level head when it comes to rating players; if anything, they keep ratings down overall.

You seem to imply that the researchers are biased because they are watching 'their club'. While that is probably true to an extent, some time spent in the DI Forum will quickly reveal that researchers do not just look at their squad go "I rate em like this" and submit that, whereby it is accepted without question. No, there are guidelines, rankings depending on league, league standing, reputation etc. that guides limits as to where researchers can rate/rank players; there is plenty (and I do mean plenty) of vigourous discussion between the researchers and SI staff. And don't forget, most of these researchers got the position because they spend a heck of a lot of time watching these players (live in most cases, including reserve games), it's not as if they are seeing a player on TV a few times and going "he's a 190 PA, without a doubt".

I see no evidence to suggest that researcher bias is as easy to get in as you are suggesting (although I'm sure it exists to an extent).

Again, I stress that if you feel that the way the researchers have rated a particular player is incorrect, go to the appropriate thread in the Data Issues Forum and post your comments in there, with reasons and explanations other than "Player X scores like 20 goals a season, but IRL last year he was pants, his CA has to be reduced". Well reasoned explanations and observations will help to improve the data quality overall.

The OP makes some valid points, if in an inappropriate manner, and many responses reflect my feelings, so I'll just add a different point.

Inevitably there are going to be subjective judgments. We have differing tastes vis-a-vis skins and graphics, and we have different assessments of individual players and teams. SI can't please everyone on these matters - but that's where the community comes in. I love the way brilliant fans across the world make new skins, backgrounds and utilities. I can choose from loads of skins and download my favourites for free. I can download graphical enhancements that SI can't afford due to licensing issues; thus increasing my enjoyment - again for free. And regarding players' attributes - I can use FMRTE to edit them to what I subjectively consider to be my accurate assessment. So I'm saying that when we take SI together with the community as a whole, we have an outstanding team.

I certainly don't think they're gonna come close to releasing a bug-free version of FM at any point in the future. Things are overlooked, adding new features will almost certainly have an affect on other features and problems will occur.

Having said that, I don't think it's unacceptable to ask for a more streamlined gaming experience. It's all well and good creating new features and adding to the core of the game. Of course as a brand FM will want to improve, however surely it's not a big deal for SI to take into account the lower spec PC's? I mean, if you're going to make a product then it has to work for everyone. At this point the game runs at a fairly decent speed but you did used to be able to play the game at a very quick speed, things would load faster and you'd get more value for your gaming time.

When it comes down to adding new features surely the best new feature would be a faster, more responsive game. The 3d match engine is something gamers have been mooting for a while but in truth it's not that great when you can't run the damn thing. I'm on a decent computer but I don't even have my game installed because of the amount of time it takes to get through a season.

Don't get me wrong. The lads here doing a cracking job, from the researchers to the developers but surely it's not asking too much to take "usability" into account?

- Other points Zoli has made are to a degree valid points. Granted the scouting is something that is a job of such grand proportions that it would never be considered. I think the game is pretty decently scouted. Overall you get an accurate game.

One thing we'd come up with for FM10 is this: http://loswonderkids.com/community/topic/5392-7-things-a-humble-man-wants-from-si/page__view__findpost__p__104163

Now that's not a cheap plug but an idea we mulled over at LW. Is that not a way in which you could resolve some of the scouting issues in the game? Setting a marker of which managers can improve which players would be a concept that would surely add that finishing touch to the game? Not only that, researchers wouldn't need to be so accurate as you add a dimension to the game which allows you to believe slightly unrealistic stats due to the nature of the club, manager and player involved.

Anyway, aside from any unrealistic requests I think Zoli is pretty much spot on with his opinions. Of course he isn't speaking for everyone and he is asking for a lot to some degree but you can get what he is asking for by using a similar methodology to what I laid out above in that link. In my opinion

- As for the SI interaction with the fansites, I don't think it's terrible. Joe Turner does a good job, he does keep in contact when he needs to and his presence may appear low on the "scene" but I'm sure he is floating around, checking things out

-- Also, http://loswonderkids.com/community/topic/5064-what-do-you-want-from-fm/page__view__findpost__p__96226

^Since this has become a request thread ^

I do not think this is the case at all. Just one look at the Data Issues Forum and the amount of trolling fanboys that are in there, and you will quickly realise that it is the researchers that often keep a level head when it comes to rating players; if anything, they keep ratings down overall.

