SI's input on the forums

I’ve noticed a few threads about the subject of SI’s input on the forums, namely in the two sticky threads here in GQ and one in OTF. However, as none seem to be the ‘right’ place to discuss this, I thought I’d open up a new thread.

Before I go any further, I’d like to point out that Miles has said that this is ok, as long as it is constructive and doesn’t resort to insults so I would kindly ask that people try to keep things civil, but at the same time ask the mods that if people act out of line they take action against the individual poster and not the thread.

Right, now that that’s out the way I’ll get to the point of the thread. The recent thread by Miles about the announcement of an announcement descended into chaos, mainly because everyone started firing questions at Miles which weren’t relevant to the thread in particular. While I agree with Miles that people shouldn’t be posting some of the issues in there, I think he needs to look at why people feel the need to do that.

My own theory (which could be completely wrong), is that it is partly because there isn’t enough input on the forums from SI, so when someone sees a figurehead like Miles posting in a thread they seize the chance to question him, even if it’s irrelevant to the thread topic.

Now I don’t want to get into the whole debate about the forums being nasty places where SI don’t want to go, as that’s been covered in the ‘These Forums’ thread, but for me it’s a two-way street. If SI don’t converse with the community in the relevant threads, then they shouldn’t be surprised when they do post something they get mobbed.

I currently know of only two SI employees who get involved in discussions with the community, Ter and Paul C (although I apologize if I’ve missed anyone off from forums I don’t frequent). While it’s great that these members will talk about their own areas, it doesn’t help that there are so many other areas of the game being discussed but with no official input form SI.

A recent example was a long thread on the transfer module, which is one of the most vital elements in the game, but widely considered to be incredibly flawed. A thread was started in GQ and got past 8 pages without a peep from SI, until eventually Ter popped in and gave the usual speech of ‘just because we don’t respond doesn’t mean we aren’t listening’, which may well be true, but it’s up to SI to prove that they are listening, rather than just relying on users trusting their word. I eventually lost interest in the thread after it passed 12 pages without anyone who had worked on the transfer module having an input. A really basic element of customer feedback is that you respond to the feedback you get, otherwise people feel like they’re being ignored, even if they aren’t.

Another example was the confidence system, which was highlighted as a potential issue even before the demo was released. Upon release it was flagged in a number of places including GQ as well as the bugs forum, but again with no official response. When I was appointed on the final patch beta testing team I asked in the private forum about confidence and immediately received a reply saying that SI knew it was flawed, but was too complex to fix in a patch and would hopefully be rectified for FM 2009. Now I really don’t see why that answer couldn’t have been given in any of the numerous threads that were asking the same question. Perhaps SI thought that there would be some sort of meltdown, or that it’s admitting failure on their part, but a simple statement of ‘yes we know it’s flawed, we can’t change it now but hope to do so for the next version’ could have done wonders and stopped a lot of the grief.

I rarely frequent GQ now, but upon each release I go through the same process of playing the game, posting my thoughts and watching them fade into obscurity while a multitude of threads clog up the forums. It’s pretty soul destroying (not literally) putting the time and effort into something and seeing it just get buried or getting involved in a really constructive debate only for the powers that be to either ignore it or watch from a distance and not respond.

In summary, I’ll go through the same process again (assuming I buy 2009) and will be posting my comments, thoughts and opinions in GQ. I’d really, really like it if SI get involved with debates about the transfer module, confidence, training, tactics etc. so will wait and see what happens.

btw I’d thoroughly recommend promoting the use of transactional analysis in the workplace at SI, which would really help when dealing with different members of the forums.

I rarely frequent GQ now, but upon each release I go through the same process of playing the game, posting my thoughts and watching them fade into obscurity while a multitude of threads clog up the forums. It’s pretty soul destroying (not literally) putting the time and effort into something and seeing it just get buried or getting involved in a really constructive debate only for the powers that be to either ignore it or watch from a distance and not respond.

This echoes my thoughts on the subject entirely.

Without the input of the SI staff, this just becomes another developers forum, in which users of <insert game/product here> brow-beat, generally argue and throw ideas around - with no idea as to whether their time, effort and analysis has been even seen by the 'powers-that-be'.

This is supposed to the the SI Community. I would assume that SI want to be a part of that.

I think the point you made about the confidence system sums up the major issue I have with SI, which is oft encapsulated by Miles' postings.

You have created a game which has two considerable flaws, and charged people £20 to buy it. These two issues are then brought up and analysed by hundreds of members on a forum which you have created for that exact purpose. It seems incredibly arrogant to me to assume people will continue to post such analysis, which can only be useful to you, without you aiding discussion through posts of your own.

You don't need to respond to every thread, you don't even need to tell us how you're going to fix it, all you need to do is have the common decency to admit to your consumers that these major flaws exist. You're not going to lose customers by doing so, you saying they exist won't make the game anymore unplayable, it will simply reassure people that you wish to fix the issues, not saying anything gives me the distinct impression you won't bother sorting it, which leads me to not bothering to purchase 09, and buying CM. If CM turns out to be good, I'll recommend it to others who will buy it, who will then only buy that by the time the CM/FM 10 games come out.

