Long term game still sucks

IMO the long term game sucks because it feels so undeveloped. Like SI have got a primitive regen and AI model working and just left it at that.

The two main problems still prevalent in patch 11.3:

Transfers

- Top/rich AI teams are still terrible at squad building. Currently entering the 3rd season of my save, there's been only one £20m+ transfer from the start of the game, and that was Ibrahimovic going to Milan, a transfer that was pre-programmed into the database. AI teams just aren't buying good/top players for big prices, which is what they'd need to do given the prices the AI clubs themselves set. As a result, teams like Barcelona, Madrid, Chelsea, ManU, etc etc, amass mediocre squads with only a handful of the best regens (and the start-game players) keeping their necks above water. Some of them have £80-90m transfer budgets but are happy buying rubbish players for budget prices. This has various knock-on effects, such as making the game too easy in the long term (because you can build a good team whilst the AI builds an average one), making it hard to sell star players who are realistically worth more than £25m, etc etc.

- AI transfers outside of the top clubs is still messed up. Dirk Kuyt transfer listed at the end of the first season available for £2m, and noone wants him? Same for Nigel De Jong (£3m), Jeremy Toulalan (£4m), Adebayor (£3m), Kaka (£3m), so on and so forth. Wages might be an excuse for a player or two, but for others it shouldn't be, teams IRL would be scrambling for these players, especially ones a level below the club that these players are flopping at (e.g. all mid table Premiership clubs would want Kuyt if transfer listed). Yet irrespective of wages, even if what they want is reasonable, there's no interest at all (so clearly it's not a wage issue, it's an AI issue). So not only is AI for the top tier of transfers bad, but it's poor at the middle levels too.

- Haven't seen an AI transfer involving a player exchange for a long time. Haven't seen any at all in FM 2011 tbh. Feels like it's not part of the game unless we (the player) offer an exchange. Even then the AI always seems reluctant to want to exchange a player, even if the exchange+cash offer is far better than the pure monetary equivalent that they'd accept.

- Managerial merry-go-round is still crazy. Wenger goes to Barca, Mancini goes to Arsenal, Mourinho goes to Man City, Guardiola goes to Madrid, etc etc. None of the teams are stable and the appointments seem to make no sense. Some of this is true to real life, but for other clubs it isn't. Maybe only a minor complaint though.

Player Development

- Regens are still ****. Sorry if alot of time has gone into it, this is just an honest opinion. There's the odd good one, but it still feels like the same random crappy regen system from FM 2006 almost glossed over with an "attribute by nation" variable. This has been an ongoing major problem for ages, and it feels like we only ever get lip service and excuses. No 18 year old wonderkids like at the start of the game, horrible hidden stats resulting in unprofessional bad-boy psychopathic wimps all over the shop, centrebacks who can't jump, etc etc. Fall in ability is still shocking, and I dislike this forced factory conveyor belt method of developing players (i.e. youth team from 14-18, tutored, loaned out/benched rotated from 18-21, then first team at 22+) - it's applicable to many players IRL, sure, I'm not denying that might be a "standard" model for player development, but it's boring and unrealistic to have to do it with every regen.

- Players rapidly declining still after 30. I don't know what the use of a good set of mental/hidden attributes are. Soon as a player hits 30, he'll decline physically and rapidly to the point where he can barely run. Sure, FM can never replicate real life, but it's not asking for much for the mental attributes to actually mean something when it comes to fitness. The attributes are there for someone like Maldini or Zanetti or Di Stefano or other evergreens to be replicated in the game.

I'm not too bothered if anyone disagrees and thinks the long term game is fine. Good for you. This is my opinion and as a fan of the game who has been playing since the very first CM, I would simply like to express my dissatisfaction at the development process of FM that involves releasing a flawed product and then patching the flaws whilst ignoring the deep underlying issues (or only paying lip service to them). No doubt FM 12 will again be rushed and released with bugs, then it takes 6 months to get to patch 12.3 and have only a somewhat stable version, yet in the mean time the long term game playability still suffers from serious flaws because SI only have time to fix the bugs that were prevalent on release, and so this cycle always gets repeated with only small updates/improvements to gloss over the problems here and there (such as this years "Brazilian regens with more flair!!!!" feature). The disappointing thing in all this is that it wasn't too long ago (maybe 14 years! ) that the core game was alot better because the mechanisms led to a better long term game. So it's like the game has gone backwards at some point and the development has stagnated at some point because it's not financially feasible to rectify things. I sure do miss the enjoyment the long term game in CM used to bring...

