Press Conferences - Another sad effort from SI

We are all used to half-arsed, poorly thought out features in the game by now. It has become the norm in SI's design.

I was expecting though that some older features would be improved as the years went by.

Not the case though, especially regarding Press Conferences.

The amount of questions asked have no bearing in real in life. They make no sense and are totally unimportant.

You sold an abysmal reserve who you barely know to some team you are playing against, the reporter will ask how you will feel that he will come up againt him. He is not even a starter and his numbers are awful, but the reporter will ask if he will haunt my team with his performance.

A reporter asks about a good player from the opposition who's been playing badly in the last five games: "Do you have an answer for him?", while completely disregarding the opposition striker who has scored 6 goals in the last 4 games.

Do they ask you about how you will counter their attacking tactics, their quick play, their direct passing, their possession? No. But they tell you that you in order to avoid defeat by Inter (who is 11th in the league while my team has won titles back to back, CL and has the best goal average in the league and have also thrased Inter with 3 goals in the first round) you must use a defensive approach.

Do they ask me about my style of play in general? No. Do they wonder why I am using Rossi as a deep forward when he is a striker? Do they ask me how I will fix my cross completed ration which is awful? Do they wonder if that's the reason my team has difficulty breaking down defences from the wings?

Do they even wonder if my decision to bring a tall, not very technical player in a team that plays possession football and relies in technical gifted players, was the right one?

Do they even know that I play possession football? They should. I totally dominate possession in every game. If they actually looked at the stat, they would know.

Do they ask me after a loss if it was the right decision to use the offside trap so much, since the opponent totally broke my defence line more than 4 times, resulting in 2 goals? No.

Do they question my ability to win big matches? No. Do they ask me why I chose to use a WB as a Winger? No.

While talking to the press, can I comment on the previous opponents tactics? No. Can I comment on the style of play my opponent had in my previous match? Can I comment on his defensive approach? On his attacking approach? No. On his use of a particular stystem? No. On his use of constact crosses? No. On his hard tackling? No. Can I comment on a referre decision? Not withoug being reprimanded by FIFA/UEFA. Can a manager in real life say that it wasn't a penalty? Yes, he can. Without being reprimanded by FIFA/UEFA.

On the other hand I can praise another manager about his decision to sell one of his players who is unknown. I can also praise about his strictness. Not important at all.

And so many other things, so many more questions exist.

Stop feeding us lies about how press conferences are always about the same questions and actually take more than an hour to think this through.

It's a disgrace how incomplete and devoid of any real sense the press conference mechanic is, while at the same time playing such an important part (which it shouldn't) in players perfomance.

Perhaps instead of just starting a negative thread, you could go into the suggestions thread and give some constructive criticism and perhaps ideas on how to improve things?

A general rant about something like this has been done a thousand times already and will just become another pointless thread where people throw in their own little complaints and will resolve nothing.

Moaning Threads - another sad effort from forum trolls.

Perhaps instead of just starting a negative thread, you could go into the suggestions thread and give some constructive criticism and perhaps ideas on how to improve things?

A general rant about something like this has been done a thousand times already and will just become another pointless thread where people throw in their own little complaints and will resolve nothing.

I think Kenco's pretty much nailed exactly what I would have said, as well.

As Kenco says, be constructive and help, trolling moaning threads will do no good at all.

Constructive? What do you think all those questions I posed are? They should be implemented in press conferences, that's why I posted them here.

I didn't use the usual sucking up to SI though (sorry If I hurt your feelings), since it's not a new feature.

If you don't have anything usueful to post, don't post at all.

The point is making a thread isnt helping. Thats like people posting here moaning about bugs. It doesnt help. They should post in the bugs forum and actually help. Its the same with this. So your questions would be useful if they was posted in the correct place and in the correct manner. As Kenco said, post them in the suggestions thread where it will be looked at and taken seriously. Anybody reading this will just read your opening line and dismiss it as a moaning troll thread and that doesnt help anybody. Especially when you do have a point.

and it begins.....

The point is making a thread isnt helping. Thats like people posting here moaning about bugs. It doesnt help. They should post in the bugs forum and actually help. Its the same with this. So your questions would be useful if they was posted in the correct place and in the correct manner. As Kenco said, post them in the suggestions thread where it will be looked at and taken seriously. Anybody reading this will just read your opening line and dismiss it as a moaning troll thread and that doesnt help anybody. Especially when you do have a point.

There is no reason to do something like what you suggest.

