Contraversial Topic

i love fm. iv had every game since 99-00.

its in a league of its own, im addicted to playing the game and play too much.

however, does anyone agree that the makers have rested on their laurels a bit.

each version, although better than the last in my opinion, i dont think they improve enough, or as much as they could.

its staraneg that the best management game has so many flaws, apart from the bugs, i mean the poor ways of communicating with players, the poor ways in which transfers are done, and the lack of many aspects that modern day football has, agents, tapping up, etc etc.

my question is, has si thought to themselves they have such a massive cult following that their games will outsell their rivals anyway. therefore not put as much effort in as they should to each new installment.

put it this way, if it was said to si, that a new game by a new company was to be released, similar to fm in its format and how it differs from the others. but with many issues re-vamped that fm have been to lazy to do, that this new company's game could threaten to take away many hardcore fm fans, that si would not take notice and produce a vastly improved game, much better than its predecessors!

if a club does the treble do they buy nobody?

do they think hey, we're the best no need to improve. maybe a couple of small transfers, youngsters etc???

no a properly run club/company with ambition always pushes itself for more!

so come on si, prove me wrong!!!!!!!!!

sorry for some mis-spelling, typed it extremely quickly!

if it was said to si, that a new game by a new company was to be released, similar to fm in its format and how it differs from the others. but with many issues re-vamped that fm have been to lazy to do, that this new company's game could threaten to take away many hardcore fm fans, that si would not take notice and produce a vastly improved game, much better than its predecessors!

Top quality idea there, let's all get together and start some rumors to this effect!

But seriously, I think they are trying pretty hard in reality.

I love the games and as long as each one is better than the last, no matter how small the difference, then I am happy. I think if its not broken then don't fix it.

Maybe they are resting on their laurels a bit, but I think they have earned the right to after almost two decades of excellent work, there is still no other management game that is as in depth or has such a vast database of players. I say keep up the good work

I dunno. The amount of detail that goes into programming a game like this, there are bound to be bugs. Too many new features = too many bugs. I look at the improvement over 2 years and I think it's more than acceptable.

I've seen comments in response to posts like this that say they should employ more programmers/testers, but this will have a "too many cooks" effect, and meshing all this together would cause even more issues. Other responses include "release it every two years instead with more patches", which is a valid arguement but for me I like the whole year-on-year anticipation thing. It's like Christmas without the disappointing books and pullovers.

I do think there should be more beta-testing. The current testers can clearly only test a certain number of scenarios. A lottery or something would be nice for loyal fans. Of course, they'd have to be locked in a room for a week with no internet access, but I'd be happy to volunteer.

SI are a business and demand a year-on-year product. I doubt very much anyone who makes that sort of decision is present on these forums, which is left to programmers and researchers to answer. They get paid for producing a year-on-year product and I seriously doubt they would say they don't do everything they can to produce a quality game.

I have cm 3 and 00/01. The difference is immense. There's twice as much leagues to start. Player option are greater, and much more.

I do think there should be more things to say in the media though. After applying for the Sevilla job I didn't have an option to say something like, "I don't want to leave, but want to further my career", or something like that. The options were crap and after choosing the "no comment", option, I was sacked!

Personally, i would rather wait a year without FM for the game to come back quicker and stronger than its predecessor. so the development team can include every little idea they can and straighten out all the kinks, ready for the brand spanking one

But then you'd have to play the current cm or pm series. If pm(prem manager) still run.

Originally posted by Gauvner:

Personally, i would rather wait a year without FM for the game to come back quicker and stronger than its predecessor. so the development team can include every little idea they can and straighten out all the kinks, ready for the brand spanking one

It's alright saying that and I understand where you are coming from, but a whole year without a release would hit finances surely. I don't know how much it would affect it, but i'm sure they can't pay their staff less to create a more in depth game.

I think the problem is the amount of good ideas we all have for the game and especially in the wishlist. As Ter says "we've got loads of ideas (too many to include)". I'm as guilty as anyone on these forums of giving the thumbs up to ideas and hoping they are in the game and then being disappointed, but if we are realistic about it, wehave no idea how hard it would be to implement and how difficult it would be to decide which was best.

There's hundreds and hundreds of ideas in the wishlist and ultimately some people are going to be disappointed that what they think is essential isn't included. If we had our way there would be 100's of changes, but I wouldn't fancy the job of trying to create them and implement them properly.

As far as i'm concerned, Si. I understand where everyones coming from re: new features, but I think we all have to understand the amount of work that goes into creating those features.