Anyway, rant over...

Ya things like these are the important issues that should have been focussed on but instead they have brought in unnecessary gimmicks like the 3d pitch which has ruined the game.

Most players should decline rapidly after 30. How many players are playing in the best leagues at that age?

Most players should decline rapidly after 30. How many players are playing in the best leagues at that age?

Gerrard , Lampard , Carragher , Terry , Ferdinand just to name a few

Gerrard , Lampard , Carragher , Terry , Ferdinand just to name a few

A VERY few. Go back to when these guys were 20 and tell me the % still playing top level football. 1% maybe?

Hang on... Didn't Gerrard only just turn 30 this season?

Yeah, AI clubs still suck a little bit at building squads, but they are better than in previous years.

In my current game in 2020 Lyon have built a fairly decent squad, as well as Palermo and Barcelona.

Also, I have no idea what you're doing wrong but for the last 2 versions regen development is nothing like what you say. I have 10 regens in my team that have been first choice since their teens including one who has been playing for me since he was 16. On top of that most of the rest of my team are regens now.

I'm fine with regens, I'm in 2017 and have several world class U20 players already.

Ya things like these are the important issues that should have been focussed on but instead they have brought in unnecessary gimmicks like the 3d pitch which has ruined the game.

Speak for yourself.

Plus, I really doubt it's that much of an "either/or". The 3D match engine was likely in development behind the scenes for many years before they released it in FM 2009; Not a spontaneous implementation that they decided to do instead of other things.

For all we know, they could already have a new transfer engine and/or player development engine being worked on, and just like the 3D match engine, they'll implement them when they're ready. In other words, just because we have a 3D match engine, doesn't mean these other engines got the boot.

The 3D match engine thing is always a laugh. People blamed it for changing the game and ruining it, when strangely enough it didn't change the match engine at all, it's just a graphics engine that shows what is happening with the match engine!

I think this must be very hard to simulate, but it needs to be improved. I'm still on FM10, in 2021, its an issue, but not as bad as what the OP says in this thread. I really do hope this improves in future versions.

Still love the game, tho, for the record.

A VERY few. Go back to when these guys were 20 and tell me the % still playing top level football. 1% maybe?

no actually last season's ac milan squad 3/4 of their first team is over 30. nesta ambrosini pirlo and so forth.

I'm fine with regens, I'm in 2017 and have several world class U20 players already.

of course you have 10 decent newgens, what about the other 50 top clubs worldwide, do they have at least 6 decent newgens each? Didn't think so.

Look the issue with SI is that it has become a pattern to release these incomplete games, and patch them in stages and even then it would fix half of the game.

They've been getting away with it since early 2000 and I think the reason why fans are not moving to another game is:

1. There is no other decent competitor.

2. The budget the company has is poor.

3. The technical team is not up to par with other technical staff such as Blizzard, S2, etc..

Honestly, I have started countless threads about newgens and its effect on long term games, maybe since 2006, but little has been done to fix the issue. I bought fm11 this year however I haven't played it up till now! I can't help but check the forums every few months to get updated with the current bugs and whether newgens and long term game is playable, but same results same disappointment since 5 years.

So, SI thank you for your efforts and your dedication. I know you do your best, but take no offense on what I say, but even Arsenal do their best and have not won a title in years. Maybe its about time the company got upgraded which might result on the game drastically getting upgraded too .

Let the hate begin

The 3D match engine thing is always a laugh. People blamed it for changing the game and ruining it, when strangely enough it didn't change the match engine at all, it's just a graphics engine that shows what is happening with the match engine!

we all know that. the purpose of that is to show what the match engine is processing.

but when the images shown on the 3d pitch almost borders on strangeness doesn't that defeat the purpose? its an eye sore to watch. defenders are doing stuff, that defies logic and movements that defies laws of physics. they need to brush up on this projection.

of course you have 10 decent newgens, what about the other 50 top clubs worldwide, do they have at least 6 decent newgens each? Didn't think so.

Look the issue with SI is that it has become a pattern to release these incomplete games, and patch them in stages and even then it would fix half of the game.