If it was a new feature I would. But this is an old feature and has received plenty of constructive criticism over the years. SI did nothing about it.

So, as a customer, I can voice my displeasure since my complaints haven't been answered. It's only logical.

Right whatever. Well you need to complain in the correct place. This isnt it. If you have suggestions on how to improve press conferences then you should post them in the aptly named 'suggestions' thread. And do it in a calm contructive manner. Then im sure it will be taken seriously and you may get a response from SI.

You say SI have had plenty of constructive criticism over the years but have done nothing about it. Have you gave them your contructive criticism in the past in the appropriate threads? Or have you just made moaning threads and then say nobody has listened to you?

You could have worded the thread differently in order to start a more constructive discussion.

However I agree with your points, press conferences are an irritating part of the game at present, but even with improved questions it will always become tedius in a game like this.

It's impossible to replicate the unpredictable media side of real life sport into a computer game.

and it begins.....

It began years ago, you just didn't notice it

To contribute to fairly and proper discussion, I think you have point that Press Conferences are too repetitive that I push to side.

For suggestions to improve Press Conferences, i offer none, because I have none. Why dwell on something that by its true nature has no interest in real life, aside to sell newspapers and occupy air time for the usual news on TV or any TV sports commentary, where in reality players don't care about.

There is no reason to do something like what you suggest.

If it was a new feature I would. But this is an old feature and has received plenty of constructive criticism over the years. SI did nothing about it.

So, as a customer, I can voice my displeasure since my complaints haven't been answered. It's only logical.

In actual fact, I can't name a version of FM since the feature was released where the Press Conferences weren't markedly improved upon from the previous year. That doesn't necessarily mean they're perfect (or even that good) yet, but it does mean they've taken feedback on board and looked to improve the system.

I agree with OP completely and totally disagree with Biscotti- press conferences have in no way improved. All that's changed is they're slightly shorter this year which is nice because it seems SI can't make them less crap/boring. And getting really tired of people who feel they have to chime in with "you could have said what you have to say in a nicer way" on every thread. Seriously...grow up.

I agree with OP completely and totally disagree with Biscotti- press conferences have in no way improved. All that's changed is they're slightly shorter this year which is nice because it seems SI can't make them less crap/boring. And getting really tired of people who feel they have to chime in with "you could have said what you have to say in a nicer way" on every thread. Seriously...grow up.

They have even if you don't see it, extra questions, the ability to answer in one click are two of the little improvements made so far.

Is your last statement more grown up than people asking for non abusive posts?

It's a good post tbh. The original poster has made some very valid points and suggestions, something that many other posters don't do.

They have even if you don't see it, extra questions, the ability to answer in one click are two of the little improvements made so far.

Is your last statement more grown up than people asking for non abusive posts?

Make your own thread suggesting people write in a nicer tone so i can ignore it, don't write it in every thread which has a criticism in it. You can tell when a thread is written in an offensive way to your sensibilities so why don't you ignore them?

Some fair points in your thread - we're aware that some aspects of press conferences are a bit generic and repetitive, but press conferences in real life aren't exactly a laugh a minute things. Saying that, yes, we should be looking to improve this area but to get it to an outstanding standard will not be easy. Let's face it, we make Football Manager, not Press Conference Manager, so to get it as complex and realistic as real life would take a lot of work. Thankfully with constructive feedback and people within the community posting suggestions and things like above, we can strive to improve this area of the game. Some of your tone I certainly wouldn't agree with, but I can understand how you could be frustrated so will let some of your 'angrier' comments slide. Cheers for taking the time to post.

How about limiting them to 1 a week that encompasses whatever happened in that week? Remember that some people play a couple months in one sitting. That makes for a whole lot more press conferences in one day than any real manager would have to put up with.

Some fair points in your thread - we're aware that some aspects of press conferences are a bit generic and repetitive, but press conferences in real life aren't exactly a laugh a minute things. Saying that, yes, we should be looking to improve this area but to get it to an outstanding standard will not be easy. Let's face it, we make Football Manager, not Press Conference Manager, so to get it as complex and realistic as real life would take a lot of work. Thankfully with constructive feedback and people within the community posting suggestions and things like above, we can strive to improve this area of the game. Some of your tone I certainly wouldn't agree with, but I can understand how you could be frustrated so will let some of your 'angrier' comments slide. Cheers for taking the time to post.