You seem to imply that the researchers are biased because they are watching 'their club'. While that is probably true to an extent, some time spent in the DI Forum will quickly reveal that researchers do not just look at their squad go "I rate em like this" and submit that, whereby it is accepted without question. No, there are guidelines, rankings depending on league, league standing, reputation etc. that guides limits as to where researchers can rate/rank players; there is plenty (and I do mean plenty) of vigourous discussion between the researchers and SI staff. And don't forget, most of these researchers got the position because they spend a heck of a lot of time watching these players (live in most cases, including reserve games), it's not as if they are seeing a player on TV a few times and going "he's a 190 PA, without a doubt".

I see no evidence to suggest that researcher bias is as easy to get in as you are suggesting (although I'm sure it exists to an extent).

Again, I stress that if you feel that the way the researchers have rated a particular player is incorrect, go to the appropriate thread in the Data Issues Forum and post your comments in there, with reasons and explanations other than "Player X scores like 20 goals a season, but IRL last year he was pants, his CA has to be reduced". Well reasoned explanations and observations will help to improve the data quality overall.

Thats the key thing, if there are issues, get them reported in the appropriate place. When that is done, constructively, then genrally you get a reasoned debate about it. I see it as your very own chance to improve the data! In general on these forums, SI, have a great presence, better than a lot of other developers forums certainly and listen to and respond to reasoned debate.

People that are harping on the activation issues on release day, none of which i had TBF, seem to forget that the servers handling the process came under attack which knocked them out for a while. Add to that the volumes of copies trying to be activated at the same time and there is the crux of the problem. SI/SEGA have already mentioned this, and apologised for it, and said they have learned from it!

Also with regards to testing, they have 'recruited' many more testers this year as opposed to last year. This should cut out some more bugs, but not all of them as has been mentioned before. This also means that they are being tested on a broader range of systems so should be easier for lower end systems to take. Part of the DRM last year was to take a snapshot of peoples system to see what specs they have, and therefore see what they are working with.

The Game - Shameless advertising

I think that Zol!'s argument is not constructed in the best way possible but he makes some very very valid points! I work for a gaming company and we put soo much more effort into support, testing and research. And it pays off extremely well. Zol!, you definitely speak on behalf of me .

"don't release a game with bugs"

Never going to happen. It's a piece of software, and software has bugs, it's that simple.

You cant make a game without bugs, there bound to pop up

1. Bugs in Release

It is a sad reality of software development that there will inevitably be parts of the software that do not operate as intended.

and the proof for this mass generalisation is?

The Game - Shameless advertising

Ha! Not only that; it's the OP's website. They're ganging up!!

Ha! Not only that; it's the OP's website. They're ganging up!!

Or maybe people here just like to view things though their tinted glasses, because its SI Forums and they can do no wrong?

Which of course no doubt happens with some.

Some good points there Zoli. On the scouts I've also found a problem with certain countries being underated just because of the SI league rating when scouts/researchers of other Similar nations overrate poor players. I know of a nation who's players finally get properly rated when they move overseas, which is sad because in the long term this ruins some national team games.

I'm quite peeved that I am being spoken for, using opinions and views that aren't mine.

I'm sure the SI people aren't stupid enough to think that these are everyones views. They might be peeved you think that they are so dumb?

and the proof for this mass generalisation is?

No Software is completely bug free when it's released, it just doesn't happen. Especially something as big and complex as Football manager.

and the proof for this mass generalisation is?

Common sense. Does anyone seriously think that it is possible to write millions of lines of code without making some errors, or discovering unexpected behaviour when it is all put together?

No Software is completely bug free when it's released, it just doesn't happen. Especially something as big and complex as Football manager.

This is true and if they release a game every single year there are bound to be a number of bugs.

That's why I'm one of those who'd prefer SI launched a new FM every two years with less bugs. FM08 was almost unplayable out of the box though I must admit FM09 was an improvement in this aspect.

The OP has a very good point about the game's system requirements. I cannot run the 3D on my machine and that's fair enough, I never even expected too. However, we were promised an unchanged 2D view - but it doesn't work properly whereas FM08's ran flawlessly.

And I find it staggering that people still try to deny the existence of the "Arsenal problem". They were unrealistically good in FM08 and they are even better in FM09 and it doesn't really matter whether it's because of the player attributes or because of the match engine. I once conducted a little experiment: holidayed through the first season with FM09 ten times. If I recall correctly, eight times out of ten Arsenal won the league.

As for everyone else.. I used my name 2 times, making this personal.

Thus that's the reason you wrote you were writing for the entire community?

@bollekewol:

yes, but wouldn't it be normal for people to be able to scout the entire World after winning a UCL? I think this is far for being realistic and it has an effect on league development. If this isn't spot on, then the way of rep being assigned to leagues is not correct.