They've been getting away with it since early 2000 and I think the reason why fans are not moving to another game is:

1. There is no other decent competitor.

2. The budget the company has is poor.

3. The technical team is not up to par with other technical staff such as Blizzard, S2, etc..

Launching unfinished product and patching later will always be the case purely because of financial reasons. The thing is, almost since fm 2006 they have not fixed every bug there is in the game, and the match engine still has alot of flaws. If they let this continue, it will soon be bound to catch up on them. The bugs may just snowball into something very complicated in the future FMs. They now have to split their time between developing and improving the match engine and also trying to solve the bugs that are plaguing the game. Just hope their system of working doesn't start snowballing of the bugs.

we all know that. the purpose of that is to show what the match engine is processing.

but when the images shown on the 3d pitch almost borders on strangeness doesn't that defeat the purpose? its an eye sore to watch. defenders are doing stuff, that defies logic and movements that defies laws of physics. they need to brush up on this projection.

Ignorance was bliss. Our defenders may have been cartwheeling or unicycling on CM01/02 but because we couldn't see it then there wasn't anything to get upset by. I play with Only Commentary now - I'm definitely happier that way.

You and me seem to differ on what a long-term save is... You say your in your third season.... that to me is still a short game, a long term game I would say is 30 years

Currently I'm 2017/18 season, Regens are fine, perhaps a little limited in nationality but that is knd of the case in real life if you think about it.

Man City have been spending a good 40-50 million in each transfer window on 3-4 players so I don't believe you when you say there are no big transfers.

Sampdoria also going nuts in the transfer market

However the squad building is a little annoying, teams don't want to bid for my players unless I offer them. This is only real problem with the game imo, the AI is not aggressive enough in the transfer market and they seem to buy players based too much on reputation.

im in 2016 and regens are fine. though chelsea are buying older players and are declining but arsenal have improved massively

I bought fm11 this year however I haven't played it up till now! I can't help but check the forums every few months to get updated with the current bugs and whether newgens and long term game is playable, but same results same disappointment since 5 years.

How strange. Why not play the game yourself straight away and judge whether YOU think it's playable, instead of deciding based on the opinions of faceless strangers on the internet, who all look for different things when deciding whether they like the game or not?

You and me seem to differ on what a long-term save is... You say your in your third season.... that to me is still a short game, a long term game I would say is 30 years

Currently I'm 2017/18 season, Regens are fine, perhaps a little limited in nationality but that is knd of the case in real life if you think about it.

Man City have been spending a good 40-50 million in each transfer window on 3-4 players so I don't believe you when you say there are no big transfers.

Sampdoria also going nuts in the transfer market

However the squad building is a little annoying, teams don't want to bid for my players unless I offer them. This is only real problem with the game imo, the AI is not aggressive enough in the transfer market and they seem to buy players based too much on reputation.

Firstly, Man City are an exception. The point I was making was about the top clubs, which Man City aren't yet (they haven't even qualified for a CL competition yet, nor won anything).

Secondly, £40-50 million is OK, but on how many players? Five? But yeah, that's irrelevant.

How strange. Why not play the game yourself straight away and judge whether YOU think it's playable, instead of deciding based on the opinions of faceless strangers on the internet, who all look for different things when deciding whether they like the game or not?

Because if a game is poor, then people will say it is poor, and you can save money by not buying the game?

I personally always look at reviews and gauge forum comments before getting a game.

Guys, your regens aren't fine because you're not checking their hidden stats, as happens every time in threads like these. Check them, and compare them to start game players. You might somehow luckily get one or two model professional top class regens with good consistency/important matches/etc etc and great personal traits, but it's pot luck. At the start of the game, all of the top clubs have a good number of these players, multiply say 10 top players for each top club and think how many you have in the game. The number I found that was remotely comparable was about one quarter to one tenth if I filtered with minimum attributes (both hidden and visible). This was 20 seasons in with 11.2, and I can already see nothing has changed in this regard with 11.3 (why would it? It's not in the changelog so SI have done nothing about it).

This is also part of the problem with the development of this game. People like the game or like their long term save that they're enjoying, so get defensive when criticism is aimed at it, but instead of actually doing the research they make ill thought out posts where they only go by a few perceptions they have rather than based on detailed information. What next, you're going to post me a picture of a regen with awesome stats? It's irrelevant, the entire point is the decline in overall ability, the randomness of the hidden/personality attributes, the weird distribution of stats (mentioned the many regen defenders who can't jump). I've already done the research in other threads, I can see 3 seasons in that there is nothing new with regens with 11.3, hence why I'm posting my frustration because I had silly thoughts of SI possibly improving the model. I find this a shame because it's very clear there is a problem but because some can live with it they choose to argue that the problem doesn't exist - meanwhile SI's owners/directors are laughing all the way to the bank whilst their poor employees are able to do nothing because they're tasked to do other things..