You make some valid points. First, let's say that Sports Interactive, or at least some individuals from them, post in the forums more than a lot of other games makers do. However, a lot of these posts seem to come in answer to a direct question. I guess the Sports Interactive team figure that the forum is for discussion by the customers and only input when they feel it is needed. That aside, there is an air in the SI camp that the forums are a dangerous place to go, and the treatment of Miles in the announcement thread certainly reiterates that.

I think a lot of SI's admission to flawed features is in the known issues thread in the Bugs Forum, and SI don't feel the need to reply to the threads discussing things they have already admitted to be "broken". I know it's disappointing seeing a well-thought out post/thread being swamped, as I found out with my ideas for the user interface thread. The indication at the moment is that SI aren't on the forums. Now that isn't the case, but a la the Broken Windows theory, if SI are posting more, it will look like they are on the forums and reading more, even when they aren't neccesarily. Some more posting from SI would create the impression that they're a lot more involved and user-friendly, but you have to regard their reasons for not posting, too.

Expect a reply from SI, most likely Riz, any minute now.

I think a problem people have is that they have been spoilt by s.i in the past and the amount of feedback and forum postings the team have done in previous years. Now people expect them to answer and responed to everything they put forward, which is impossible. Thats when some users get quite frankly nasty, and this intern leads to s.i not wanting to show their faces round here. I do agree though that if a problem or bug is being discussed in a constructive fashion, just a quick post by s.i to say they understand and will try and rectify the problem will help.

If SI have someone who can point their relevant people in the direction of constructive threads where they can give some input then that would be good, but I wouldn't expect (or want) SI staff to trawl through all the meaningless threads that get started here ("meaningless" referring to ones that are either just total rubbish or the frivalous ones that lots of people like, but aren't directed at improving the game or asking questions about it) just to find one or two that are worth them responding to.

Certain days I spend quite a lot of time (far too much) in these forums whilst at work simply because I am working on something that involves, for example, a very steep learning curve where I need to just let information soak in so I have time spare to wander into a forum, but obviously most of the time posting in a forum just gets in the way of work when you are working on something where you know where it is going and need to concentrate.

I am only here regularly over the last week (and other times) because my head would explode if I spent all my time at my desk on my work because I need time to subconsciously soak up all the complex maths I am learning - if I'm in a programming phase then I don't like to waste too much time on non-work things and I wouldn't want SI staff to be doing less programming and more forum chat!

Well delivered post, Bigwig. I can't really argue any of your points too deeply, as I'm pretty much in agreement with everything you've stated. But from a wide angled point of view, can you imagine the backlash the forums would have if SI employee's were to post more regularly?

Heres the current scenario as we know it.

FM Forums : Minimal response from SI Employees, while forumites complain about the game and its flaws, subliminally begging SI for a "Legitimate response" - while slating them every waking moment that they refuse to post in a thread. In the threads they do post in, it often turns into a Q&A and pretty much obscures the point initially made in the thread.

Heres how I see it if SI did post more frequent.

Fm Forums : Initially, forumites will be delighted that their every whim and question gets the "official response" from SI that they so desperately crave, despite the fact that ultimately, it really doesn't make much difference to the game in its current state, and although may give the poster periodic peace of mind, they'll eventually have another problem, and another question. Responses from SI will become repetitive, dull, lackluster, and will begin to be slated by the forumites. On top of this, members here (as well as I know them) - will turn the tables against SI yet again with immature responses to SI.

Forumite - "Why is XXXX broken, and when will it be fixed?"

SI - "We're having certain troubles with XXXX, but hopefully it should be fixed for FM09. Unfortunately, it was too big a job to fix in the 8.0.2 patch"

Forumite - "Well then why don't you stop wasting yours and our time on the forums and get some work done in the office to avoid these issues"

And there we go. Its gone full circle and the problem of SI not being on the board enough becomes a problem of them even being o the board.

What I propose, is a Question and Answers team that is basically fully informed from SI what the issues are with the new game, whats planned to be done about these issues and when, so that the Q&A team can be the dogs bodies on the forums, and allow SI to participate in threads that require a little more in-depth knowledge over a Q&A team member.

Currently, I'm not overly pleased with the input of SI on the forums, regardless of how much they read - but I'd rather it this way than the other.

I was actually going to suggest some form of Q&A system too.

I can understand why SI have had to lessen their inteaction with the community, it's the general way things go - the bigger a company gets, the more removed it becomes from the consumers, that's always going to be the issue, It can't really be done any other way. You can never please all the people and with a larger amount of users asking questions, they're more likely to get annoyed when their questions don't get answered.

A Q&A system, whether that be a dedicated team, or a semi-regular occurance would help to change that, they'd be fully dedicated to doing just that and therefore could hopefully ensure users questions were answered properly.

