What would happen to SI if???

We all bought FM 2011 next February rather than at release date? Would it affect them in any way or not at all?

It will be the first inacrnation I will probably wait until the final patch before buying if of course the reviews on here suggest that patches are needed to make it a decent game.

Always felt in the past that the game was pretty much playable without all the patches but this time around various issues make it not unplayable but certainly not realistic enough which does affect enjoyment.

This isn't a rant or a pop at SI because I have always loved the series but and sorry to repeat :

**One on Ones are really affecting use of strikers IMO. I have tried 4-4-2, 4-5-1, 4-3-3 and get reasonable success but despite having the likes of Cardozo and Adriano they just don't score. Adriano for instance with 7 goals all season and 5 of those were from corners, yet Riquelme and Noble just behind in the midfield get double figures with long efforts. Just not realistic.

**Wide formations being difficult to master. I have always played wide and made it work but until the 3rd patch the only way I can find success is with a narrow formation.

**Wingers being useless. Cross rare, medium, often. Hopeless. Hit the first man every time thus rendering a successful use of a TM pretty tough.

**Inconsistant results. Beat Man City away 1-0, then beat Man Utd away 1-0, then lose to Bolton at home 0-2 then tonk Arsenal 5-1 at home... then lose 3-0 at home to Everton!!!!!!! What is that all about?! Yes I know it happens IRL but there are too many off field happenings that affect results and not enough on field. You are high on confidence and on a good run and a dodgy teamtalk destroys all that work?! Not realistic...

I could go on but won't, so would it affect SI if we all waited?!

it will only serve to show them that a few idiots who claim to be not ranting at them ..are in fact doing so with thinly veiled threads like this and that them not buying the game will be a blessing in disguise....

"the game is easily the best game of its kind ever made.. but it has a few issues which even though i know SI are trying to solve , I infact want perfection off the bat... thanks!!! any chance of a free moon on the stick with the game too?"

Nobody will wait, outside of the forums.

Besides which, I guarantee you that next year, most "reviews" on here will say that patches are needed. That happens every year.

it will only serve to show them that a few idiots who claim to be not ranting at them ..are in fact doing so with thinly veiled threads like this and that them not buying the game will be a blessing in disguise....

"the game is easily the best game of its kind ever made.. but it has a few issues which even though i know SI are trying to solve , I infact want perfection off the bat... thanks!!! any chance of a free moon on the stick with the game too?"

Best line of the day

Nobody will wait, outside of the forums.

Besides which, I guarantee you that next year, most "reviews" on here will say that patches are needed. That happens every year.

of course.... but again.. fm will get 90+ % in almost every review out there... as it will be the best of its kind.... and anyone with any patience or indeed sense., can see that and give SI the time and room to improve and /or innovate the game with every installment as it has done so far

of course.... but again.. fm will get 90+ % in almost every review out there... as it will be the best of its kind.... and anyone with any patience or indeed sense., can see that and give SI the time and room to improve and /or innovate the game with every installment as it has done so far

No need to get personal with the words "idiot" and "sense". I'm being constructive, rather than being insulting maybe you can do the same!

Your quote "as it will be the best of its kind." sums it up perfectly, it is the best of it's kind because there are no actual compeditors at the moment to run it close.

As I said before I am not making a rant or even a thinly veiled dig, I am merely pointing out a few issues (albeit again) and asking what would happen if people did wait until the finished article.

I have patience, and sense as I have been fairly successful in previous incarnations and my tactics and advice have at times been a help to others. I have a great deal of time for the game, that's why I play it but what is disappointing and I am sure it is for others as well is that a few of the issues that need to be patched are issues that have also needed to be patched in previous incarnations. One on Ones or criticisms about team talks are not new issues. They date back to previous releases. I don't have a problem with patches for new issues but a 3rd patch to sort out a problem that was cleaned up in last years third patch is frustrating.

I am sure that I won't be alone in waiting, I was merely asking what people views were. I haven't got any angst against anyone who will buy the game from day one.