Because if a game is poor, then people will say it is poor, and you can save money by not buying the game?

I personally always look at reviews and gauge forum comments before getting a game.

so one person says its terrible, the next says its brilliant, where do you go from there?

The forums are full of people either side of the fence, some say its brilliant some dont, i really dont see how you can make a decision based on forum when in reality most of the happy people dont have the need to post on here. It would be a very one sided opinion your taking.

Guys, your regens aren't fine because you're not checking their hidden stats, as happens every time in threads like these. Check them, and compare them to start game players. You might somehow luckily get one or two model professional top class regens with good consistency/important matches/etc etc, but it's pot luck. At the start of the game, all of the top clubs have a good number of these players, multiply say 10 top players for each top club and think how many you have in the game. The number I found that was remotely comparable was about one quarter to one tenth if I filtered with minimum attributes (both hidden and visible). This was 20 seasons in with 11.2, and I can already see nothing has changed in this regard with 11.3 (why would it? It's not in the changelog so SI have done nothing about it).

This is also part of the problem with the development of this game. People like the game or like their long term save that they're enjoying, so get defensive when criticism is aimed at it, but instead of actually doing the research they make ill thought out posts where they only go by a few perceptions they have rather than based on detailed information. What next, you're going to post me a picture of a regen with awesome stats? It's irrelevant, the entire point is the decline in overall ability, the randomness of the hidden/personality attributes, the weird distribution of stats (mentioned defenders who can't jump). I've already done the research in other threads, I can see 3 seasons in that there is nothing new with regens with 11.3, hence why I'm posting my frustration because I had silly thoughts of SI possibly improving the model.

well the regens in my teams, play very well, have very good stats, dont miss training or any of the other unprofessional things you would associate, dont fall out with me, in short i have no issues with them at all. None hide away in big games or anything, i dont see the problem here at all, the regens this year are far better than any other year of FM so far.

At the end of the day you're still gonna play it and buy it so stop complaining! When I see a bug in the game I don't let it bother me, I'm in the game to win games, I'm not arsed about some 'bug' on the news screen. I think many people on here look too much into the game and try to spot things. I just load it up, play, then save it down.

so one person says its terrible, the next says its brilliant, where do you go from there?

I don't look at a sample size of 2.

And if there is a 50-50 spread amongst a large sample size, then I avoid it (it implies 50% of people are satisfied).

The forums are full of people either side of the fence, some say its brilliant some dont, i really dont see how you can make a decision based on forum when in reality most of the happy people dont have the need to post on here. It would be a very one sided opinion your taking.

Other people not on the forum include people who have thrown the game in the bin because it's rubbish, and can't see why it will be a good game because bugs are so visible.

In practice, I believe that a forum roughly-represents the video game population and that yes, I can use forum posts to judge a game.

Most players should decline rapidly after 30. How many players are playing in the best leagues at that age?

"Most", yes, but not most of the top level players, and not as rapidly as they do in the game. I've given examples of evergreens like Maldini, Beckham, Zanetti, etc etc, who retained physique into their mid/late 30's, good enough to still be very good players at the top levels. Look at AC Milan and Cafu, Seedorf, Inzaghi, etc etc, their players can go on for ages because they're top players with great professionalism on/off the pitch and Milan as a club have a culture of getting the most out of their oldest stars. FM is unable to replicate players like this unless it's already in the game from the start, and even then players in general decline physically far too quickly irrespective of their personal traits. When you get to the stage of having regens only the game becomes a race to move the 30 year old on as quick as possible because you know within 2 seasons that he'll be as fast as a bus with no wheels and have the stamina of a 25 stone obese man who has just got out of bed for the first time in 15 years.

I don't look at a sample size of 2.

And if there is a 50-50 spread amongst a large sample size, then I avoid it (it implies 50% of people are satisfied).

Other people not on the forum include people who have thrown the game in the bin because it's rubbish, and can't see why it will be a good game because bugs are so visible.

In practice, I believe that a forum roughly-represents the video game population and that yes, I can use forum posts to judge a game.

To add to this.

I always find that the majority of people who use forums are only here to complain. There are thousands upon thousands of players who don't even come on here and seem happy enough.

To add to this.

I always find that the majority of people who use forums are only here to complain. There are thousands upon thousands of players who don't even come on here and seem happy enough.

