Will data base feature work better this year, SI?

What I hope this year is that the SI makes the data base option more correctly. In previous versions, after february update, this feature worked very poorly. I am one of those people who wish all the benefits from the new patch, except for all transfer that have occurred between the game was released and the latest patch. Reason for this is because I do not consider it realistic to start playing in the summer of 2009 with all transfer from winter 2010 included. Thus, it is rational for me to choose to play with date base 10.2 instead 10.3. By selecting the 10.2 data base I still get all necessary updates in relation to ME and the players' attributes, while all transfers are in accordance with reality of summer of 2009. Let me give an example of what was one of the errors of previous versions and that illustrates the problem in a good way:

Last year, Robbie Keane has been bought by Liverpool during the summer transfer window in real life. The same Robbie Keane was sold back to Tottenham when Redknapp took over during the winter transfer. When the february update was in place the game chose to interpret this as follows, despite the fact that I chose to play with data base 90.2 and not 90.3: the start of the game was the summer of 2008, and I chose to play with the data base 90.2, however, the game chose to have Robbie Keane as Tottenham player in the summer of 2008. In addition, Robbie Kean`s history said that he played for Liverpool! This is just an example of how bad this feature worked. There were too many examples where the game decided to include the player's real life loan in their history, when this should not be included in the game when you start the game in the summer of 2008 and with data base from 90.2.

Another example is the managers and staff update. Last year, Blackburn was under the leadership of Ince in the summer of 2008. He was then sacked in autumn 2008 in real life. When february update arrived, I started the game in the summer of 2008 and chose once again data base 90.2 insted of 90.3. Despite this, the game chose Sam Allardyce as Blackburn manager in sommer 2008, who in real life joined the club in december? I know that Ince was sacked IRL, but this should not be included when I chose to play with data base 90.2 and with the summer of 2008 as a starting point, because in real life Ince was still manager at Blackburn at that time. This must be rectified this year.

I'm sorry if this may seem a bit messy, but I found no better way to explain the problem. If I shall conclude short it should be like this: what I want from SI this year is that data from 10.2 works properly when I select it in the wake of that patch 10.3. I want all the changes from 10.3 includet when I choose to play with 10.2 data base, except from all transfer from january window and players history that includes RL events from the period summer 2009 - winter 2010. This is how this feature should work, but it never did work properly in previous versions, because it was mixture from both data base.

i think it would make more sense just to make the patch as a patch only without the updates.

i think it would make more sense just to make the patch as a patch only without the updates.

It could be a good idea. One patch with transfer updates and one without.

Id prefer it if the update was made as Future Transfers to be honest.

Id prefer it if the update was made as Future Transfers to be honest.

Even this would have been better than the system that the SI had in previous versions.

IIRC, when you start a new game, you are only selecting the database to use, rather than what patch you are using.

ie: if I start a game now, I can select the "10.1" database, but the game would still have the effects of the 10.2 patch, in terms of the match engine etc.

Just checked, you have an option to start the game with the "default" database, which gives you the 10.0 data, but the game is still uses the 10.2 patch.

I agree you should also have the option to select the 10.1 database too, though.

i agree that all Jan transfers on 10.3 should be set to future transfers. Just say Man Utd sold Rooney in this transfer window, if i start a new game in July, why should i have already lost my best player when he didnt move for another 6 months. I cant see it being that difficult for SI to make all these transfers "future". After all they do want the game to be as realistic as possible, dont they?

IIRC, when you start a new game, you are only selecting the database to use, rather than what patch you are using.

ie: if I start a game now, I can select the "10.1" database, but the game would still have the effects of the 10.2 patch, in terms of the match engine etc.

Yes I know that, but it is not why I m complaining. Read my opening post. This option never worked as is it should because it had some strange mix of both data base, as Kean example I wrote about, and many other errors.

i agree that all Jan transfers on 10.3 should be set to future transfers. Just say Man Utd sold Rooney in this transfer window, if i start a new game in July, why should i have already lost my best player when he didnt move for another 6 months. I cant see it being that difficult for SI to make all these transfers "future". After all they do want the game to be as realistic as possible, dont they?

It would be a choice, but not the ultimate one. It would be wrong to loose Rooney to some other club when the deal IRL was signed sometimes in january. When I start the game in sommer 2009 this deal was not signed IRL, so the best solution will be to not have him set to future transfer because it was another manager who sold him, not you. You took over as manager in sommer 2009, not in january 2010.

personally i like it how it is....

but then again.. i am also suprised SI have stopped offering an option.... i.e with data update or not... or make the future transfer thing work..