If you don't agree with my views fine, it's a forum and that means a spectrum of views that we all may or may not agree with. I may not agree with your views but I respect them and refrain in being anything but respectful. It would be nice if you did the same.

yeah... i apologise if my post seemed personal... it wasnt meant as such... but your OP did indeed just list very well known issues that i think get posted a dozen times a day... sandwiched between, what i deem to be , a silly nothing question about what an incredibly successful and experienced company would do if a few forumers didnt buy the game straight away...

so im sure you can forgive me for deeming this a rant... like all the others around here..

as for the waiting thing... its said by many people for every incarnation and yet ... most of these posters have proven they go out and buy the game on release or close to it just like everyone else...

so, again... i apologise for my original post... it wasnt very helpful at all.. just as i see your op adds little

yeah... i apologise if my post seemed personal... it wasnt meant as such... but your OP did indeed just list very well known issues that i think get posted a dozen times a day... sandwiched between, what i deem to be , a silly nothing question about what an incredibly successful and experienced company would do if a few forumers didnt buy the game straight away...

so im sure you can forgive me for deeming this a rant... like all the others around here..

as for the waiting thing... its said by many people for every incarnation and yet ... most of these posters have proven they go out and buy the game on release or close to it just like everyone else...

so, again... i apologise for my original post... it wasnt very helpful at all.. just as i see your op adds little

Not a problem at all.

I do appreciate I have listed issues that have been done 100's of times before, they are the easy examples I could think of. I too will probably end up buying on day 1 knowing my change of mind! It was just a hypothetical question on "if" everyone (which they won't) waited would it affect the marketing etc or indeed the ability to make patches because obviously the gamers feedback is vital to find the errors.

I apologise if the OP sounded like a rant, it wasn't meant to be. I appreciate that SI arew far more forthcoming and helpful that they really have to be.

it will only serve to show them that a few idiots who claim to be not ranting at them ..are in fact doing so with thinly veiled threads like this and that them not buying the game will be a blessing in disguise....

"the game is easily the best game of its kind ever made.. but it has a few issues which even though i know SI are trying to solve , I infact want perfection off the bat... thanks!!! any chance of a free moon on the stick with the game too?"

That's a complete straw man argument to be fair. We are all held prisoner (in the non-prisoner sense of the word!!) by this game. The game isn't good enough, but there is nothing else to come close to it so what are people supposed to do?

I like flight simulators, but because they are not perfect, doesn't mean I have to give in on all of them. I pick the best in the market and go with it. The best thing that could happen to FM is for a real rival hit the market place. It's just not ok (in my view) to say that because SI are trying to fix a game they released nearly 5 months ago, that we expect perfection from day one, or are being unreasonable. I don't think it's good practice to release an unfinished product five months before it's ready in order to make cash.

I'm not slagging SI here, like I say, you pay your money, you takes your choice, but to flippantly dismiss any posts questioning the business model of SI, as wanting "perfection off the bat" is a dicky thing to do. I've owned every version from this game from CM1 on the Amiga so feel entitled to an opinion on what is happening with the series. Although, as old gets like me eventually give up on the product, I'm sure will be more than delighted to know that for every old get giving it up, there are 100 fanboys shouting the dissenters down.

If you accept mediocrity, you'll be given more of the same.

If everyone waited then patch 3 wouldn't exist as no one would find any bugs.

Also SI would probably go out of business.

Not sure what you are trying to prove with this thread to be honest.

Yeah that's a good point. ^^^ If everyone waited untill Feb, then SI would not find out about most bugs untill after Feb as some bugs can be missed by the SI testing team and they need players to point these out to them.

It would probably be too late to fix it and move onto the next FM, if they got told about bugs they missed in Febuary.