And there are lots of people who chuck the game through the window upon noticing a bug.

If a lot of people complain, then there are clearly issues that a lot of people have noticed.

It is not just a democratic majority vote!

I don't look at a sample size of 2.

And if there is a 50-50 spread amongst a large sample size, then I avoid it (it implies 50% of people are satisfied).

Other people not on the forum include people who have thrown the game in the bin because it's rubbish, and can't see why it will be a good game because bugs are so visible.

In practice, I believe that a forum roughly-represents the video game population and that yes, I can use forum posts to judge a game.

Does your opinion not count more to you than the opinion of another person?

These forums do not represent the FM community, almost anyone i know who plays this game and does not frequent the forums has a completely different opinion to the game when compared to regular forum users, because they dont read about the problems and are unware of 99% of the games problems.

well the regens in my teams, play very well, have very good stats, dont miss training or any of the other unprofessional things you would associate, dont fall out with me, in short i have no issues with them at all. None hide away in big games or anything, i dont see the problem here at all, the regens this year are far better than any other year of FM so far.

Ah, good old milnerpoint, still trolling these forums with your extremist blind defense of SI. Are you actually paid by them to come on these forums and into every single one of these threads to defend the game? Or are you trying to worm your way into a moderator role by getting on the "good books"? Difficult to know what your motivation is, last time I posted any criticism was months ago and I'm not suprised to see you still here trying to tell people that their opinions/research is wrong becaues you think it's all cushtie.

Anyway, to get to your point without wanting to get dragged into another debate with you where I post evidence and you deny everything by sticking your fingers in your ears, as I said, it's clear you haven't checked the hidden stats using tools and it's clear you've done zero statistical research into the problems. So of course you can't see the problem because the truth is you have no intention of looking for it. Like I said in the original post, if you think the game is fine then good for you, let this thread be for those who aren't happy with it. Maybe you an set up an appreciation thread and just post in there with other people who are happy with the game about how great it is for you, that way you don't have to be on these forums 24/7 arguing what is only your opinion in threads intended to highlight complaints about the game? Or is it genuinely the case that you have nothing better to do...

ah sorry i didnt realise all you were wanting was an agreement. You obviously have access to the stats of all my regens, most of which i have actually checked out with FMRTE now but obviously the stats i am looking at wrong and the ones you have access to are correct.

Im not wanting to start any appreciation thread but in my opinion you are wrong, the regens have been massively improved on recent versions and its something SI themselves say they take a lot of time to work on, if you choose to ignore that then its up to you, but ill leave it there you dont want to discuss the regens you just want people to quote you and say "ZOMG you are right i want my money back".

Does your opinion not count more to you than the opinion of another person?

Of course my opinion counts more, but I'm not going to just buy a game so I can judge it for myself. I might not have much money left if this was the case.

I'm fussy but I also like breaking games and taking them to the limit - if lots of bugs are easily found, then I am wary.

These forums do not represent the FM community, almost anyone i know who plays this game and does not frequent the forums has a completely different opinion to the game when compared to regular forum users, because they dont read about the problems and are unware of 99% of the games problems.

Good ol' anecdotal evidence...

Unfortunately, I tend to notice bugs rather easily - I break software a lot and have tested software before. So I do not consider myself a casual player of games, to lack a word.

Hang on... Didn't Gerrard only just turn 30 this season?

Yeah, AI clubs still suck a little bit at building squads, but they are better than in previous years.

In my current game in 2020 Lyon have built a fairly decent squad, as well as Palermo and Barcelona.

Also, I have no idea what you're doing wrong but for the last 2 versions regen development is nothing like what you say. I have 10 regens in my team that have been first choice since their teens including one who has been playing for me since he was 16. On top of that most of the rest of my team are regens now.

Lyon, Barcelona and Palermo. The only "fairly decent" squads... ... just proves my point really. Not that it needed to, we all know this is a major problem with FM.

Regarding regens, my point was more looking at their CA/PA and the development of that. You having regens in your team since their teens doesn't mean anything because I'm referring to getting the regen to say 170-180. Sure, you can have them from the start if you want, although you're not meant to with FM regens since they're usually at about 100-120 CA when they're 17/18, but my point is that we still have to wait a long time for them to hit the 170+. I've made a number of threads/posts on this issue, but IRL there are plenty of great teenagers who come through who start at 140-150, maybe even more if they're Owen/Ronaldo/Messi type elite youngsters in the 170-180's (at 18), and this isn't remotely reflected in the game. The best I've seen is a regen spawn at 21 starting off with 150 CA and 175 PA, and even then that just fits this single model SI have implemented whereby a player becomes 150+ at say 21.

ah sorry i didnt realise all you were wanting was an agreement. You obviously have access to the stats of all my regens, most of which i have actually checked out with FMRTE now but obviously the stats i am looking at wrong and the ones you have access to are correct.