There's also a lot of dross posted on here. I'm sure it's difficult to wade through, but as a fairly frequent contributor to the forums I see the majority of posts fall into 3 categories:

1. Valid point, not raised before, prompts engaging discussion.

2. Valid point, but been raised a hundred times before (board confidence, transfer market, "let's have 3d graphics", regens, "when is FM09 coming out?"), all of which can be found via the search facility.

3. Utter nonsensical rants - eg, "the game cheats", "the corner bug is appalling", "grey teams are too good", "SI should release FM09 NOOOWWW!", "FM09 should be a bespoke game designed for **ME** to use exactly how I want it and any deviation is disgusting..."; (I'll stop there, but I could go on).

In my experience, SI tend to engage with point 1 fairly often, even if it's just to say "thanks, we're working on that" or "this is understandable, but we can't fix it at present... here's what to do" or other such valuable nuggets.

I don't see why they should engage with either 2 or 3. I know *I* wouldn't, except to close the threads and direct posters to either the search facility or to tell them to grow up.

IMO the SI staff engage as much as they should, although a couple more mods would be nice.

I'm generally more of a reader than a poster on here, I pretty much agree with the OP on this but I'm not sure if thats all just a bit idealistic.

It would be fantastic if SI responded more regularly to threads, but I dont think its really that likely until many around here can start being a lot less antagonisic and aggressive towards each other. I used to post on here all the time, a few years back, but it's hard work these days. Some people are just too tightly wound and looking for an argument constantly, even if you try to help.

I appreciate the input SI has on these forums. I do agree with the OP that more regular aknowledgements from SI that a thread has been noted would help a bit, but I really don't think it would magically solve the general atmosphere of the forums, which isn't always particularly nice.

In fairness a fair number of the 'Testing Team' who are also SI employees do frequent the forums looking for feedback and issues so we can then pass it on. Although we're not considered 'official' to the community because we don't have the blue badge, we are involved and do try to speak on behalf of the company.

Maybe some sort of badge for you lot would help, as it would make it easier for posters to recognise that a post comes from somebody linked to SI?

If I was a SI employee my main problem would be finding the incentive to read through 4 pages of rubbish about the game cheating for that one post that makes any sense or has anything new or substantial to offer. Then I would have to think long and hard about the fact that making a comment would probably mean the thread really going to pot as a legion of members ask me questions that have been answered a million times.

Perhaps a forum designed specifically to discuss things with SI could be set up and the posts monitored so as to keep things on topic and relevant.

One thing we have on the new forum software which we didn't have before is the ability to tag threads, so as a moderator I can tag threads in this forum that contain good ideas or discussion about ideas for the game. Using the tag search, it is able to get a list of these threads like this, which could narrow down the searching for members of SI. If people have put a lot of effort into a thread with suggestions for improvement to the game and are worried about it disappearing I'd be more than happy for people to PM me to suggest that it should be tagged.

I'm not promising that every tagged thread will be responded to or acted upon but it is another way of drawing attention to good ideas and discussion from the community.

I really thank the OP for starting this cause it was done in a way that will get the devs and mods to look at it and maybe raise an eyebrow or two. I feel that when people complain and keep posting thread, after thread about it an issue it means the community is crying out for a mod to come down from heaven and explain to us that this is why x is happening and we are doing Y to counter act it. I myself feel we as a whole are not being listened too but again I do not bare the workload that SI do to get these games out on time and with little bugs as possible.

My biggest issue is the Regens being so poor with there physical abilities. I have seen at 15 threads over the last year discussing this. Some have been well thought out and others have been rants and raves about why it needs to be fixed. I have taken part in both. Miles did talk to me about taking it easy and to play the demo and make a decision then if I want to get the game or not. Only thing is is that won't answer my question whether Regens have been fixed in the areas that a lot of the community think they need fixing. I would have to buy the game and play a couple of seasons worth of matches to actually find that out.

I myself will do my best to make a thread about this when we get more information this upcoming Weds. to again bring this up in a very constructive and undemanding way and I would to get an answer from anyone at SI. I just want a yes or no answer on the subject then I think all my concerns and many other members of the community will have all this behind them and looking forward to what SI plan if anything to do about it.

Si should make a customer service dept if they don't already have one to stay in touch with the community about issues they feel should be fixed. I hope they listen to this one and can get us an answer about some of the things we have talked about in a lot of the threads that have been posted. Thanks for this thread OP.

Neil's in the Bugs forum every day, Olly's always answering questions in the FMH and 360 sections and Glenn (who codes FMH) is pretty active in there too. It's been a bit better than that in the past, I agree, but when you see some of the things that people write on here it's no surprise that SI employees are reluctant to post.

but when you see some of the things that people write on here it's no surprise that SI employees are reluctant to post.

Well that's the flip side of the coin isn't it? Aggressive moderation is the answer in my book. At the same time, it's discussed at length in the 'these forums' thread.

In the threads they do post in, it often turns into a Q&A and pretty much obscures the point initially made in the thread.

And therein lies the problem. Threads always go :

Peep : I've noticed that x doesn't work. Would y or z fix it? Are SI aware?

SI : We're aware and we are working on it.