Actually, the press conferences regarding player purchases, pre-match etc... these aren't the problem. I always leave them to the assistant because the risk of answering some of the questions is higher than the benefits. That is one problem - how should SI program the press conferences so that it is actually worth showing up on them? Not like this, that is one thing I am completely sure of.

What is annoying me with FM11's press conferences about mind games - the battles vs other managers - is that there is a button to the bottom right which says "reply" whenever someone else is talking trash about me or my team. When you click on it and scroll through what you can actually say in response, none of them are "replies". They are comments about the opposing manager's chances of winnign the league, his discipline level etc. Those are not actually responses to "you won't win the league". This is the gaming equivalent of "yo momma".

In FM10, however, one could actually reply to these things. So again, FM11 is one step in the wrong direction.

Some fair points in your thread - we're aware that some aspects of press conferences are a bit generic and repetitive, but press conferences in real life aren't exactly a laugh a minute things. Saying that, yes, we should be looking to improve this area but to get it to an outstanding standard will not be easy. Let's face it, we make Football Manager, not Press Conference Manager, so to get it as complex and realistic as real life would take a lot of work. Thankfully with constructive feedback and people within the community posting suggestions and things like above, we can strive to improve this area of the game. Some of your tone I certainly wouldn't agree with, but I can understand how you could be frustrated so will let some of your 'angrier' comments slide. Cheers for taking the time to post.

Thanks for the reply. No disrespect but it's total marketing talk.

If you can't implement a feature and make it work -at least- satisfactory don't implement it at all. The way you have implemented the press conferences is just a marketing move, a line to put on the box (that goes for many other features, too).

In my post you can read many more questions you could implement. You don't have to implement them all at once. You could put in only some of them every year, which of course you could have done for the last 4 years if you actually gave a damn.

Or am I to think that you don't have the proper people to think about this feature a little deeper?

As for my tone, I don't see why you wouldn't agree with it. I am a customer and for the last years a major part of my product is not working as intended and has not improved, despiite the problem being identified and acknowledged all these years. Am I to continue support this unprofessionalism? And if so, for how long?

Have you seen me make a topic shouting about agents? About Match preparation? No, because they are new features.

I hope you get my point.

Yeah that's an outright bug and something which will most definitely be fixed for any future version of FM.

It's unbelievable this hasn't been fixed. It is a very important bug of a very important feature that actually has an impact to your team.

Unbelievable.

TSH basically nailed everything about the press conference. It's pretty poor considering it first came out many years ago, and it certainly isn't a new feature.

Me and my friends who play just leave it to assistant. Its too repetitive.

you do know that trolling is where people delibratly post with intent to wind up? maybe this guy is just that fed up with some features. that was to the first 4-5 posters

Have to agree with TSH and don't feel he was unconstructive - sometimes being negative is constructive.

My main frustration is with the exaggerated effect on player match performances from what are completely mundane questions and answers that would be extremely unlikely to have any detrimental effect in real life. The problem with this type of feature, particularly its knock on effect on player performance is that it is all complete speculation and highly subjective. Outside a very limited number of real life instances (Keegan Benitez etc), there is very little evidence that press conferences have any real effect on players or their performance, regardless of their personality. Most players probably don't even listen.

This is my main frustration with team talks as well and general player interaction. Overall, the player/media interaction, personalities and resulting outcome on morale and performance seem overly emphasised and somewhat illogical e.g. I often find my professional players with high important matches, pressure and determination ratings (yes, I have checked using FM scoutn or FMRTE) are the ones that get nervous in matches where I am favourite to win. Would this really be the case repeatedly in real life?

Also, I find that I play just as well with nervous or complacent players as I do with motivated players, with one difference - I miss nearly every scoring opportunity. Surely, performance generally would be affected, rather than just missing clear cut chances e.g. poor passing, less domination etc? AI teams seem to be able to manage their teams much better when they have nervous or complacent players in my game but not sure why.

By the way, this is not a rant from someone unsuccesfull at the game, as I win most of my matches and still really enjoy every other aspect of FM apart from player/media interaction.

How about limiting them to 1 a week that encompasses whatever happened in that week? Remember that some people play a couple months in one sitting. That makes for a whole lot more press conferences in one day than any real manager would have to put up with.

I wouldn't mind doing Press Conferences like 10 in one season. But of course that would be unrealistic.

However I do concur that as is, Press Conferences is very poor, despite knowing that they implement new questions and all of that. However the biggest issue I have with press Conferences of having that big influence on morale of the team, which i believe is very unrealistic, because Player in reality don't care about it. The thing is, if I say something that would hurt the morale of the team, my players before the match, will ask for explanations. That is why in reality Press Conferences have little to no difference.

I do wonder who does SI ask about the importance of this stuff in reality, because I wondering it is time to change those people and ask the manager that much success like Mourinho, Fergusson or Pepe Guardiola among others.

More good points Pete S, I don't think this thread has been unconstructive at all and agree there's nothing wrong with being negative. All we ask for is constructive criticism, which the majority of this thread has been.

Then you agree that the first replies where harsh? If so, why don't they get a warning. it is due to that kind of behaviour I avoid in replying in GD forums.

TSH is mostly right in his "suggestrant", but unfortunately most of his ideas would require a total rework of the press conferences system, probably implying a level of complexity far beyond AI's current "ability".

The AI journalists can't really understand all the subtleties of tactical choices, transfer policies and so on...

Oh and hats off to Neil Brock for recongizing the constructive parts of TSH's post, while, as usual, some members of the resident Anti-rant Brigade were crying foul and coming to the rescue of SI's good name.

Turned out SI staff have better judgment than overly sensitive apologists.

Have to agree with TSH and don't feel he was unconstructive - sometimes being negative is constructive.

My main frustration is with the exaggerated effect on player match performances from what are completely mundane questions and answers that would be extremely unlikely to have any detrimental effect in real life. The problem with this type of feature, particularly its knock on effect on player performance is that it is all complete speculation and highly subjective. Outside a very limited number of real life instances (Keegan Benitez etc), there is very little evidence that press conferences have any real effect on players or their performance, regardless of their personality. Most players probably don't even listen.

This is my main frustration with team talks as well and general player interaction. Overall, the player/media interaction, personalities and resulting outcome on morale and performance seem overly emphasised and somewhat illogical e.g. I often find my professional players with high important matches, pressure and determination ratings (yes, I have checked using FM scoutn or FMRTE) are the ones that get nervous in matches where I am favourite to win. Would this really be the case repeatedly in real life?

Also, I find that I play just as well with nervous or complacent players as I do with motivated players, with one difference - I miss nearly every scoring opportunity. Surely, performance generally would be affected, rather than just missing clear cut chances e.g. poor passing, less domination etc? AI teams seem to be able to manage their teams much better when they have nervous or complacent players in my game but not sure why.

By the way, this is not a rant from someone unsuccesfull at the game, as I win most of my matches and still really enjoy every other aspect of FM apart from player/media interaction.

Have to agree with this for the most part...

Press conferences, player interaction, and team talks are all very half baked, boring, but we have to do it or the possible negative effects on players can actually cause the lose of games.

Now I believe they should play a role, it's part of being a manager... but there are various ways they completely fail.

Press conferences: You can play just half a season and you know everything that's going to be asked, and what the correct answer is, so very shallow... but then on the other hand when the press talks to players or staff IRL we already know what they will say because it's all rhetoric and political correctness. Only very rare instances are their times when they actually speak their mind IRL. But we have to do them because it actually has an impact on the level of play by our team. Honestly I can't think of a way press conferences will ever be an entertaining aspect of the game, but at the same time it's hard to say 'get rid of them' but I also don't like doing them just for more extra morale boost.

Player Interaction: Well as I've found out recently there is indeed too much randomness with this area, specifically relating to tutoring and PPM's. However it's also very shallow, player gets a 6.3 or lower rating in a match, have a talk and tell him it's unacceptable, player agrees and is happier because 'the last talk went well'. Player has a rating of 7.5 or higher and you praise the performance, they thanks you and again 'the last talk went well' affect. Very shallow.

Team Talks: This has to be the most important of all the interaction systems for obvious reasons, yet even though there are a number of options the system doesn't allow us to use them all. We usually only have the same 5-6 options and on occasion get access to others like 'warn against complacency'. But these rare ones never show up at times I think they are most applicable. So simply adding more depth to the talks would be better.

All in all however, because of the shallowness of the systems it's all to easy to manipulate them. My newest save I just finish the first season with a team. Combined with a successful season, by manipulating these systems a majority of my team have me listed as favored personnel, and it's mostly due just to the repeated praising/criticizing of performances because each one gives a little boost and you can do it pretty much every match you play they don't have an 'average' game.

So simple summary... More depth.

Have to agree with this for the most part...

Press conferences, player interaction, and team talks are all very half baked, boring, but we have to do it or the possible negative effects on players can actually cause the lose of games.

Now I believe they should play a role, it's part of being a manager... but there are various ways they completely fail.

Press conferences: You can play just half a season and you know everything that's going to be asked, and what the correct answer is, so very shallow... but then on the other hand when the press talks to players or staff IRL we already know what they will say because it's all rhetoric and political correctness. Only very rare instances are their times when they actually speak their mind IRL. But we have to do them because it actually has an impact on the level of play by our team. Honestly I can't think of a way press conferences will ever be an entertaining aspect of the game, but at the same time it's hard to say 'get rid of them' but I also don't like doing them just for more extra morale boost.

Player Interaction: Well as I've found out recently there is indeed too much randomness with this area, specifically relating to tutoring and PPM's. However it's also very shallow, player gets a 6.3 or lower rating in a match, have a talk and tell him it's unacceptable, player agrees and is happier because 'the last talk went well'. Player has a rating of 7.5 or higher and you praise the performance, they thanks you and again 'the last talk went well' affect. Very shallow.

Team Talks: This has to be the most important of all the interaction systems for obvious reasons, yet even though there are a number of options the system doesn't allow us to use them all. We usually only have the same 5-6 options and on occasion get access to others like 'warn against complacency'. But these rare ones never show up at times I think they are most applicable. So simply adding more depth to the talks would be better.

All in all however, because of the shallowness of the systems it's all to easy to manipulate them. My newest save I just finish the first season with a team. Combined with a successful season, by manipulating these systems a majority of my team have me listed as favored personnel, and it's mostly due just to the repeated praising/criticizing of performances because each one gives a little boost and you can do it pretty much every match you play they don't have an 'average' game.

So simple summary... More depth.

I actually agree with pretty much everything here. I suspect the only way to make these things more interesting would be to add an amount of depth that is not really achievable, though :/

I actually agree with pretty much everything here. I suspect the only way to make these things more interesting would be to add an amount of depth that is not really achievable, though :/

I would agree that adding that depth to press conferences is all but impossible and not really worth the time... so lessen their impact.

But i think they can possibly make player interaction better and I adding depth to team talks would be relatively easy, just don't limit our options so much and even expand on those options. Fairly simple compared to many other things that need work.

More good points Pete S, I don't think this thread has been unconstructive at all and agree there's nothing wrong with being negative. All we ask for is constructive criticism, which the majority of this thread has been.

Thanks for the participation Neil.

What I don't get though is this: You said the problem is time. How much time do you need to make the press conferences more logical? Isn't 4 years enough? I mean, wow.

You have to admit that the reason that this is taking so long is because it was badly designed in the first place. In order to improve it you have to redesign the whole thing, there is no other way.

The problem is that this whole feature (it's not the only one) wasn't thought out at all. How can we, the clients, see this from day one, yet you, who are pros, give the green light to include it in your final product and leave it like this for 4 years?!

You have no idea how much I love SI and FM and how many years of joy the series has offered me. But SI still feels like a bedroom company in so many ways. And if there was competition, which for example offered better press conferences, then I'm pretty sure that you would find the time to improve them.

Create some questions that make sense. You have already created more than 500 (I think) and most of them are illogical. If you create proper questions and most importantly, RELEVANT questions, then the feature would start to make sense. It may not be the most fun feature but at least players would like to do it more, because it will make sense.

Tie the feature with the RELEVANT questions to the fans and to the chairman. Create a dynamic that actually makes the player think before replying. How will the board react? How will the fans respond?

You have INEXCPLICABLY tied the feature to player perfomance. I mean, REALLY???? It's very rare that a real press conferenance has any impact to how the players perform, because press conferences are typical affairs most of the time.

Create a new feature which you can talk to your team, to have a team meeting, you know, like real teams do, where you can share your REAL thoughts about perfomances, match preparation, expectation of the next match, etc... This is how the whole feature should be designed.

You have taken the crazy and lovevable social aspect of football and have turned it to the most boring thing ever. Yet some of my not properly thought out suggestions would make the whole thing -wait for it- interesting.

TSH is mostly right in his "suggestrant", but unfortunately most of his ideas would require a total rework of the press conferences system, probably implying a level of complexity far beyond AI's current "ability".

The AI journalists can't really understand all the subtleties of tactical choices, transfer policies and so on...

Oh and hats off to Neil Brock for recongizing the constructive parts of TSH's post, while, as usual, some members of the resident Anti-rant Brigade were crying foul and coming to the rescue of SI's good name.

Turned out SI staff have better judgment than overly sensitive apologists.

There is no real A.I. at work in press conferences. For starters the system could feed the journalists with some basic info, like goals conceived, players doing well in the last 5 games, players playing badly in the last 5 games, etc, and trigger the questions.

Can't a journalist recognize that I am the champion for the last 2 years and avoid asking a stupid question like "will you be using a defensive approach to avoid defeat from AC Milan", when Milan hasn't qualified for europe in the last 3 years and it's on the 15th position? Of course he can and it would be really easy to implement.

The press conferanceas have a meta-importance to the game. They are not essential but they are an integral part of the role playing experience because you are communicating with the world. The MUST be improved as that will help the immersion tenfold.

How would you do it differently if you could? I don't think competition has anything to do with it - and you say 'isn't 4 years enough', we only have so many coders which can work on so many things. It's not like we have half a dozen people working solely on press conferences, we just don't have that kind of man power. We put in the best idea we had in regards to press conferences - it's not an easy concept to envisage in a computer game. I'm certainly not trying to make excuses, I just hope you can see it from our perspective.

My way would be to concentrate on each feature and get it as near as damn it finished before adding new features. How many new features have been added in the last four years? Most of which arent great because they havent had enough time spent on them. I think the only features which have been a bit success is the 3D and the tactics/set piece creator. And even the latter is just a graphical representation of what was already there.

So I think what it boils down to, and what a lot of people think, is that there has been time to do it and improve it, but that would mean concentrating on that alone. But the following years game with 'improved press conferences' on the box wont sell as much as 'added agents, tactics creator, set piece creator, 3D...............' and so on.

I do sympathise with the position your in though. You need to add new features so the game goes forward and keeps up sales. Because basically you cant sell a slightly improved game with a new database forver. But obviously that impacts on the game as a whole and the more you add, the more you have to play catch-up.

How would you do it differently if you could? I don't think competition has anything to do with it - and you say 'isn't 4 years enough', we only have so many coders which can work on so many things. It's not like we have half a dozen people working solely on press conferences, we just don't have that kind of man power. We put in the best idea we had in regards to press conferences - it's not an easy concept to envisage in a computer game. I'm certainly not trying to make excuses, I just hope you can see it from our perspective.

Sorry, have to say it...

That's exactly why many people ask SI to focus on fixing broken things (and I'm not talking about press conferences but more substantial systems) instead of using those limited resources to create minor new 'features' that are just as half baked because you have limited time to get them done (ie agents, and even match prep has been found lacking after it's new shiny wore odd).

Just a vicious loop of not fully finishing anything and more stuff piling up that needs to be worked on.

How would you do it differently if you could? I don't think competition has anything to do with it - and you say 'isn't 4 years enough', we only have so many coders which can work on so many things. It's not like we have half a dozen people working solely on press conferences, we just don't have that kind of man power. We put in the best idea we had in regards to press conferences - it's not an easy concept to envisage in a computer game. I'm certainly not trying to make excuses, I just hope you can see it from our perspective.

Read my above post for some examples on how to do it differently. I have created a whole system though on how this should work.

I can understand the limitations, that is why I didn't post anything about new features. On the other hand, this feature hasn't seen any real improvement in the last years, so I believe that it has become a major hindrance.

As I said, I can understand the limitations. But you must also understand that 4 years (or 5?) should be enough to make some (just some) proper improvements. This applies to other features, too, but I have no desire to stray off topic.

edit: Just a small correction. Your problem is not only limited coders but absence of proper designers, too. The llatter may be more important than the former.

Simple fix:

Give us the option of doing away with the press conferences. I derive absolutely no pleasure from slogging through them but I sure as heck am not going to let my assman possibly upset my entire team by saying the wrong thing. I understand that these things can and do happen in real life...but we're not including the option to choose how we brush our teeth in the morning, are we? At this point it's still an entirely unneccesary feature that, to people like me, takes away from their ability to enjoy the game. Realism is great and all, but the main focus of a game should be on entertainment.

Sorry, have to say it...

That's exactly why many people ask SI to focus on fixing broken things (and I'm not talking about press conferences but more substantial systems) instead of using those limited resources to create minor new 'features' that are just as half baked because you have limited time to get them done (ie agents, and even match prep has been found lacking after it's new shiny wore odd).

Just a vicious loop of not fully finishing anything and more stuff piling up that needs to be worked on.

While this is quite true, as SteveRobbo pointed out just above SI can't afford to release a new version of the game without any new features for fear it will look like it's going backwards. They're in a bit of a catch-22 in that sense, because they can't devote enough time to make significant strides on their current features while still being able to crank out enough new features to satisfy the people involved.

Personally I don't subscribe to the "every other year" ideas, but I do think perhaps they would benefit considerably from having one year without a release in order to catch up. Not sure what kind of effect that would have from a business perspective, though, seeing as they almost certainly budget based upon projected sales of the new version...

There actually was a 'polish' year not so long ago. Out of curiosity, how much was sales affected (if at all) by only releasing a polished game rather than a 'new' game. If the difference was minimal, would it not be worth having a polish year every other year? So one year add new features, the year after perfect the features, then the year after release new features again?

How would you do it differently if you could? I don't think competition has anything to do with it - and you say 'isn't 4 years enough', we only have so many coders which can work on so many things. It's not like we have half a dozen people working solely on press conferences, we just don't have that kind of man power. We put in the best idea we had in regards to press conferences - it's not an easy concept to envisage in a computer game. I'm certainly not trying to make excuses, I just hope you can see it from our perspective.

For my money, this is where SI needs to embrace the huge following they have and give their customers the tools to further "flesh out" this feature: set it up as a feature of the editor (regular or advanced) and allow people the option of creating their own conversations for the conferences. It could go like this:

1. "New question" Type the question to be added.

2. "New reply" Give at least two replies that can be used to respond to the question.

3. "Effect" Set the parameters that will be effected by the reply. Will it please/delight a determined player? Upset an ambitious one? Have a seperate box that lists the potential effects (player morale +/-1, +/-2, etc.) and lists the relevant attributes (determination, player status, etc.) of the players that are effected. In other words, create a new question/reply that will have a positive impact on players with high determination, or create one that will have a negative effect on players with low professionalism.

4. Allow customers to up/download these new questions and rate them.

General comment, not just to this thread, but to all threads that post complaints but offer no alternative solutions, and I'm NOT implying that no solutions are offered in this thread.

1> Complaints ARE justified. Anyone who thinks a game is perfect because the franchise has been around a long time is kidding themselves. Bugs happen, and so does poor or incomplete design.

2> Complaints that are made without offering solutions are whining. And no, saying something like, "spend more than an hour thinking about this" or "fix this" is not offering a solution. List specifically how YOU would have it work instead.

Over the years (and I started back with CM4) forum members have offered some great ideas for how things should work. Whining is easy. Offering specific, descriptive solutions can result in a better future release in the franchise.

For my money, this is where SI needs to embrace the huge following they have and give their customers the tools to further "flesh out" this feature: set it up as a feature of the editor (regular or advanced) and allow people the option of creating their own conversations for the conferences. It could go like this:

1. "New question" Type the question to be added.

2. "New reply" Give at least two replies that can be used to respond to the question.

3. "Effect" Set the parameters that will be effected by the reply. Will it please/delight a determined player? Upset an ambitious one? Have a seperate box that lists the potential effects (player morale +/-1, +/-2, etc.) and lists the relevant attributes (determination, player status, etc.) of the players that are effected. In other words, create a new question/reply that will have a positive impact on players with high determination, or create one that will have a negative effect on players with low professionalism.

4. Allow customers to up/download these new questions and rate them.

I like this quite a bit. It doesn't even necessarily need to be a tool provided with the game to allow you to do it, because as things currently stand it is possible to edit the in-game commentary - it would just be a similar thing to that.

Having said that, I'm not entirely sure that you couldn't potentially go in amongst the files and do this....

another problem is all the things that are implemented the ai managers either don't use at all or only use sparingly so every new feature added...which after about a half a seaosn max you've got figured out, gives you a greater and greater advantage over the AI. I mean they already bad at squad building and tactically (just use generic formations don't set up each player to maximise their potential), now that all this man management stuff is added we just further and further ahead of them.

There actually was a 'polish' year not so long ago. Out of curiosity, how much was sales affected (if at all) by only releasing a polished game rather than a 'new' game. If the difference was minimal, would it not be worth having a polish year every other year? So one year add new features, the year after perfect the features, then the year after release new features again?

It's entirely possible that this could do a good job of balancing the situation. It could also cause all manner of unforseen problems, though, so if SI/SEGA were to go this route I'm sure they'd have to be very cautious with it - I mean, can you imagine how many ranty threads would start popping up if there were game-breaking bugs in a polish year?

While this is quite true, as SteveRobbo pointed out just above SI can't afford to release a new version of the game without any new features for fear it will look like it's going backwards. They're in a bit of a catch-22 in that sense...

This is my issue with the computer game industry in a nutshell...something that has destroyed great franchises such as Call of Duty...

Albeit not everyone, but the consumer puts so much pressure on developers to come up with ingenious new ideas, new features that make the new game aesthetically different from past versions...they are also under pressure to tailor for two markets, hardcore and casual gamers who as you know, have two totally different opinions...and this is something i fear is happening the Football Manager series...

Me personally, well i'd like to see bi-annual releases (this is in any game, not just FM)...where the developer is given time to perfect and buff the game without the pressure of an upcoming release date...

However, i'm sure there is plenty of reasons why developers would disagree with this...and for reasons i agree with...so i dont see it happening in the near future...or ever.

I could go into this more, but it would just turn into a dissertation like document so...plus its kinda off topic..

On topic...i don't really need to say much more...i will ass though, that i don't even read the question...i just click on what i know is the right answer...say's a lot!

I mean, can you imagine how many ranty threads would start popping up if there were game-breaking bugs in a polish year?

This is where i sympathise with SI...

It is IMPOSSIBLE to create a 'perfect' game...especially in a game such as FM. And what may be perfect for someone, may be horrid for someone else...

While this is quite true, as SteveRobbo pointed out just above SI can't afford to release a new version of the game without any new features for fear it will look like it's going backwards. They're in a bit of a catch-22 in that sense, because they can't devote enough time to make significant strides on their current features while still being able to crank out enough new features to satisfy the people involved.

Personally I don't subscribe to the "every other year" ideas, but I do think perhaps they would benefit considerably from having one year without a release in order to catch up. Not sure what kind of effect that would have from a business perspective, though, seeing as they almost certainly budget based upon projected sales of the new version...

To a degree this might be true... but I think the main people that want new features every year are the die hards anyway, they just want a new gadget in game but they'd likely buy it anyway.

However the majority of the customer base would likely be no less put out if FM didn't have new features for a year or two compared to it having new features that were half baked an buggy. I mean myself I don't intend to by 2012 because FM11 while having new features does seem to have gone backwards from FM10 imo. So in reality what difference does it really make if they don't put in new features, diehards will by it anyway and the saved time will make existing system function better, instead of just adding more bugs with new features. Obviously I'd rather have fewer bugs each year instead of adding new ones and not fixing old ones.

As for the yearly release or not... never have liked a yearly release, think it's nothing more then companies gouging customers for as much as they can because there is truly to implement enough change into software in just 1 year to make it worth a full price new release. But I also no that SEGA and SI will not change that model, just like EA's never changed their sports franchises, because people always come back ever year and buy it again without thinking.

There is no real A.I. at work in press conferences. For starters the system could feed the journalists with some basic info, like goals conceived, players doing well in the last 5 games, players playing badly in the last 5 games, etc, and trigger the questions.

Can't a journalist recognize that I am the champion for the last 2 years and avoid asking a stupid question like "will you be using a defensive approach to avoid defeat from AC Milan", when Milan hasn't qualified for europe in the last 3 years and it's on the 15th position? Of course he can and it would be really easy to implement.

The press conferanceas have a meta-importance to the game. They are not essential but they are an integral part of the role playing experience because you are communicating with the world. The MUST be improved as that will help the immersion tenfold.

Once more, plenty of fair points... but the thing is, we don't know how press conferences work "under the hood"..

I used "AI" as loose term to indicate the game "knows" something about our team and uses said infos to pick the questions... But HOW MUCH does it know, I can't say and you can't say.

So maybe the "defensive approach" against a former Top Club is just a standard question... I'm sure it popped up also before a cup fixture against a lower league side... Or it's just based on past results, so it still "remembers" when they defeated you 4-0 many years ago.

As far as I can tell there are just a couple of non-generic situations that trigger specific questions, like before the 2nd leg of a cup fixture, in the final games of the season etc.

Or player-specifics about form (goal droughts or hot streaks), behaviour and so on.

But expecting the journalists to "see" you've been playing Some Guy as a DL-forward instead of as a Poacher, or other very in-depth tactical aspects of your play would require an amount of data so big it wouldn't really worth the effort.