Just because we "shouldn't" see some attributes doesn't mean there is no problem with those attributes.

Of course my opinion counts more, but I'm not going to just buy a game so I can judge it for myself. I might not have much money left if this was the case.

I'm fussy but I also like breaking games and taking them to the limit - if lots of bugs are easily found, then I am wary.

Good ol' anecdotal evidence...

Unfortunately, I tend to notice bugs rather easily - I break software a lot and have tested software before. So I do not consider myself a casual player of games, to lack a word.

But thats my point, if you read for example the posts Splerz is putting up constantly you would think this game is completely unplayable, everything is broken and nothing works, but if you read my posts you would think everything is hunky dory, there is very little middle ground on here with a balanced opinion, its either love or hate for 99% of posters.

I know its not a good specimin and purely based on my friends my only point was if you didnt read the forums unless you go looking hard you dont see the bugs, but if you read the forums they are hugely apparent because as soon as you turn the game on you look for them.

Because if a game is poor, then people will say it is poor, and you can save money by not buying the game?

I personally always look at reviews and gauge forum comments before getting a game.

Except he already said he bought it ages ago, and THEN waited.

Anyway, the game's not exactly expensive is it? £30 once a year.

Just because we "shouldn't" see some attributes doesn't mean there is no problem with those attributes.

my point is i have looked at these attributes, and i still dont see the problem.

But thats my point, if you read for example the posts Splerz is putting up constantly you would think this game is completely unplayable, everything is broken and nothing works, but if you read my posts you would think everything is hunky dory, there is very little middle ground on here with a balanced opinion, its either love or hate for 99% of posters.

Why can't I make a conclusion out of extreme opinions?

(Hint: It's called an average)

I know its not a good specimin and purely based on my friends my only point was if you didnt read the forums unless you go looking hard you dont see the bugs, but if you read the forums they are hugely apparent because as soon as you turn the game on you look for them.

And that is a problem because...

Except he already said he bought it ages ago, and THEN waited.

Anyway, the game's not exactly expensive is it? £30 once a year.

No, but you can apply it to pretty much any game (or piece of software, in fact). There are a lot of games I'd like to buy but turn down because of system specifications, reviews and general ire on the interwebs.

I think you're mixing CA/PA with how good they are in a position. CA and PA only say the stats they can have, the stats themselves say how good a player is. If I striker had 20 marking and tackling they probably wouldn't be a very good striker but could have a CA of over 150 so everything is relevant. Also on my game several wonderkids have come through (I'm in 2025) including one at Man City who has played every game for them since 2013 when he was about 19.

I also have no problem with the "big" clubs building good squads, they do seem to mainly buy off other European clubs (ie me...) but they do seem to be going after good youths and my highest transfer is over £50m with 5 or 6 over £40m

Why can't I make a conclusion out of extreme opinions?

(Hint: It's called an average)

And that is a problem because...

Well i guess i need to stop looking at it through my own eyes, i would never make my opinion based on the forums, because frankly i find 90% of whats posted in GD to be complete nonsense, if you see it differently who i am to argue!

I personally would prefer to play a game without going looking for the problems the game has, but again that is just me and shouldnt be automatically applied to you.

I agree with the transfer system problems, but regens and declining ability appear quite ok to me, better than in previous FMs.

For regens, linkages between attributes and positions are better than before. Linking of important hidden attributes like PA-determination-professionalism look good to me too. (This is important to make sure the top regens really develop). The part that seems a bit off is the purely random consistency and important match stats, many of the top regens are very poor in this regard compared to the real-life stars. The solution I believe is to allow these stats to improve over time (realistically, many youngers are a bit lacking in the consistency department compared to seasoned pros). This doesn't appear to affect my game too much though since these stats don't seem to be overwhelmingly important, you can still get pretty consistent performances from players with poor ratings.

For decline in CA with age, I think it is reasonably realistic. Hardly any player who played to 35+ was as good as he was when he was younger. They might still be good enough for a top team, but it probably has to do with the fact that they were exceptional players in the first place so a CA decline of say 180=>140 still allows them to be a rotational player in a top team. This is accurately reflected in the game for players with good natural fitness, get enough game time, etc etc. In my game for example I have Steven Gerrard at 35 still playing as a squad player and doing ok even with around 10 for pace.

I don't look at a sample size of 2.

And if there is a 50-50 spread amongst a large sample size, then I avoid it (it implies 50% of people are satisfied).

Other people not on the forum include people who have thrown the game in the bin because it's rubbish, and can't see why it will be a good game because bugs are so visible.

In practice, I believe that a forum roughly-represents the video game population and that yes, I can use forum posts to judge a game.

You may - in a later post - claim to be an expert at testing and breaking software, but your knowledge of statistics is very poor.

There's a very good reason you can't use a forum to make a sound statistical analysis of any subject, and that's because the opinions and therefore statistical information you can get from it is self-selecting.

You don't actually have a broad spread of FM players on here - you only have those who like to use forums. Believe me, I know many people who love FM and never come near this forum, don't even know it exists. I tell them a patch has come out, and they shrug and say "Oh right, what's that for then?". A vast number of people who buy the game simply stick it in their PC, install it, and play it. And you know what - I think they enjoy it too. How do I know? Look at the sales figures. If a product is poor, it doesn't sell.

So far then, we only have those people who a)play the game (obvious but I'll say it anyway!), and b) use internet forums.

Next, you tend to find that opinions on internet forums are polarised - you don't get many people posting on any subject with an "It's ok, I quite like it" point of view. If someone is bothered enough to come on a forum and type something, chances are they have a definite opinion either way. You may think this means it balances out the happy/unhappy points of view and therefore will give you a balanced opinion. Except that it's proven that people who are unhappy are far more likely to complain, than those who are happy are to praise.

So in essence, your sample is skewed towards those who are unhappy.

Personally, an internet forum is the last place I'd go to try to gauge opinion on any subject if I wanted a balanced view.

the Ai brains is seriously underdeveloped. For the game to reach the next level, and it sure as hell, has the potential to do so, this is a key area.

i cvompletely agree with TS, its a huge problem and sadly it hasnt been fixed.

the AI decisionmaking, needs to be much much better.

I can never understand why people assume that every regen at every club (or perhaps just their own) should be world class. The facts are there for people to look at, if they can be bothered to find them (even this month's 442 speaks about it), that the majority of scholars in the UK alone will not 'make it'. This means they will fall out of the football league (Premiership all the way down to League 2) and some out of football entirely.

Oh come on...

Long-term game really lacks any challenge due to AI managers being unable to build-up a competitive team. And as soon as the gameworld is mostly populated by newgens who need a lot of time/effort to be developed right it all goes south even quicker.

Let's be realist here... OUR OWN newgens mean diddly-squat because we have a much better judgement than the best AI managers, so we'll buy and train a promising 17yo ten times better that the AI teams will.

AI clubs can get an odd Top-Notch newgen every now and then, but the issue isn't there aren't enough average-to-good newgens... You either get the New Terry/Gerrard/Rooney with 15+ attributes or a plethora of unbalanced, unprofessional and inconsistent schmucks who would need 5 years of flawless tutoring and development just to become adequate backups.

The game seem to be unable to produce and/or to foster the next generation of Average Joes, those who should eventually become first team material for Fulham, Genoa, Espanyol, Rennes or Bochum...

Instead AI clubs will sign (and your scouts will recommend you) loads of inconsistent players with uneven attributes just because their PA is high... Totally ignoring the fact the mental traits and/or the visible attributes scream "I'll never fulfill my potential".

To put it into bare figures: AI will always pick a 60CA/180PA over a 90CA/130PA despite the latter having an actual chance to become a decent footballer.

Still, the game itself seem to produce MORE of the former...

In my latest save I'm just in the 2015-16 season but having been the manager of Cameroon and Chile I've already noticed how bleak the future looks in terms of newgens... With the exception of 1-2 newgen who are almost ready for top-flight football at age 20, the rest of the Under-21 team consists in abysmal players who are much much worse than their original db counterparts.

Basically most national teams, even those with good tradition and those with playable leagues (not the Top Nations) will be doomed once the original players get old or retire... They'll be lucky to get a handful of decent players who'll however suffer from lack of development due to AI's inability to do so.

Define "there aren't enough average-to-good newgens..." from what I've seen most clubs do get Regens with 2-3 stars. Also, as a Manager/Coach, its your job to train these young players and mould them into the players you want. The game isn't going to always produce cookie cutter wingers for you. Do you think that happens in real life? It doesn't. Long Term Player Development plans are in place to help mould young players.

on the transfer front, i have seen plenty of 20m+ transfers in my game by august 2023. real madrid bought a midfielder for 93m so big buys do happen. but the ai are still poor, buying good players for positions they dont need and making them be a back up or reserve and ignoring areas that they could improve.

dont think you need to treat all regens the same though. signed 1 regen for 700k as an 18 year old who had never made a senior appearance. by age 24, he had scored 200 goals for the club and captain of my side. i also signed a 17 year old from the derby youth team who i threw straight into my 1st team and he scored the winner in the champions league final the same season. at age 19 hes playing for england and i just sold him to real madrid for 34m, a profit of 32.5m but i needed the money. on the opposite side of that though i got an 18 year old striker with a terrible attitude who is never going to make it even with tutoring but i see any young signing as a risk, thats why they are cheap. i do agree though that some attributes are very poor for regens like jumping and flair.

on the age issue i have no issue. my old captain retired at 34 and was still a regular until he stopped playing. it wasnt until the last couple of months that he could no longer do a 90 minute effort. on the other hand i see players aged 30 who look well past their but there are many real life examples of that too. i think the personality of the player pretty much decides how long it is before they decline, a model pro will do more to keep fit than somebody who is balanced for example.

You may - in a later post - claim to be an expert at testing and breaking software, but your knowledge of statistics is very poor.

There's a very good reason you can't use a forum to make a sound statistical analysis of any subject, and that's because the opinions and therefore statistical information you can get from it is self-selecting.

You don't actually have a broad spread of FM players on here - you only have those who like to use forums. Believe me, I know many people who love FM and never come near this forum, don't even know it exists. I tell them a patch has come out, and they shrug and say "Oh right, what's that for then?". A vast number of people who buy the game simply stick it in their PC, install it, and play it. And you know what - I think they enjoy it too. How do I know? Look at the sales figures. If a product is poor, it doesn't sell.

So far then, we only have those people who a)play the game (obvious but I'll say it anyway!), and b) use internet forums.

Next, you tend to find that opinions on internet forums are polarised - you don't get many people posting on any subject with an "It's ok, I quite like it" point of view. If someone is bothered enough to come on a forum and type something, chances are they have a definite opinion either way. You may think this means it balances out the happy/unhappy points of view and therefore will give you a balanced opinion. Except that it's proven that people who are unhappy are far more likely to complain, than those who are happy are to praise.

So in essence, your sample is skewed towards those who are unhappy.

Personally, an internet forum is the last place I'd go to try to gauge opinion on any subject if I wanted a balanced view.

You are assuming that I actually aim to use a robust, scientific and mathematically-sound statistical process in order to judge whether or not I need to buy a video game. Bloody hell... :D:D

I do not have time to conduct a sample survey of around a thousand people, taking into account blinding, blocking and control.

I simply look at a review of a product, as well as the community, take a pinch of salt and draw my conclusions from there.

I note that I usually break games because I like tinkering, and if a lot of people find fairly obvious bugs, then I am probably going to run into them too.

There is little science or mathematics here - I simply have better things to do.

You basically saw the words "sample size" and "average" and assumed I was using some complicated (and apparently flawed) statistical process to pick which games I buy. I don't - I use my brain. And my wallet.

Now if you excuse me, I am off to use milnerpoint's even-less scientifically-sound process of buying a game without figuring out what the community thinks (both positive and negative), because it does not contain words like "sample size" and "average".

Define "there aren't enough average-to-good newgens..." from what I've seen most clubs do get Regens with 2-3 stars. Also, as a Manager/Coach, its your job to train these young players and mould them into the players you want. The game isn't going to always produce cookie cutter wingers for you. Do you think that happens in real life? It doesn't. Long Term Player Development plans are in place to help mould young players.

Too bad AI managers can't do it properly...

Also, don't trust the 2/3 Stars, because for youngsters the rating is based on their PA, regardless of their actual attributes distribution.

My scouts have been recommending me literally dozens of 3*/3.5* youngsters with horrid attributes or with poor mental traits... it doesn't take a psychic to guess a 16yo with just a couple of attributes >10 and a poor personality won't ever turn into the talented players he "could" be