Other Peep : Whilst you're here SIbod, what about a or b?

Other Peep : And c and d and e!

Yet more : Huh no SI response. U R teh Suck!!!!!!!!!!

And that's almost all of them.

I wouldn't be adverse to an SI response that answers the query brought up in the thread and then once they've replied they CLOSE the thread. So that particular topic of discussion is answered, and other other topics people want to discuss they can open up a new thread.

Perhaps even then have a sticky FAQ-style at the top of the forum giving a summation of the issues raised and the answers given. Job done.

VB

I think being seen more often is the key to SI's efforts being taken more seriously. You have to remember this is a business where customer relations is important. After all, no customers, no revenue stream. As the user base is reminded earlier in this thread, this is a big company ( or at least bigger than 5 years ago). As with all big companies if a customer has a query, not hearing from the compny wil do nothing but annoy the customer. Its all very well saying you read them, but if the customer doesnt know that its not great is it?

Great, more drama... The single fact that they actually do give attention to the forums should be something that we should be happy about, not whine about wanting to have more.

They give you a hand, you'll grab the arm, some people are just never happy.

Great, more drama... The single fact that they actually do give attention to the forums should be something that we should be happy about, not whine about wanting to have more.

They give you a hand, you'll grab the arm, some people are just never happy.

It's threads like this that give frequent forum users a bad name and make people think we are just over the top about everything

It's threads like this that give frequent forum users a bad name

Considering a lot of the posts in this thread are from bods who've been here well over 4 years then perhaps you need to reconsider your point of view.

I'm not saying that being here less than a year makes your opinion less valid, but it's a difficult standpoint to take.

Considering a lot of the posts in this thread are from bods who've been here well over 4 years then perhaps you need to reconsider your point of view.

I'm not saying that being here less than a year makes your opinion less valid, but it's a difficult standpoint to take.

I don't think length of service or anything like that has any relevance to the point I was making.

My point was that the way in which some people choose to post unfairly reflects on the rest of us e.g. using terms such as whine. Now I don't find that particularly offensive, but it only serves to add fuel to the fire on these forums that people who side with SI and disapprove of certain types of thread are aggressive and think they rule the place. Length of service has nothing to do with it, but forum etiquette and peoples perception of the rest of us has everything to do with it.

I think we're remarkably lucky for a community to have this level of access to the development team - I'm not aware of any other software company that achieves that, or which offers the level of service and support that SI aim to attain. I've been lucky enough to meet some of the team, and they're a good bunch that care very much about both their products and their customers.

What we really need is for people to ignore the trolls and let moaning threads slide off the page. See a moan? Find a constructive post below it and contribute to it instead. Everyone wins - except the trolls, of course - and I'm sure the SI staff would then be able to spend their time on the forum contributing in positive ways that everyone can appreciate. As opposed to how things are now, when you get some idiots trying to get into confrontations - I'd question why they feel the need to do that?

I'd like to see a much firmer moderating position to really stamp on unconstructive posts in GQ as well, personally - the mods do a hard job very well, don't get me wrong, but I'd like to see a bit more stamping.

This post somewhat baffles me, so maybe I can learn something by responding. I want to start with something at the end: " I’d really, really like it if SI get involved with debates about the transfer module, confidence, training, tactics etc. so will wait and see what happens."

That seems quite reasonable. You are stating what you would prefer and acknowledging that it is your preference and that SI may also have a choice, which means it is open to actual relation and some back-and-forth.

But what baffles me overall is some kind of assumption of what SI should do that seems to me a bit unreasonable. But I may well be wrong. It might be a cultural difference, or cultural artifact from days-gone-by wherein SI set a precedent that has since changed. Nonetheless, maybe another perspective would be useful to you. I won't quote each passage, but I'd like to reply to a fair few with this end in mind. Hey, I'm just 'some guy', so take it for what it is.

I’ve noticed a few threads about the subject of SI’s input on the forums, namely in the two sticky threads here in GQ and one in OTF. However, as none seem to be the ‘right’ place to discuss this, I thought I’d open up a new thread.

One of the favorite complaints is: "There are already 30 threads on this. Do a search.". Frankly I think people that make such statements have not thought it through, or they simply like complaining. With 60,000 members there is going to be some repetition for some very good reasons. If say, 1000 people want to be heard on the issue of the transfer module, maybe there will be 10 threads of 100 posts each with some back and forth so that people are heard by each other. Also, there is a continuous flow of newbies, some of whom are quite young or new to gaming forums entirely. Without knowing what to expect they start a new thread. It may irritate the overly-organized amongst us, but it is perfectly to be expected and quite survivable. Railing against what will happen is futile.

And another reason people start new threads on topics already discussed is if they feel they are not being heard. Fair enough. Its going to happen. I'm all for it. But things get dicey when the person is determined 'to be heard' by SI, or by anyone in particular. Unless you've personally built a 2-sided relationship with someone, expecting that they reply to you; you, as one of 60000 people, seems a bit irrational. There are always other options such as trying to build a personal relationship with someone at SI and understanding that it may or may not happen as relationships are voluntary. Or attempting to organize the fans in some way so that you can speak with one voice on some issue. Also possible.