Originally posted by Nomis07:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gauvner:

Personally, i would rather wait a year without FM for the game to come back quicker and stronger than its predecessor. so the development team can include every little idea they can and straighten out all the kinks, ready for the brand spanking one

It's alright saying that and I understand where you are coming from, but a whole year without a release would hit finances surely. I don't know how much it would affect it, but i'm sure they can't pay their staff less to create a more in depth game.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh i realised that the finances would drop as soon as i hit post. Thats one of the downsides to having a game nearly 2 year-realeases financial issues. Shame really but its money. I know i wouldnt work for less .

Also i know where your coming from with the wishlist, i thinki every member on these forums are guilty of wishing something be implimented i for one.

Some people will be dissapointed but i think that there should deffinatly be some interaction with the Mods or even Developers on the forums making themselves known to the public, so we can atleast try to relate to how much work is done.

I would love it if a brilliant idea is drawn up and then a Developer replys stating the effort and time consumption involved whilst still being human about it. If you get me that is.

Originally posted by Ter:

We probably couldn't include everything we wanted to in two years either.

All the more reason to go back to seasonal update releases or bring "filler" releases between full releases.

I understand SI depend ona yearly release but I'm beging to question whether it's worth buying the seasonal release because

1) I can still enjoy playing a release for a long time (which is testiment to how playable the game is as a standard release)

2) As a long term fan of the series (93 onward) the last 5 releases have been quite similar and we havent seen a massive jump forward sicne the 2d Match engine.

Not critising, just saying I feel I could have probably get away with buying every second or even 3rd year release and would have probably jsut prefered a seasonal data update. Again I can understand SI's financial reasons for not doing this.

It is natural that the longer something goes on for the less easy it is to keep making giant steps forward with each release. Indeed, if you are making giant steps forward every single time then implicitly that means the previous releases were seriously lacking!

I don't agree with the idea of laziness on SI's part though - there are so many ideas that can be added, some which I imagine get partially added (or at least some process taking some portion of time considering how/whether an idea can be added) and then some reason found why it won't work or needs a lot more effort to get working. Everyone has different ideas on what they want and what they see as the flaws and priorities so it is never going to please everyone.

I find team talks add very little to my enjoyment and add a huge amount to my irritation at the game, but I assume the consensus is that they are a good addition (whilst obviously having room for improvement). Media interaction is lacking certainly, but since there is always a neutral option to just ignore media comments that has no good nor bad effect that doesn't bother me so much as things that a compulsory like team talks.

I can't stop myself from buying every new version when it comes out even though sometimes it takes time for me to get into it (e.g. I went back to FM07 constantly for the first 3-4 months of FM08 because I just couldn't get into it before the final patch). When FM08 came out my resolve to not go out and buy it immediately lasted exactly as long as it took for me to head to a game shop in my lunch break on the day it was released

I don't think seasonal updates are the way to go, there are still a lot of people who don't even know anything about patches etc and carry on with the game oblivious to updates available, they may be left at a disadvantage.

I actually think that people would be more receptive to a fully working out of box game with no need for a patch than a game with a load of new additions.

Originally posted by Ter:

That's your choice Box. If you don't feel the game is worth buying every year then that's fair enough.

It's up to us to make a game good enough for people to buy it each year and that's what we try our hardest to do.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">All the more reason to go back to seasonal update releases or bring "filler" releases between full releases.

I wouldn't agree. We've got a hell of a lot of ideas we would like to include and it wouldn't make sense to just stop releasing and do them. By the time we did that we would have even more ideas. We're still able to work on long term things as well. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just out of curiosity what is the best idea you have heard being bantered round the SI HQ that hasn't been implemented into the game? Why was this idea not implemented when manager "sons" (lol) was ?

Originally posted by Nomis07:

I don't think seasonal updates are the way to go.

That's what we have all been buying since CM 4 though, or so it seems.

At the end of the day FM08 is by far the best Football Simulation game.

I think with the introduction of the Match Engine in CM4 and the evolvement and development to CM 03-04, FM05, FM06, FM07 and FM08 has been drastic from SI's point of view but perhaps not ours.

I fully trust in SI to get it right and continue the trend of developing an utterly playable and enjoyable Football experience.

The only time they didn't was CM4 and if you compare CM4 and CM 01-02 you will see why.

Originally posted by Box:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nomis07:

I don't think seasonal updates are the way to go.

That's what we have all been buying since CM 4 though, or so it seems. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Match Engne in CM4 and in FM08 are very VERY different so its unfair to say that.

