Should SI go back to releasing a different game every second year?

Every year we get the same old FM that usualy has left over bugs from the last version, I was recently thinking that if they released a different game every second year it would give them more time to test bugs and impliment new features as well as try new things without messing up the original. There used to be Championship Manager '93

Championship Manager 2, Championship Manager 96/97, Championship Manager 3 etc. I think most people would buy both games anyway.

I personaly would like to see them try a more RPG style game but can't see it working with the current format and some people might not like it but this way they could still play there normal FM and others could try somthing a bit different.

Just an idea, What do you think?

I would be happy for this to go ahead - SI probably wont make as much money though

Urm, SI have always released a version every year and its never been a "different" version. I think you are getting confused with what was called CM2, 3 & 4 which were complete rewrites as opposed to improved versions.

When it became FM it was all rewritten in sections so there was no need to do a complete rewrite in the future.

No for many reasons but i'll start with these 2

1, If any bugs were to be in the game come release there be up roar in here (the games been in making for 2 years and theres still bugs its a disgrace etc etc )

2,Its ok people saying yeah i'd like it to miss a year but after about a year playing same fm the same people would be on here saying were's this years fm im bored this is an outrage !!!

Personaly I only buy it every 2 years. Ive never been a fan of anualizing games as IMO it detracts from the devs really pushing a genre forward with innovation.

On the other hand SI showed that they can work behind the scenes improving things in the way that it took 2 - 3 years to plan and develop the 3d style match engine before releasing it as part of the game. As long as they continue to do things like that - perhaps with a high quality audio/commentary update, or a physics based ball engine etc - then I'll cut them some slack. I'll still only buy it every 2 years though

M

2 years you will get a better polished version and maybe more to chew on than the 12 months release.

Lets face the music and dance, SI will always release a 12 month version, like it or not.

You can always choose to buy one FM every second year.

The whole "release a new version every year" business model is pretty lousy. You can't make enough changes and usually there are loads of bugs.

SI are at least pretty good at supporting games after release, but look at a company like EA. They release, for instance, FIFA every year and EVERY year it's riddled with bugs and not nearly enough new features - and they do next to nothing about it.

One year is NOT ENOUGH to do a whole new game and also test it properly.

Yes, but commercially they can't.

Yes but would you pay double for a game released every two years because that is what it mean for SI to survive. Personally I would probibly be prepared to do that for a better game but i am not sure everyone would

YES!!

Still, they could just release a Data Update for like £10-15 every year, so they would still make some money even in their year off, but taking 20 months to develop and test a good game instead of rushing it in less than a year is needed.

Raise the price of the New Game to 40 or 50 quids, if it's the money they need to survive the non-release year... I don't really care... That's what we spend ANYWAY by buying TWO bugged/unfinished yearly releases anyway, so what's the difference?

There is nowhere near enough competition in this particular genre to require a yearly release, and I doubt a 24-months release policy would put SI out of business... Much less if the new games would be a significant improvement over the previous ones in terms of quality.

No. It put BGS (Championship Manager people) almost out of business, and it would do the same for SI.

YES- as for the last few releases we have not had an acceptable game couple months after release.

This years one really takes the biscuit- as SI have released the game in a clearly broken state, the transfer market issues caused by player happiness were unmissable, and you can only conclude that SI are happy to release the game like this.

Personally I think the loyal fanbase deserve some kind of apology/feedback for why FM11 was released like this.

I hope next year everyone does what Ive done after years of this crap and decided on my purchase via the demo and the forums feedback. If SI do not get massive sales on release then maybe they may realise this strategy is not acceptable. Until then they will keep releasing FM in a poor state- so if your unhappy, vote with your wallets next time.

They should do it once, and once only. Spend the time getting the match engine sorted, then don't try and dismantle it for a laugh the next year; which they seem to enjoy doing.

I think what they're doing now is beyond adequate. Every time issues with bugs comes up, I ask the same question. Find me a game without a bug. You can't. So why should SI stop making the game annually, just to appease the rage of a few people.

You get bugs in games, you deal with it. I look forward to the day the first ever bug free game is released, however, I doubt it'll be in the next decade.

You have to look at it like this.

FM is created. 5,000 people test it. The dev team fix as many of the bugs as possible. (Some are a bit harder to do, other than a "quick fix" due to the fact fixing one bug could trigger a chain reaction that causes other things to go wrong) - and then the game is released. You then have the game being played on a scale of millions of people. There are obviously going to be issues with this. I'm sure if SI could get a testing team of millions of people, there would be less bugs, but it just wont happen.

Just do what others have suggested and only buy it yourself every two years. There is nothing that says you have to buy it every year just because it's put out every year. I myself only buy it every two years now. That way I get all the upgrades of two versions all in one go and it feels better value to me!

I don't understand the "go back to" part? When was FM/CM released bi-annually in the past!?

I wish I did that with FM09 and FM10. Both were awful games imo. Wish I never bought them.

I don't understand the "go back to" part? When was FM/CM released bi-annually in the past!?