So 'the right place' does seem to be a new thread. I'm all for it.

My own theory (which could be completely wrong), is that it is partly because there isn’t enough input on the forums from SI, so when someone sees a figurehead like Miles posting in a thread they seize the chance to question him, even if it’s irrelevant to the thread topic.

This is blaming Miles for others behavior which you implicitly condemn and forgive at the same time. If people are rude (in your judgment), they are to blame. It was quite painful to read through, and I agree with you that SI could choose to do things differently with a different outcome. I also agree with you that as things are, the replies were inevitable. But being inevitable doesn't mean that they are Miles' or SI's 'fault'. Or that they should be expected to behave in ways that don't encourage more 'rudeness'. Maybe you want to protect SI from the rabid fans? That is up to them really. If Miles doesn't want to interact in an announcement thread, he doesn't have to. Ignoring inappropriate posts is perfectly legitimate.

It seems like what you are saying is: "If you live up to the fans' expectations of interactions, we (they, of course) may be less aggressive and rude". That isn't a relationship, that is blackmail and part of the problem.

Now I don’t want to get into the whole debate about the forums being nasty places where SI don’t want to go, as that’s been covered in the ‘These Forums’ thread, but for me it’s a two-way street. If SI don’t converse with the community in the relevant threads, then they shouldn’t be surprised when they do post something they get mobbed.

Again, baffled. Blaming SI for the behavior of the fans is quite strange. How about: "I wonder if there is any forum structure I could advocate which would encourage more dialogue between the developers and fans?" and "How do SI feel about being mobbed, and what would they ideally like to have happen in the forums? Is there any way we can contribute to that end because I think the fans would enjoy more dialogue...".

On the other hand, if the fan culture doesn't respond to forum structures (mods, self-policing, whatever) SI can set up their interactions at whatever level they feel comfortable with. I've seen pictures and they are not 10 years old so I'm confident they can set their boundaries and I'm not responsible to do this for them (and blame them for my patronization at the same time).

I currently know of only two SI employees who get involved in discussions with the community, Ter and Paul C (although I apologize if I’ve missed anyone off from forums I don’t frequent). While it’s great that these members will talk about their own areas, it doesn’t help that there are so many other areas of the game being discussed but with no official input form SI.

Maybe SI have seemed confusing and inconsistent in their communications? Maybe there is a reason for that. the "It doesn't help" line is a subtle denial of self-responsibility and an attitude of un-listening. The participation of Ter and Paul in 'their own areas' does not implicitly require the rest of SI to participate equally. That some people might assume that requirement and then be baffled is understandable but is their problem with logic. To miss that question: "Are my expectations reasonable and are they mutual?" and instead blame the object of unfulfilled expectations without receptivity is not likely to go anywhere, is it?

Another example was the confidence system, which was highlighted as a potential issue even before the demo was released. Upon release it was flagged in a number of places including GQ as well as the bugs forum, but again with no official response. When I was appointed on the final patch beta testing team I asked in the private forum about confidence and immediately received a reply saying that SI knew it was flawed, but was too complex to fix in a patch and would hopefully be rectified for FM 2009. Now I really don’t see why that answer couldn’t have been given in any of the numerous threads that were asking the same question. Perhaps SI thought that there would be some sort of meltdown, or that it’s admitting failure on their part, but a simple statement of ‘yes we know it’s flawed, we can’t change it now but hope to do so for the next version’ could have done wonders and stopped a lot of the grief.

Interesting. I can see why you'd wonder about that. I can see why SI wouldn't want to openly say: "We screwed up on the Confidence System, and we're not going to fix it", and why we get little info on the subject because this is being swept under the carpet. But aren't you breaching their trust by discussing this now?

If that is really what happened and SI choose not to communicate about it, well I have to agree with you that they shouldn't be at all upset with the 'grief' in the forums on that particular subject, and on a little shade of mistrust in general. Too bad for everyone, but still understandable on SI's part.

I rarely frequent GQ now, but upon each release I go through the same process of playing the game, posting my thoughts and watching them fade into obscurity while a multitude of threads clog up the forums. It’s pretty soul destroying (not literally) putting the time and effort into something and seeing it just get buried or getting involved in a really constructive debate only for the powers that be to either ignore it or watch from a distance and not respond.

Change your expectations or approach?

What often works (I know you know, but bears repeating) is for fans to unify a few important issues on their own and present them as generous 'take it or leave it' feedback. Holding onto the hope that active game developers (IE, not PR reps) will debate various points with you individually seems unreasonable. It does happen here and elsewhere, but it has to be rare.

The culture of the forums is such that I'm not surprised if SI 'leave it' though, even if we were to gather up our most pressing concerns and questions and offer them up as constructively as possible. Maybe SI is to blame a bit for this as it is their forums and consequentially they must have some influence on the culture that develops therein. Then again, they are developers, not Conflict Mediators or Community Developers. I find this is often part of why the best forums for a particular product are the 'unofficial' forums. In such venues it is only each other (the fans) that we fail to respect or integrate, and as such you'll often see a good bit of self-responsibility develop.