In no way am i accepting mediocrity.... and in no way was I suggesting that people should blindly accept the faults in the game..

what i did say however is that ranting about said faults when it achieves nothing is pointless.. and that I for one accept that this is by far the best management game of its kind , which means im happy with the effort SI put in... and know , from experience that they will fix the issues..

as for releasing a game thats unfinished... this is an old and flawed argument.... name any game anywhere near as complex thats released and needs no patching or fixes... in fact.. Im betting the very OS your using right now has been updated and thousand times since you 'bought' it....

software, by its very nature , needs fixing and updating as it goes on... and again, I realise this and recognise the fact that the very reaon that SI are the best is that they listen to their community and use their customers as a debugging tool... for which i cant see an issue... at all... as all developers do this, albeit a lot more inadequately.

as for your 'dicky' and 'fanboy' comments.... i find it ironic that you use the most cliched argument out there to defend your post... the 'ive been playing since day one ' routine....

the only thing my post suggested (apart from the parts i have already apologised to the OP about ) was that SI have earnt my trust over many years of creating solid , enjoyable games that are far beyond anything else out there... and frankly ... the fact your posted your drivel just affirms my point that these threads are pointless and just incite flame and rant wars

Id like a flying car that brews me a tea in the morning but i also realise that its going to take a while to get there... so for now ... im a 100% happy and faithful driver of an aston martin....

see my point?

but surely the testers should test the game properly and find the bugs or do they just not appear in all saves??

bug testing a game this large to 100% would mean that fm2010 would have come out late july 2016 tbh...

bug testing is an ongoing process that almost all developers rely on public testing aswell as the preliminary alpha and beta testing..

It would affect their expected overheads and profits however it wont happen. Its impossible to get ppl to stick to a proposal. There is always one person that will do the opposite just to be different. And where there is one person there is a few more.

What your argument does provide is a suggestion to note if SI actually acknowledge the complaints/concerns and try to deal with them or whether they take these for granted and adhere to their set in stone deadlines (patches). If ppl did not buy on release date, would this make them change policy or not?

To say the game is not ready until February is incorrect. If it was released later, ppl would say its too late in the season and would also complain. However what is noted is that the testers, not the main guys but the apparently hundreds who test must be playing the game as a game and not testing it for possible errors. They must be choosing their favoured teams, signing their fav players and playing as they would with the finished product. Which is why there are probably so many unnoticed bugs when the game is finally released.

I'd imagine that if sales were extremely low, they'd quite simply not work on a new patch at all. The likely result would be Sega closing the studio, or at least stripping it down a fair bit and setting them to work on FM12.

I'd imagine that if sales were extremely low, they'd quite simply not work on a new patch at all. The likely result would be Sega closing the studio, or at least stripping it down a fair bit and setting them to work on FM12.

So it would be very bad for us in the long run. Bad idea, OP.

So it would be very bad for us in the long run. Bad idea, OP.

Bad in the short run, very bad in the long run.

To put it in perspective, ask what would happen if all Man United fans, in protest to the Glazers, didn't buy any tickets, merchandise, or anything for the next year. Right down to the toffs not buying executive boxes and season ticket holders cancelling.

On one hand, sure it'd send a message. On the other, they'd also end up being liquidated, so the fans would be far worse off.

but surely the testers should test the game properly and find the bugs or do they just not appear in all saves??

Far from as simple as that. The game basically generates a different situation every single time you create a new game (No two save games are the same) So the bugs are always going to be there. Much in the same way they are in such things as operating systems, as people use it in loads of different ways

We all bought FM 2011 next February rather than at release date? Would it affect them in any way or not at all?

It will be the first inacrnation I will probably wait until the final patch before buying if of course the reviews on here suggest that patches are needed to make it a decent game.

Always felt in the past that the game was pretty much playable without all the patches but this time around various issues make it not unplayable but certainly not realistic enough which does affect enjoyment.

I could go on but won't, so would it affect SI if we all waited?!