It would be a choice, but not the ultimate one. It would be wrong to loose Rooney to some other club when the deal IRL was signed sometimes in january. When I start the game in sommer 2009 this deal was not signed IRL, so the best solution will be to not have him set to future transfer because it was another manager who sold him, not you. You took over as manager in sommer 2009, not in january 2010.

well i suppose it depends on how real you want the game to be. The same could be said for the jan transfers. If you take over in july why would you want another managers transfers in your team when you take over.

Im a Man Utd fan and if we lost Rooney now then theres nothing you can do. But if you want the game to be real then why lose out on Rooney for 6 months of the season when his goals have put us where we are now.

The first season of this game is always meant to reflect real life to a certain extent. thats why we bother to make data updates and so on. If you wanted a true reflection on real life all you have to do is use the option to take away the transfer budgets for the first window (or if they include jan transfers as future then make it 2 windows so you cant buy in jan) so its as close to real life as possible. Then from season 2 you can start building your own team.

Like i said this is an option depending on how real you want the game to be at the start

well i suppose it depends on how real you want the game to be. The same could be said for the jan transfers. If you take over in july why would you want another managers transfers in your team when you take over.

You do not follow. I do not want this, and that is the point. If I start the game in July 2009 I want only real life transfer up to that date to be included. Neither more nor less.

Im a Man Utd fan and if we lost Rooney now then theres nothing you can do

Yes you do, because Rooney was not lost in july 2009 but in january 2010 in real life. If you choose then to play with july 2009 as a starting point, the deal shuold not be included. The deal should only be included if the starting point of the game is february 2010. Is it so difficult to understand this?

The first season of this game is always meant to reflect real life to a certain extent. thats why we bother to make data updates and so on. If you wanted a true reflection on real life all you have to do is use the option to take away the transfer budgets for the first window (or if they include jan transfers as future then make it 2 windows so you cant buy in jan) so its as close to real life as possible. Then from season 2 you can start building your own team.

Like i said this is an option depending on how real you want the game to be at the start

I allways choose to play with the option which takes away the transfer budgets for the first window. You dont follow at all mate, it is obvious that this is too complicated for you. Try and read my opening post again, because I do not want to be involved in discourse where one party totally ignores what the other side says.

no you dont understand what im saying. If Rooney goes in Jan 2010 then i want him to go in Jan 2010 regardless of when i take over. And if you actually read what everyone else is saying you will see that we are saying there should be 2 options for the patch. 1 with the bugs fixed, finances and data changes fixed but with the original database with no jan transfers. And another patch which includes the Jan transfers but with them all set as future transfers so they actually happen in jan and not when you take over in july.

You can already use the original db if you want with an updated patch. its not rocket science. Also like your saying if you want to use the 10.1 db with the new patch then im sure theres an easy enough way of doing it. In previous versions all you had to do was copy the db from the patch and copy it over the original db so when you start a new game and select original db its actually the version that you want.

All it takes is a bit of common sense but i suppose if your not so great on computers then this may be too complicated for you

Well i also want player stats etc. to be updated, but thats only possible in a database with all the "future transfers" already implemented... why not just a database without the transfers but with the stats improvements?.....

If Rooney goes in Jan 2010 then i want him to go in Jan 2010 regardless of when i take over.

Again you dont read. It is not realistic for the transfer deal which happans in Jan 2010 in real life to get trough when you take over in Jul 2009. How can it be? You are making your owen history when you take over in Jul 2009, and should not be depending on something that happans in the future in the real life. Only if you take over in Jun 2010 this deal should be included. The claim from your side is irrational.

And if you actually read what everyone else is saying you will see that we are saying there should be 2 options for the patch. 1 with the bugs fixed, finances and data changes fixed but with the original database with no jan transfers. And another patch which includes the Jan transfers but with them all set as future transfers so they actually happen in jan and not when you take over in july.

And I agree with that, read my respons to Edle. What's your point really here when this is something that I never said I opposed?

You can already use the original db if you want with an updated patch. its not rocket science.

In heaven's name. I have already answered that I am fully aware of this, and that this is not what I m complaining about. What I am complaining about is that this feature has never worked as it should. Have you actually read anything of what I wrote?

Also like your saying if you want to use the 10.1 db with the new patch then im sure theres an easy enough way of doing it. In previous versions all you had to do was copy the db from the patch and copy it over the original db so when you start a new game and select original db its actually the version that you want.

No, all you have to do is to start the game with the previous data base, but for the 100 time: this doesnt work as it should! It never did, and I have played this game since early 1990s.

All it takes is a bit of common sense but i suppose if your not so great on computers then this may not be possible for you to do

Ok, I have no desire to discuss this more with you. Not just because you absolutely ignore codes for a rational discourse but you also have preferences to provoke. I have no interest to drag this on the low level as you want, because it involves people with subjective preferences to win the discourse.

What I hope this year is that the SI makes the data base option more correctly. In previous versions, after february update, this feature worked very poorly. I am one of those people who wish all the benefits from the new patch, except for all transfer that have occurred between the game was released and the latest patch. Reason for this is because I do not consider it realistic to start playing in the summer of 2009 with all transfer from winter 2010 included. Thus, it is rational for me to choose to play with date base 10.2 instead 10.3. By selecting the 10.2 data base I still get all necessary updates in relation to ME and the players' attributes, while all transfers are in accordance with reality of summer of 2009. Let me give an example of what was one of the errors of previous versions and that illustrates the problem in a good way:

Last year, Robbie Keane has been bought by Liverpool during the summer transfer window in real life. The same Robbie Keane was sold back to Tottenham when Redknapp took over during the winter transfer. When the february update no. 3 was in place the game chose to interpret this as follows, despite the fact that I chose to play with data base no. 2: the start of the game was the summer of 2008, and I chose to play with the update data base no. 2, however, the game chose to have Robbie Keane as Tottenham player in the summer of 2008. In addition, Robbie Kean`s history said that he played for Liverpool! This is just an example of how bad this feature worked. There were too many examples where the game decided to include the player's real life loan in their history, when this should not be included in the game when you start the game in the summer of 2008 and with data base from no. 2.

Another example is the managers and staff update. Last year, Blackburn was under the leadership of Ince in the summer of 2008. He was then sacked in autumn 2008 in real life. When february update arrived, I started the game in the summer of 2008 and chose once again update no. 2 insted of no. 3. Despite this, the game chose Sam Allardyce as Blackburn manager in sommer 2008, who in real life joined the club in december? I know that Ince was sacked IRL, but this should not be included when I chose to play with update no. 2 and with the summer of 2008 as a starting point, because in real life Ince was still manager at Blackburn at that time. This must be rectified this year.

I'm sorry if this may seem a bit messy, but I found no better way to explain the problem. If I shall conclude short it should be like this: what I want from SI this year is that data from 10.2 works properly when I select it in the wake of that patch 10.3. I want all the changes from 10.3 includet when I choose to play with 10.2 data base, except from all transfer from january window and players history that includes RL events from the period summer 2009 - winter 2010. This is how this feature should work, but it never did work properly in previous versions, because it was mixture from both data base.

i bloody hated this !!!! it killed fm2009 for me !!!! keanes history read......

2008/09 liverpool ,£25m. played 0, scored 0.......

2008/09 spurs ,£19m, played 0, scored 0.!!!!!!!

come on so liverpool got keane and then sold im for less on the same day !!!!!!!

i know the yanks are running liverpool into the ground but even they are not that thick !!!

ans its like that for all the FM's down the years !!!!!

i bloody hated this !!!! it killed fm2009 for me !!!! keanes history read......

2008/09 liverpool ,£25m. played 0, scored 0.......

2008/09 spurs ,£19m, played 0, scored 0.!!!!!!!

come on so liverpool got keane and then sold im for less on the same day !!!!!!!

i know the yanks are running liverpool into the ground but even they are not that thick !!!

ans its like that for all the FM's down the years !!!!!

It is exactly what I was talking about, and I feel your pain.

if the updates were made as future transfers then you wouldnt get this problem. In keanes history it would have shown you that spurs sold him to liverpool. if a future transfer was set so he went back to spurs in jan then this would be avoided. But because SI put all jan transfers in the team at the start of the game it causes this.

SI want to keep the info and stats in the game realistic. As these moves happened IRL they have to be shown in the players history. Like it has been said many times, if SI set the jan transfers to future things like this would be avoided. But until they do this just play the game and stop complaining about something in a players history. Its really not that important as far as the game goes.

The only thing that is important is that Spurs had Keane for a full season when they should have only had him from Jan, and Liverpool have lost out on a player they had for 6 months. The patch sorts out the finances as they are IRL so i bet they didnt scrap the trasfer fees did they even though in the game the transfer doesnt happen. I bet Liverpool are still down by £6m and Spurs up £6m when the patch updated the finances

I personally can't see why SI can't implement the "future transfers" suggestion in future FM versions. The building blocks are there and it should be easy to add into the game - to have the transfers set as agreed at a certain point in the future when they went through.

The only issue I can see is if the club who was buying the player then has no funds to buy the player when the transfer goes through. I guess the way around this is simply to reduce the tranfer budget that is given to the team and have it "set aside" for this transfer. But then would you get annoyed that you have taken over a club, and have no budget for players due to all the arranged transfers?

It would be interesting to hear SI's point of view on this.