But as it is, the SI forums are quite active. Active and maybe in decline. Its up to SI to design the forum structure and 'hire' moderators, etc.. if they want to do so. And its up to them how much they want to interact or not. Up to them how much feedback they want, and how useful they want to find it. As fans on their forums, we can only try to recognize things for what they are and participate if we find it suitable. I too wish it were different a bit, but I find that it has to be my responsibility to get myself heard on those wishes, or accept that in the current environment things are not likely to go my way.

I’d really, really like it if SI get involved with debates about the transfer module, confidence, training, tactics etc. so will wait and see what happens.

Again, I find this a most reasonable statement and one that I agree with. Actually I wouldn't be surprised at all if most of SI would want the same thing. You know, some sit-downs with fans and light back-and-forth in good spirit with the mutual mission to improve or further the dev. of the product. Maybe the forums are a little too rough these days for such safe and open discussion to become fruitful. If SI care to upgrade the forum infrastructure (IE personnel) to foster this end, that's up to them. As things stand though I think there is just too much weight of requiring an 'official' place for customers to come land and gab, to try to manipulate the 'culture' to something a bit more refined and safe.

As such, I think its perfectly legitimate (and apt) to let the forums be a bit wild and free and not taken too seriously anymore. So many (60000?) people need to vent, and it is a very rare individual who can wade into that venting and not take it personally. But the venting is legitimate (to each person who vents of course), so it is a tradeoff of sorts: Invest in the forum community with the knowledge that there will be vast numbers of newbs and venters, etc.. on an official forum, or slowly back away and start up some smaller in-house forums more suited to the temperament and requirements of the developers. I think its an easy choice really. You put the development and non-distraction of your developers ahead of your 'community', but you try to offer the community a chance to develop itself. Because without the product there isn't anything to discuss, is there?

It takes two minutes to post or 20 if you have something serious to say, put that in someones job description and you can write that time off. There have been many topics where there is confusion and ambiguity amongst the players, all it would take it the aforementioned 20 minutes to reply and everything would be dandy (of course SI could always write a more comprehensive manual but I wont hold my breath). In the last 2 or so months there has been less than half a dozen topics that could be 'defused' by a SI person posting and yet they haven't, this really isn't any different to an independant forum; there is so little interaction from SI.

SI have to be careful with what they actually post, as anything incorrect will get shot down...

SI have to be careful with what they actually post, as anything incorrect will get shot down...

Surely they know what they're talking about? Also who's going to reasonably and effectively argue against SI on matters concerning hwo the game works? This is no reason for the lack of input from SI, I'd imagine the primary reason is that they don't feel like it will benefit them.

Its been mentioned in this thread already but my 2 peneth worth regarding SI's imput on the forums.

As you can see by the new thread about the announcement of FM09 when anyone from SI makes a post people just go off topic and fee because someone is posting whom has a SI badge they will ask questions that are not relevant to the thread in any way shape of form. They feel they deserve an answer yet dont want to process the question it the right way.

I know how annoying it is to find and bug, and how more annoying it is to know its been logged. (its easier when you are a AR or a beta tester ive found as i found a bug in FM08 that i origianally found a long long time ago and had re surfaced, and if you didnt look for it you wouldnt know it was there)

So people post and lose heart because they feel no one has heard them. I know its got to be hard to read every thread in the bug forum, but the only way i know of to solve this slight concern is to have someone read thenm and say its been logged or something similar. Which i did notice NBrocky (silly geordie fan) and iirc SiTipple (dunno his username but know him from a long time ago playing FMO and know he is a dodgy brighton man ) were doing last time i looked seriously in that forum.

I also believe, or am of the opinion that GQ needs to be more seriously moderated. Dafudge is a really decent poster and has recently been made a mod, but you cannot rely upon him reading most things and upon forum members repoting everything. Useless threads need closing. Repeat threads need closing and a link to a thread putting in them so people can keep things in one place. Lots of new posters will appear after the release of FM09, they will have questions many of us older forum users will have seen time and time again, they shouldnt be barked at to use the search function, just a polite line something like "this topic has been brought up before, www.linktodiscussiononit.com can be found here. [thread closed]"

Others may feel diffently, but i feel if the double posts are stopped and the forum more closely moderated then the more active and more pertinant threads will be at the top. (FMO has its own way of doing things and it works reasonably well.)

All been said before i know. But its my opinion.

to anyone posting tl:rd

Perhaps SI should appoint an official spokesperson, someone who has the authority to get the answers from the relevant SI staff on any given subject and represent their views on the forums.

Atm SI response is reliant on people who work all the hours God sends happening upon a subject they have the answers to or being pointed to them by someone else who just happens to know who can answer.

That makes for a disjointed and sporadic response giving the impression SI are only lending half an ear.

Using the tagging system Dafuge mentions and working with the forum mods this would lead to a uniform response to all issues by a person authorised to represent SI.