Originally posted by Box:

That's what we have all been buying since CM 4 though, or so it seems.

I don't think that way, although I know plenty of people do. I buy the new release, think I prefer the previous release and try to go back to it, within 30 minutes i'm back playing the new release. Additions such as board confidence etc may not be the most massive features and may not work properly, but I miss them when I try to play the previous version.

I'm probably different to most users on these forums though, because I think a revamp of interaction and additions to interaction would be first and foremost on my list of improvements and I would ignore other possibilities e.g. revamp of tactics.

It's not the size of change it's the quality that makes the difference

The Match Engne in CM4 and in FM08 are very VERY different so its unfair to say that.

Yes CM4 was terrible, alright then seasonal updates since 03/04

No I feel tehre has been a marked improvement in the match engine of FM08, no doubt about it.

Originally posted by Ter:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Some people will be dissapointed but i think that there should deffinatly be some interaction with the Mods or even Developers on the forums making themselves known to the public, so we can atleast try to relate to how much work is done.

I would love it if a brilliant idea is drawn up and then a Developer replys stating the effort and time consumption involved whilst still being human about it. If you get me that is.

The problem with being so open like that is that it lets the whole world know what we're working on. That's why everything is quiet until we make official announcements.

It would be great to have the community and stuff more involved in the game making process but we don't want to give the game away too early. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Once again Ter way to knock me off stride . But i do see where you are coming from so many other companys willing to poach ideas from the Best!

Originally posted by Nomis07:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Box:

That's what we have all been buying since CM 4 though, or so it seems.

I don't think that way, although I know plenty of people do. I buy the new release, think I prefer the previous release and try to go back to it, within 30 minutes i'm back playing the new release. Additions such as board confidence etc may not be the most massive features and may not work properly, but I miss them when I try to play the previous version.

I'm probably different to most users on these forums though, because I think a revamp of interaction and additions to interaction would be first and foremost on my list of improvements and I would ignore other possibilities e.g. revamp of tactics.

It's not the size of change it's the quality that makes the difference </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree whole heartedly, I love the media and interactive features of the game but I feel they havent been implemented to the standard the game or its fanbase requires. At first glance they are very , very nice and impress but it becomes apparant though that they are still flawed and/or repetitive once you get quite far into the game, this is particaurly the case with the media module.

I would put these feautures high up on any wish list for new releases. My frustration comes when I read with each release that these featuers have been "improved" and then when I play the game they are very similar as in previous releases with maybe a few changes made to the wordings of questions etc.

I find FM too complex in comparison to CM's of old though all CM (pre 2005) / FM games are classics.

I would love to see what CM would be like if the FM thing had never happened, if it were not possible to have 2d pitch displays would that extra effort have been invested in the mechanics of the original style management game?

Hope that makes sense, its just that every time I play CM01-02 (and I still do!) I think of my wishlist for that game, and it doesnt include the 2d thing, though that has its attractions I accept.

I think it's hard not to feel a little disappointed with every new edition, but ultimately I think each one improves on the previous version.

I'd take Tiger's point further and say that the likes of the 2d match representation, they weren't on my list of essentials, but now I couldn't play the game without it. We just have to go with the flow and as long as the changes are implemented well it is easy to deal with, it's when changes e.g. confidence don't work despite patches that people think nothing has really improved.

I would love to see what CM would be like if the FM thing had never happened, if it were not possible to have 2d pitch displays would that extra effort have been invested in the mechanics of the original style management game?

I sometimes wonder that too- I dont watch 2D at all and it seems somewhat unnecessary watching dots running about. But I understand that others find it fundamental to the game and I therefore its here to stay...thats also in part why I dont see the need of a 3D match engine. It would detract too much from adding other facets that would REALLY add to the enjoyment of the FM series.