At the Arsenal debate. The fact are that Arsenal can safely win the UCL 2 years in a row with their current squad. I think Arsenal's first team is better than any other team's in the game.

No, it wouldn't. It depends on a numerous amount of things and not on simply winning one major cup. THAT is realistic, your idea of "I win so I should be able to do this or that" is far from realistic.

Your ideas about Arsenal have already been discussed above.

Also, I tend to avoid comments which start with "don't speak for us".

Then don't write you are speaking for the entire community when you're obviously not.

First, about the bugs. This year we got a patch right after release. Wouldn't you have preferred to get the game and not download anything? What about people who have no internet access, or people who have bad connections?

No.

Besides, I have bad connections thanks to the uni connection. The only difference is that when you have that you need to be more creative. I got around it, others have too or will at one point. How else do you expect the patches of January/February be distributed? Through shops? Than be prepared to pay for them.

The skin. As I said, I am sure many like it. Still, if 50% don't, then there is a problem.

That's still not the majority.

Besides, there is a wide variety of skins made by fans. You get the game and a few days later you can change the skin already to something that suits you better. I rather have SI spend time on other stuff than creating a few extra skins.

Resources. By not installing some components, we might gain resources. I think this is something which can be done. I mean older FM's had very similar db's and they ran smoother. There must be the other features..

And this from the person who wants SI to work on more minor things like conferences. You can chose to going back to basics and than not complain about the extras not being how you would like them or you want the features and don't complain about the PCs needing more power to get it done.

FM is well beyond England imo. For example we can find great discussion on Hungarian Madrid forums. Not FM, just Real Madrid. Also, there are lots of great "foreign" sites. I for one would preffer playing in the Spanish 4th Div, instead of the BSN. I am very sure that lots share my view. If you go almost all the way down in England, than please do the same in other major countries.

Again, you're free to go and scout them... Be aware: you're not getting paid. Good luck with trying to find enough people to go and scout the lower divisions. SI got it done for England because they're an English company and are big in the UK. As stated again: if you have enough volunteers, it can be done: look at Belgium.

Nothing will change until si start losing money because a different game (hopefully cm10 ) starts to give them a beating in the shops . Si see us as piggy banks releasing sub standard rubbish that is not fit for purpose .

Nothing will change until si start losing money because a different game (hopefully cm10 ) starts to give them a beating in the shops . Si see us as piggy banks releasing sub standard rubbish that is not fit for purpose .

Do you have some sort of thesus or whatever it is that proves this?

Presumptions get people no where.

@bol

1. It's a fictional letter. I will include whatever I want in it

2. Lol. I have 50mil in balance and I can't scout the World. If you think this would happen in real life, then you clearly don't have any trace of logic.

3. See #1.

4. You don't get my point. I don't want patches. Not 3, in any case.

5. Lol again. I know there are lots of skins. They usually come out after a month from the release

6. Fixing press conferences would take away more resources? OK...

7. Majority of the Spanish 4th Div clubs and players are already in the database.

@bol

1. It's a fictional letter. I will include whatever I want in it

2. Lol. I have 50mil in balance and I can't scout the World. If you think this would happen in real life, then you clearly don't have any trace of logic.

3. See #1.

4. You don't get my point. I don't want patches. Not 3, in any case.

5. Lol again. I know there are lots of skins. They usually come out after a month from the release

6. Fixing press conferences would take away more resources? OK...

7. Majority of the Spanish 4th Div clubs and players are already in the database.

*sighs*

So it's a fictional letter? Meaning it's not fact. Nice one.

Starting a comeback argument with "lol" again, nice one.

4 . So you'd rather have a game with bugs that SI make no attempt to fix? Face it you aren't going to get a game this complex with out bugs in.

5. So you can't play the game at all in the first month before the skins come out? Do you have some sort of rare eye disease or something.

6. You want more features but it to be less demanding. Nice logic.

*sighs*

So it's a fictional letter? Meaning it's not fact. Nice one.

Starting a comeback argument with "lol" again, nice one.

4 . So you'd rather have a game with bugs that SI make no attempt to fix? Face it you aren't going to get a game this complex with out bugs in.

5. So you can't play the game at all in the first month before the skins come out? Do you have some sort of rare eye disease or something.

6. You want more features but it to be less demanding. Nice logic.

I think it's pretty hard thinking that this is not a fictional letter.

Some comments made me "lol".

4. Less bugs, less patches.

5. Indeed.

6. For the 10th time.. Improving things like the press conferences, or tweaking the confidence system wouldn't take more resources away. People just say things..