It's not a new idea, most organisations have an official spokesperson these days.

Of course it would be one more person on the payroll, which might not be justifiable.

Atm SI speaks with many voices, unfortunately these are totally uncoordinated and sometimes even contradictory to each other.

Kriss - that's Miles.

Kriss - that's Miles.

It is currently Matt, but my point is that he can't possibly devote the time and concentration required to ensure constan, consistent and accurate input to these forums in addition to all the other things he does.

I well know he's a workaholic but there are only 24 hours in a day.

My own theory (which could be completely wrong), is that it is partly because there isn’t enough input on the forums from SI, so when someone sees a figurehead like Miles posting in a thread they seize the chance to question him, even if it’s irrelevant to the thread topic.

I do agree with that, as i know i'm guilty of it not just on here but on other forums. A lot of the time you want an answer to a question that can only be answered by an employee of a company so as soon as you know they're active in a thread it seems like a good idea to ask them there rather in the nice thread you wrote that had no response in it.

Maybe a regular (fortnightly) Q and A session from Miles (or a member of the team) would be a good idea, each week people post questions in a thread and Miles takes time to answer some of them every 2 weeks (in a seperate locked thread), with the Q and A then archived so people can see previous weeks. The only part would be establishing which questions are more valid than other, so silly questions like "What's your favourate soft drink?" don't over-ride serious questions that the majority would like to know.

this way there there would feel like more interaction between SI and it's customers?

;1560202']

Maybe a regular (fortnightly) Q and A session from Miles (or a member of the team) would be a good idea' date=' each week people post questions in a thread and Miles takes time to answer some of them every 2 weeks (in a seperate locked thread)[/quote']

Love the idea, but how would that get counter-balanced against the need for commercial and competitive confidentiality? I reckon part of the reason we get a lot less feedback/updates/plans on the boards (especially about the 'important issues') from SI is the union with Sega and the need to not give the competition the heads up on features and fixes.

Love the idea, but how would that get counter-balanced against the need for commercial and competitive confidentiality? I reckon part of the reason we get a lot less feedback/updates/plans on the boards (especially about the 'important issues') from SI is the union with Sega and the need to not give the competition the heads up on features and fixes.

It would be at the discression of the team. Eg:

"What new features do you have?" could be answered along the lines of,

"There will be a blog and video on the 6th September showing you some of the things we have planned"

Which doesn't reveal anything before time, but gives people an answer to when something would happen.

Questions like, how does X feature work etc, could be answered by saying we can't reveal this.

I just think it's a good way of getting that 2 way interactivity people want. The only way it would fall down imo is if serious questions were never answered and it just became a "What's your favourate... X?" fest!

I like the original post and agree with much of it.

Having said that, I think the responses from the SI guys in here have already shown that some peaples perceptions that only Ter & Miles ever post in here are incorrect.

From my own personal point of view, I have been contacted directly by SI employees about ideas/bugs/comments that I have posted in here so I know that they read stuff.

Please also take into account, that with the new "private message" system, more discussions will take place now that will not be visible to all.

One area that SI need to improve on is their communication. To their credit, they seemd to take on board a lot of criticism that was directed their way about this in the past. This resulted in Miles making what seemed to be an almost "super-human" effort to respond to just abot everything and anything at one point last year.

The info that was given out in advance of the release of the game was within the normal timescales, but was more detailed and in a structure far superior to that which had gone before for previous versions. Most of this was sort of based around Miles and it made sense as his passion for the product is pretty infectious to anyone who listens to/reads what he has to say.

I think that although this "communication system" was far improved on what had gone before, I am sure that SI saw ways in which it could have been improved and I would expect the "message" that come sout this year to be even more polished.

I guess what I am saying is that SI are not trying to meet our expectations. They are trying to exceed them. Occasionally they fall short and it must be hard for them to come on here and get "beaten" with it when they are probably more frustrated than we over whatever the individual circumstances are.

Playing FM and using this forum go hand in hand for me. I must admit though that until recently I had grown so tired of the forums, (GQ in particular), that I had just stopped playing and posting completely. I understand that certain frustrations within the game are also largely to blame for this and I am sure that the guys at SI will be determined not to make the same mistakes again.

I personally feel that it would be in the interest of SI to appoint somoene to take a more active role in forum communication, but we all know that if they did that then the issue wouldn not be the "lack of a response from SI", but the "content of the response from SI".

I would say that more communication is needed, (the style that Si BHA does it in is excellent).

I just think we need to just put all this carp to bed now and focus on the game. SI can't win whatever they do or say because however good the game someone will still find fault with it and them.

;1560202']I do agree with that' date=' as i know i'm guilty of it not just on here but on other forums. A lot of the time you want an answer to a question that can only be answered by an employee of a company so as soon as you know they're active in a thread it seems like a good idea to ask them there rather in the nice thread you wrote that had no response in it.