You're right to not understand as CM/FM has never been released bi-annually.

It never was. It was just updated versions.

Like, you have CM3, then CM Season 99/00 then CM Season 00/01 - Which were CM3 with updated databases to reflect new signings and new players.

They shouldn't release a game every 2 years as there would be uproar. Plus look at the shambles that was Championship Manager 2010, they said it would be the most polished management sim ever yet the game was awful and there was uproar on their forums. Now multiply that by several thousands and imagine what it would be like on here if that was the case.

To be honest it really doesn't matter how this vote goes or what anyone says. SI and Sega have said repeatedly, it ain't happening. So guess what? It ain't happening.

SI is not gonna double their sales revenue by doing that, so stop asking this silly question

Me and my fellas have the same on our minds since fm 2009.

They should employ hard working Japanese testers or release the game every second year

Having a two year cycle won't solve anything. Two years means twice the amount of new feature and twice the amount of bugs.

Same amount of features won't work at all as people already complain that FM11 didn't introduce enough new (major) features.

People ARE going to complain. About the lack of new features or the presence of bugs.

I was hoping somebody would have some Idea's for a different way to use the FM engine, for example.....

in 2012 they release an RPG themed football management Game

2013 FM

2014 Either expand on the RPG game or try somthing different

I doubt they would loose too much revenue as a lot of people would buy the other game anyway, Perhaps it would even attract other customers who find FM too hard/monotonous.

I should have made the title "Should FM release the game every 2 years" but i wanted to incorporate the idea of another game in the "dead" year.

Hell, i guess they could even release another game anyway now that they have eastside hockey manager off their plate.

I was hoping somebody would have some Idea's for a different way to use the FM engine, for example.....

in 2012 they release an RPG themed football management Game

2013 FM

2014 Either expand on the RPG game or try somthing different

I doubt they would loose too much revenue as a lot of people would buy the other game anyway, Perhaps it would even attract other customers who find FM too hard/monotonous.

I should have made the title "Should FM release the game every 2 years" but i wanted to incorporate the idea of another game in the "dead" year.

Hell, i guess they could even release another game anyway now that they have eastside hockey manager off their plate.

Can i have some of what you have been smoking ?

Can i have some of what you have been smoking ?

as if the wait was not painful enough, people want to double the wait for a game, never ever ever

the new Gran Turismo took years and that has bugs. whats to say that FM would be bug free or have less issues? the sheer number of people playing FM in the weekend the game is released would surely surpass the time the SI team and their testing team could get through in years. as good as they are, the masses will always be a useful tool for improving the game as so much time is put into it.

a game like FM is a lot more complex than pretty much any other game out there because there is so much information and data that goes into it. that is bound to lead to more issues.

i'm quite shallow. as much as i loved FM10 (best version in years) during the summer i was anticipating the latest incarnation months before even the demo.

It wasn't the "two year cycle" thing that made CM10 a terrible game...

Also, comparing a football management game to Gran Turismo is nonsensical... SI don't need to create/recreate ONE THOUSAND stunningly-looking photorealistic cars and dozens of equally good looking tracks. And to make sure each car handles as close to the real thing as possible.

Should Poliphony release GT6 for the PS3, it wouldn't take them years... they'd just throw in some more cars [possibly GT5 outtakes], upgrading those who went through a real-life restyling and voila...

GT5 took ages because it was more or less a brand new game... Not a yearly upgrade of a pre-existing game.

FM has a lot of complicated "hidden stuff" to be taken care of, and that requires TESTING, polishing, and MORE TESTING.

See, I agree the hours spent by us in the first weekend after the launch are probably more than SI testers spent on it in the whole testing process... But I'm still not a fan of the "let the customers be gamma testers" approach.

And to be honest, the deadly "Upset Players-Dumb Transfers" combo should have been spotted already by the time the demo was released. First and foremost because at least HALF of the issues reported about AI clubs buying old/average/not needed players were already present in FM2010 and had been addressed in the FM2010 bugs section.

I don't mind brand new bugs and issues, not even if they're a result of "overmedication" for an already existing bug, but for crying out loud, just fix the bugs we've been reporting for years!.

It's frustrating finding in FM11 the exact same issues I've been finding and reporting since FM09...

P.S. "not two games are the same" all you want, but when the same-ish issues surface in hundreds of saves, for users who play in different leagues and levels, there MUST be something wrong that should have been spotted well before releasing the game!

I hate that cop-out answer... that works for odd and obscure things like "I was forced to play my striker in goal and he saved 10 penalties" and for "why can't I register a foreign player in Slovakian 3rd division cup"... but I just don't buy it when you need 5 minutes to replicate the "I can't sell Messi for more than 15M if I offer him to clubs" so many have been reporting.

P.P.S. In a non-polemical way: is it really so complicated preventing AI clubs from signing 32yo nobodies [who just happen to be moderately famous in their country?], from signing 8 strikers while playing a 5-4-1, from buying players who are clearly not good enough?

I only buy it every 2 years anyway.