Originally posted by byrner:

i love fm. iv had every game since 99-00.

its in a league of its own, im addicted to playing the game and play too much.

however, does anyone agree that the makers have rested on their laurels a bit.

each version, although better than the last in my opinion, i dont think they improve enough, or as much as they could.

its staraneg that the best management game has so many flaws, apart from the bugs, i mean the poor ways of communicating with players, the poor ways in which transfers are done, and the lack of many aspects that modern day football has, agents, tapping up, etc etc.

my question is, has si thought to themselves they have such a massive cult following that their games will outsell their rivals anyway. therefore not put as much effort in as they should to each new installment.

put it this way, if it was said to si, that a new game by a new company was to be released, similar to fm in its format and how it differs from the others. but with many issues re-vamped that fm have been to lazy to do, that this new company's game could threaten to take away many hardcore fm fans, that si would not take notice and produce a vastly improved game, much better than its predecessors!

if a club does the treble do they buy nobody?

do they think hey, we're the best no need to improve. maybe a couple of small transfers, youngsters etc???

no a properly run club/company with ambition always pushes itself for more!

so come on si, prove me wrong!!!!!!!!!

as you say, each version is better than the other. i certainly believe this too.

you also say that they dont improve it as much as they perhaps should.

but you've got to remember there are a few constraints. time and money.

you can't put everything you want in if you have a finite time to code it and test it.

so you have to be realistic with what you can put in to the game with the current time frame.

what i have noticed is that chelsea won the prem in the 3rd season. they went out and bought about 7 players for a combined total of 105mill pounds.

they attempted to buy another few for another 50mill or so but they were refused.

so unless thats a one off i'd say they do.

I'm pretty sure SI do what they can to develop the game as far as possible between the release. What I miss is not a game thing, but a suggestion boards at these forums. The way it works now the suggestions are poste in the General discussion forum, and in here they just drowns between all the threads were people are complaining about the game.

Veg, there is a wishlist thread, but it is for lists of ideas, whereas single ideas are supposed to be started as new threads.

I noticed someone mentioning the possibility of a voting system and perhaps that would be a good idea so SI can gauge what a majority of the fans actually want.

I don't think it's a case of not working hard enough, but of making the wrong decisions. The past two editions were more and more 'simulations' as many would call them. This has taken the pick-up-and-play-ness (I'm making up words as I go along) out of the game. I think the game has become less fun and it shows in the forums.

Originally posted by Yalcin:

I don't think it's a case of not working hard enough, but of making the wrong decisions. The past two editions were more and more 'simulations' as many would call them. This has taken the pick-up-and-play-ness (I'm making up words as I go along) out of the game. I think the game has become less fun and it shows in the forums.

Unfortunately I think they are stuck between a rock and a hard place regards playability. Take out features that make it "too hard" and lose some hardcore fans who will think it's a step in the wrong direction, continue trying to make it a simulation (and so making it harder) lose some of the pick up and play fans.

FM (or it's previous CM incarnations) have always aimed at the realism/simulation side of play though so that has not changed really - it's just that the more attempted realism you add the more things there are to balance out and to go wrong (both in terms of coding it to work well and in terms of managers having no idea what aspect of their play or management needs tweaking to improve problems).

I have bought one or two other football management games in the past (with 3d match engine) and all the surrounding simulation stuff was so bad that I soon lost interest because the 3d match engine only holds my attention and excitement for a short time before the novelty wears off.

I like having more tactical options than we used to, the trouble is I am amongst those who now finds it very difficult to work out how to balance my tactics whilst working them out for myself and using what I believe is realistic to real life (i.e. not match engine-busting tactics that see your strikers score 300 goals per season and your wingers claim 247 assists each).

I think that is an aspect where the input of the Assistant manager could be so much better to help get rid of many of the issues of people finding aspects too difficult. You can never expect a gamer to have the kind of tactical knowledge of Ray Houghton and whoever else advises SI to get their tactics modules as realistic as possible so even though it is unrealistic that a manager would lack so much in tactical knowledge and be corrected by his assistant it would be a hugely useful addition to teh game so long as Assistant manager's judgement is vastly improved from the current case.

Originally posted by Yalcin:

I don't think it's a case of not working hard enough, but of making the wrong decisions. The past two editions were more and more 'simulations' as many would call them. This has taken the pick-up-and-play-ness (I'm making up words as I go along) out of the game. I think the game has become less fun and it shows in the forums.

The other problem with any complex program is that introducing new features can affect existing parts of the program in ways that are difficult to anticipate.

Every new feature probably means three or four unintended consequences to iron out. You reach a point where it isn't time effective to put too many in at once.

Originally posted by Nomis07:

Veg, there is a wishlist thread, but it is for lists of ideas, whereas single ideas are supposed to be started as new threads.

I noticed someone mentioning the possibility of a voting system and perhaps that would be a good idea so SI can gauge what a majority of the fans actually want.

I know that, but the problem with a thread like that is that sooner or later that thread get messy and unorganized, because people will make all their different wishes in a thread. In the end that will be too many different wishes in one thread. In a suggestion forum, the suggestions will be organized in different threads.