To answer to this "what if" scenario, and being on topic, i think that either a) SI and Sega would have urgent meeting and simply scramble the game jump into production on next FM, because the competition would probably have raise in sells (however if people stick for FM10 until Fm12 was released) or b) Si would probably go trough some difficulties. Not sure if financial would happen, but seeing that SI only produce this series and FML, it could put them into financial problems and c) taking the words of Vic, they would man up and decided to change completely the game, much like they did CM4 to FM05.

To answer to this "what if" scenario, and being on topic, i think that either a) SI and Sega would have urgent meeting and simply scramble the game jump into production on next FM, because the competition would probably have raise in sells (however if people stick for FM10 until Fm12 was released) or b) Si would probably go trough some difficulties. Not sure if financial would happen, but seeing that SI only produce this series and FML, it could put them into financial problems and c) taking the words of Vic, they would man up and decided to change completely the game, much like they did CM4 to FM05.

They wouldn't. If the sales were all suddenly down it could well spell the end of the game. Full Stop.

CM4 to FM05 was forced because of the behind the scenes split between SI & Eidos. Its quite a different situation.

Far from as simple as that. The game basically generates a different situation every single time you create a new game (No two save games are the same) So the bugs are always going to be there. Much in the same way they are in such things as operating systems, as people use it in loads of different ways

Still despite you do have great point (that every game is not the same), doesn't mean that some bugs, specially the ME ones, which we all agree some have reappeared and that each year they only update the ME and do not recreate the entire ME from scratch is an excuse that after 5 years the ME hasn't improved a lot. Also the 3D only brought a more complex thing.

Sorry but I think the "The game basically generates a different situation every single time you create a new game (No two save games are the same)"is just an excuse. There is a lot of games (true, non football sims) that has large variants and multiple choices that if you compared 10 same games, have different outcomes and hasn't such amount of bugs.

Note: if you are wondering what games i'm reffering it is Mass Effect 1 & 2 and Dragon Age: Origins. I played Mass Effect 2 out of the box, without installing the patch and the game works perfect without a glitch. Being dependent of patches in long run personally i think is just bad policy.

They wouldn't. If the sales were all suddenly down it could well spell the end of the game. Full Stop.

CM4 to FM05 was forced because of the behind the scenes split between SI & Eidos. Its quite a different situation.

That is why from what i learn being dependent of one game or product could be bad, if things in production go wrong.

Note: if you are wondering what games i'm reffering it is Mass Effect 1 & 2 and Dragon Age: Origins. I played Mass Effect 2 out of the box, without installing the patch and the game works perfect without a glitch. Being dependent of patches in long run personally i think is just bad policy.

This sometimes describes FM users. Not everyone needs the patches.

That is why from what i learn being dependent of one game or product could be bad, if things in production go wrong.

Part of the reason they're now part of Sega I'm sure

This sometimes describes FM users. Not everyone needs the patches.

True, but how would you feel that SI said that in FM10 there wasn't any patches being released? Knowing the bugs that existed in 10.0, 10.1 and 10.2?

Still despite you do have great point (that every game is not the same), doesn't mean that some bugs, specially the ME ones, which we all agree some have reappeared and that each year they only update the ME and do not recreate the entire ME from scratch is an excuse that after 5 years the ME hasn't improved a lot. Also the 3D only brought a more complex thing.

Sorry but I think the "The game basically generates a different situation every single time you create a new game (No two save games are the same)"is just an excuse. There is a lot of games (true, non football sims) that has large variants and multiple choices that if you compared 10 same games, have different outcomes and hasn't such amount of bugs.

Note: if you are wondering what games i'm reffering it is Mass Effect 1 & 2 and Dragon Age: Origins. I played Mass Effect 2 out of the box, without installing the patch and the game works perfect without a glitch. Being dependent of patches in long run personally i think is just bad policy.

FM is wholly different to them I'm afraid. The role playing games you mention are linear in nature with their abilities (All be it with less linear connotations that have been added, but the essential system is still the same) In addition to this all of them bar Dragon age are Console only correct?

Creating a console game is infinitely easier as you only have one platform to test on. PC development has millions of variations that it needs to cope with. Hence why bugs appear for some users and not others. Not to mention the mac development on top of that.

Oh and just to add, I bought Dragon Age on release, couldn't play it as it was bugged to all high hell, its been getting frequent patches ever since for the PC

Edit : Seems I was wrong about mass effect being console only! But a quick look at their forums shows the game is far from bug free on the pc again....

True, but how would you feel that SI said that in FM10 there wasn't any patches being released? Knowing the bugs that existed in 10.0, 10.1 and 10.2?

Can't really comment on it, seeing as I'm playing an unpatched version of FM10, and it's fine.

Plus, SI would never not make patches. They have either the 2 or 3 the patch strategy planned out every year.

FM is wholly different to them I'm afraid. The role playing games you mention are linear in nature with their abilities (All be it with less linear connotations that have been added, but the essential system is still the same) In addition to this all of them bar Dragon age are Console only correct?

Creating a console game is infinitely easier as you only have one platform to test on. PC development has millions of variations that it needs to cope with. Hence why bugs appear for some users and not others. Not to mention the mac development on top of that.

Oh and just to add, I bought Dragon Age on release, couldn't play it as it was bugged to all high hell, its been getting frequent patches ever since for the PC

Well i did read of soem bugs of Dragon Age: Origins, but Mass Effect 2 not one glitch. I guess depends on numerous things, but I haven't the Dragon Age, but friend of mine has and didn't needed the patches. Like you said depends on circumstances. These two games where released in multiple platform. Dragon Age, was PS3, Xbox 360 and PC and Mass Effect 2 was for PC and Xbox 360.

The mac and PC development isn't that much different from Xbox 360 and PC development. I mean mac has limited specs (due to be restricted to what Apple releases for each product... well your mac you know how it goes). It is multi platform game and SI like Bioware and other games should be prepared to that.

Also the philosophy of steam users gets achievements, while Box(dvd in drive version) and Mac users, isn't that fair.

Can't really comment on it, seeing as I'm playing an unpatched version of FM10, and it's fine.

Plus, SI would never not make patches. They have either the 2 or 3 the patch strategy planned out every year.

Yes in agree that in FM10 is true, but in FM09... Do i need to say more?

Well i did read of soem bugs of Dragon Age: Origins, but Mass Effect 2 not one glitch. I guess depends on numerous things, but I haven't the Dragon Age, but friend of mine has and didn't needed the patches. Like you said depends on circumstances. These two games where released in multiple platform. Dragon Age, was PS3, Xbox 360 and PC and Mass Effect 2 was for PC and Xbox 360.

The mac and PC development isn't that much different from Xbox 360 and PC development. I mean mac has limited specs (due to be restricted to what Apple releases for each product... well your mac you know how it goes). It is multi platform game and SI like Bioware and other games should be prepared to that.

Also the philosophy of steam users gets achievements, while Box(dvd in drive version) and Mac users, isn't that fair.

Yes in agree that in FM10 is true, but in FM09... Do i need to say more?

I could play FM09 out of the box without an issue... Same way as you / your friend could play other games out of the box without issues which I couldn't

Comparing mac development to console development unfortunately isn't as similar as you would hope, seeing as there are multiple mac platforms (Macbook / mac pro / mac mini) not to mention the different operating system builds and even the change in processor builds which effect an awful lot.

With PC (And to a lesser extent mac) Its ridiculously harder to find all the bugs. People still finding bugs in windows XP would show you that much

I could play FM09 out of the box without an issue... Same way as you / your friend could play other games out of the box without issues which I couldn't

Comparing mac development to console development unfortunately isn't as similar as you would hope, seeing as there are multiple mac platforms (Macbook / mac pro / mac mini) not to mention the different operating system builds and even the change in processor builds which effect an awful lot.

With PC (And to a lesser extent mac) Its ridiculously harder to find all the bugs. People still finding bugs in windows XP would show you that much

I do agree, specially in less then one year time frame that SI has.

I haven't played ME2 to completion yet, but I've got 'stuck' on three occasions and had to reload my save, so glitch free - it ain't.

I haven't played ME2 to completion yet, but I can tell you it isn't glitch free. I've got 'stuck' on three occasions and had to reload my save.

I didn't said it wasn't. I got stuck on the Collector's ship, because my character walked above in some boxes and couldn't get out of there. Every game has its flaws, but personally there is somethings in FM can't go blind eye, specially knowing FM being a game of high standards.

They wouldn't. If the sales were all suddenly down it could well spell the end of the game. Full Stop.

CM4 to FM05 was forced because of the behind the scenes split between SI & Eidos. Its quite a different situation.

Hate to bring it up, but there was no CM4 to FM05.

You are missing the best game in the series, the one that had the wonderful John Mason on the testing team... CM03/04. It went CM4 - CM03/04 - FM05

But yeah, those games listed are far from perfect out the box. And yeah, no sales would either mean no more SI, or at the very least no patches. As for a huge leap like cm03/04 - fm5, most of that was cosmetic and forced upon SI, and regardless, a lower operating budget as a result of a flop would mean FM12 would most likely have the LEAST additions in the series, not the most.

Well said.

Thats why I have stopped playing FM until the patch.

I was trying 4-5-1, 3-5-2 and 4-4-2 and couldn't get anyone to score decently and the results were absolutely random nearly every single game.

I thought I was a really bad manager when trying galantly to succeed with a 4-5-1, 4-4-2 and a 3-5-2 and would never have a realistic string of performances. It never really mattered who I was up against, but more on what formation I was up against that would determine results and that is not how football should be.

They may pass the ball around nicely, defend decently etc but the match engine is quite poor.

To top it off, I was woeful with my tactics (or so I was told) when I struggled with the said formations with my West Ham side, then I went to a 4-3-3 (only thing I did was move my AMC to ST no tactical instruction changes) and I suddenly was unstoppable winning every single title known to man and going undefeated for over 50 games (1 loss the entire campaign).

So something is wrong if a 4-4-2 or a 4-2-1-2-1 or 4-1-2-1-2 does not work, then all you do is move 1 player to ST and you win everything without changing anything tactically/instruction wise.

I feel as though if you do not play narrow, then you will just struggle.

Let's hope SI spend most of their time fixing the ME (I expect tactics to work far more easily and realistically) and the graphics (they need to improve the 3D animations and include celebrations/cup presentations for winning cups/leagues) for FM2011 or I won't be buying it.

It is not a threat in any way - I had purchased FM2005 and then FM2007 but never got into them. FM2009 was fun for 4-5 seasons but the graphics were a put off and I do not like 2D.

FM2010 has been wonderful in my eyes but the lack of regen talent, strange AI transfer dealings and the poor ME has killed my long term enjoyment of it.

I especially want to note the AI transfer dealings. Why is it they always buy players based on CA/PA but yet never really look at player ATTRIBUTES. This is the big difference between human players and the AI. They fill their squads with the most woeful players meerly because they have decent CA (maybe 150-160) but their points are basically all spent on 12-15 stats in every spot but they never play well as they do not excel in anything.

At the end of the day, if these things are soley the only things SI works on and aim to get right, we will have a brilliant game.

i always buy them soon as they come out because the first month i never get a good season going anyways then when u do i make a tatic that works for that patch but on 09 i played way to much when on the 2nd patch then not much on the 3rd

I don't buy it on the first day anymore. Not after last years. I was going to wait til Feb ths year but it was given to me for christmas.

I hate it when the patches change everything. You can go from doing well then the patch comes out and your formation becomes useless.

I will probably just stick with this one till about the same time next year.

it will only serve to show them that a few idiots who claim to be not ranting at them ..are in fact doing so with thinly veiled threads like this and that them not buying the game will be a blessing in disguise....

"the game is easily the best game of its kind ever made.. but it has a few issues which even though i know SI are trying to solve , I infact want perfection off the bat... thanks!!! any chance of a free moon on the stick with the game too?"

To be quite honest, if i pay €50 for a game, i want perfection.

Yes in agree that in FM10 is true, but in FM09... Do i need to say more?

I don't patch any of my games and they all, including FM09, run fine.

To be quite honest, if i pay €50 for a game, i want perfection.

You're going to be sorely dissapointed then.

To be quite honest, if i pay €50 for a game, i want perfection.

Perfection does not exist in any game.

Perfection does not exist in any game.

I can actually think of a few games where no bugs were reported. :o

I can actually think of a few games where no bugs were reported. :o

Having no bugs doesn't make it 'perfect'

Having no bugs doesn't make it 'perfect'

:confused: What's the definition of 'perfect' that we're discussing then?

:confused: What's the definition of 'perfect' that we're discussing then?

Did you think 'perfect' was an objective term?

90% of FM players will never patch (they don't come here on this board/site) and for 99% of those users, FM10 will be 'perfect'.

We're just the moaning sub-subniche of the bigger silent subniche

Did you think 'perfect' was an objective term?

90% of FM players will never patch (they don't come here on this board/site) and for 99% of those users, FM10 will be 'perfect'.

We're just the moaning sub-subniche of the bigger silent subniche

We were talking about bugs. Then someone says they expect a perfect game. Was I not meant to make the connection?

And when told 'perfect' wasn't relating to the bugs problem, I asked what it did refer to.

You yourself have, in your above, used the term 'perfect' as a term for users not noticing or not suffering from the bugs and not needing the patches.

So...

We were talking about bugs. Then someone says they expect a perfect game. Was I not meant to make the connection?

And when told 'perfect' wasn't relating to the bugs problem, I asked what it did refer to.

You yourself have, in your above, used the term 'perfect' as a term for users not noticing or not suffering from the bugs and not needing the patches.

So...

Again; if you have 20 gamers you'll have 20 different views on 'perfect'.

Bugfree could be one

Value for money could be another

etc etc

'Perfect' in this context refers to whatever the user wants it to refer to.

It could be bugfree for you. Good for you.

To me it's more how involved a game feels; I would say that the patched version of FM10 is 'perfect' for me in that respect.

But I'm sure that thousands of gamers are playing FM10 unpatched and thinking 'This game is perfect!'

And maybe some of them are noticing bugs and don't care. Or they are thinking the bugs are features.

Again; if you have 20 gamers you'll have 20 different views on 'perfect'.

Bugfree could be one

Value for money could be another

etc etc

'Perfect' in this context refers to whatever the user wants it to refer to.

It could be bugfree for you. Good for you.

To me it's more how involved a game feels; I would say that the patched version of FM10 is 'perfect' for me in that respect.

But I'm sure that thousands of gamers are playing FM10 unpatched and thinking 'This game is perfect!'

And maybe some of them are noticing bugs and don't care. Or they thinking the bugs are features.

Okay. Point taken.

Let me rephrase my statement:

I know several games that are bug free.

Okay. Point taken.

Let me rephrase my statement:

I know several games that are bug free.

Let me rephrase your statement:

You know several games that seem bug free

Let me rephrase your statement:

You know several games that seem bug free

No, I mean what I said. There have been no bugs reported for them, and if the existed, they would have reported somewhere.

Sorry to bring it back up again but the argument "we only settle for FM because there isn't any competition for SI" is a pretty stupid one it is hardly SI's fault the competitors can't catch up. CM has had more than enough time to bring out a decent game but as most of us have seen from CM10 they are far from.

Back on topic and i agree with most people that it wont make a blind bit of difference to Si as the majority will still go out and buy the game.

I'd be interested to know how many of these "bugs" were actualy spotted while playing the game and how many were "spotted as a result of looking on here.

TBH most of these bugs, with the exeption of the most obvious ones I.E long shots, i never notice until i actually come on here.