Maybe a regular (fortnightly) Q and A session from Miles (or a member of the team) would be a good idea, each week people post questions in a thread and Miles takes time to answer some of them every 2 weeks (in a seperate locked thread), with the Q and A then archived so people can see previous weeks. The only part would be establishing which questions are more valid than other, so silly questions like "What's your favourate soft drink?" don't over-ride serious questions that the majority would like to know.

this way there there would feel like more interaction between SI and it's customers?[/quote']

In theory that sounds very good. But allowing SI to pick out what questions they answer and which they miss over would lead to more 'chaos'.

Part of the problem i find at the minute is that many decent posts that SI couldnt be bothered / cant / dont want to answer are simply passed over, or a member of their team picks up on a petty remark within the post and chooses to answer that than addressing the more pertinent issue. Its less than reassuring for the customers.

Why was Miles picking up on the more comedy parts of your posts?

He told you to ask the questions in a thread more appropriate to your topic, he asked a few times, and you went on and on and on like the battery bunny.

The idea of a Q&A actually sund appealing, yeah it gives them the chance to pick questions that they feel they can answer and maybe dodge some of the more..intresting shall we say, but least its some sort of on-going imput and feedback of sorts.

Why was Miles picking up on the more comedy parts of your posts?

He told you to ask the questions in a thread more appropriate to your topic, he asked a few times, and you went on and on and on like the battery bunny.

The idea of a Q&A actually sund appealing, yeah it gives them the chance to pick questions that they feel they can answer and maybe dodge some of the more..intresting shall we say, but least its some sort of on-going imput and feedback of sorts.

Thats a question youll have to ask Miles, because i simply dont know the answer. And my questions were irrelevant to that thread, they were about changes that might be seen in the new version. Like everyone, i have my expectations as to what i think will be in FM09. As such i asked questions accordingly. The fact that i chose to base my wants for FM09 to be based upon the flaws in FM08 being fixed should not be deemed as badgering.

I like the idea of a Q&A night. I think that if at least your getting answers on some things that maybe a concern it is good to at least hear about how or what they may want to do with it, or how they may be thinking about fixing it. Also if there is a question that is overwhelming popular and the mods or whomever decides not to answer it for weeks I think at that point you can say, "well maybe it's not a big concern of their's". I say give it a try.

Thats a question youll have to ask Miles, because i simply dont know the answer. And my questions were irrelevant to that thread, they were about changes that might be seen in the new version. Like everyone, i have my expectations as to what i think will be in FM09. As such i asked questions accordingly. The fact that i chose to base my wants for FM09 to be based upon the flaws in FM08 being fixed should not be deemed as badgering.

I dont think the fact you chose to base your wants for the new game on improvements to the faults badgering, i think the fact is how you went about asking, asking, asking, asking asking. It ended up like a me, me, me, me, thread. What devine right is there to get your questions answered?

He is within his rights to dodge any question he wants, he answered you in a way he wanted. Post your questions elsewhere as they are not important to the announcement regarding the release. To you that may not be right, to others also. But thats your opinion and theirs. To some it may have been right. Their opinions again. But the fact is you then went on to badger about not having your question answered. Rather childishly tbf. Miles reacted pretty much the same way imho.

I think as a paying customer im entitled to some answers. Its not like I asked him to spill the beans on all new features. A simple "we've looked at them" would have done nicely, but that would involve Miles acting with some degree of maturity. And if Miles makes a comment its only courteous to reply.

We're all paying customers though and given how frequent people ask questions about things being looked at and how often they are just repeating questions that have already been asked enough times, it's understandable that he wouldn't answer every single one.

I agree with Ter, don't turn this into another argument as the thread has been quite positive in it's discussion. You want to argue, just take it to the OTF

Any idea if a Q and A session would be welcome Ter?

Give it a rest eh. It's getting very tiresome going on and on and on and on and on and on about it and we can maybe get back to discussing some of the better points made in this thread before it turns into rubbish and gets closed.

Fair enough.

I can understand the need for confidentiality and fully agree that SI should keep their cards close to their chests between releases. However, once the game is released and there are a multitude of questions being asked, I don’t think it’s asking too much to ask for some feedback.

I know I’ve said this before, but there seems to be a real reluctance from SI to admit their mistakes, or at least while the game is currently on sale (I remember the official opinions on CM4 changing drastically from when it was in circulation and when the next version came out).

Take the confidence issue for example, where it was highlighted as a flaw even before release, but afaik (and I could be wrong on this), I never once saw SI even acknowledge that it was a problem, at least not on the public forums. While I would never expect someone to come out and say ‘yeah we know, confidence is crap but there’s nothing we can do about it for now’, but I don’t think it would damage their reputation at all to come out and say something like ‘we’re aware that the confidence system has some flaws, but unfortunately it would be too complex to fix this in a patch so we’re hoping to rectify some of these issues for the next instalment of the game’. As long as it was nothing major (like the morale bug from way back) then I think people would be more understanding rather than not hearing anything at all.

That’s not giving away anything to competitors and is letting the userbase know what’s happening wherever possible.

I don't think anyone has sniped or abused you, unless you consider people differing in opinion abuse :confused: