How SI MAY have averted some of the negative first impressions & general frustrations

I hope that by Xmas we will mostly be happy and enjoying the game the way it was intended to be, however next year I suggest the following:

Instead of spending time & effort filming promos at Loftus Road, maybe use that investment to go and buy some High St standard spec machines (Maybe PC Worlds cheapest & most popular models, for instance), then test the game on these until satisfied all is well before going Gold / releasing the demo.

If i sound bitter it is because I cannot view 3d on an almost brand new machine because of the Intel cards compatibility issue (I know that is being adressed elsewhere so I just have to be patient but a few hours tesing on PC Worlds "selling fast for Xmas" range would probably have been prudent now dont ya think?)

Please dont suggest that I deserve to miss out on the full FM09 experience just because I have a budget and cant confidently source my own tailor made spec machine - because I expect the majority of gamers are more like me than the "Built my own in the shed" brigade.

This whole forum community has degenerated into a debate about PC specs - how I long for the tactical debates, never again will I be offended by the responsive Post "its your tactics" as at present it seems "its your misfortune to buy a particular PC with a particular graphic card which was not tested properly" !

Instead of spending time & effort filming promos at Loftus Road, maybe use that investment to go and buy some High St standard spec machines (Maybe PC Worlds cheapest & most popular models, for instance), then test the game on these until satisfied all is well before going Gold / releasing the demo.

Doing this wouldn't change much. I think just as much the problem is that they're tested on 'clean' machines.

If i sound bitter it is because I cannot view 3d on an almost brand new machine because of the Intel cards compatibility issue

You're always gonna get rpoblems with Intel cards anyway.

This whole forum community has degenerated into a debate about PC specs - how I long for the tactical debates, never again will I be offended by the responsive Post "its your tactics" as at present it seems "its your misfortune to buy a particular PC with a particular graphic card which was not tested properly" !

It's like this every year.

I hope that by Xmas we will mostly be happy and enjoying the game the way it was intended to be, however next year I suggest the following:

Instead of spending time & effort filming promos at Loftus Road, maybe use that investment to go and buy some High St standard spec machines (Maybe PC Worlds cheapest & most popular models, for instance), then test the game on these until satisfied all is well before going Gold / releasing the demo.

If i sound bitter it is because I cannot view 3d on an almost brand new machine because of the Intel cards compatibility issue (I know that is being adressed elsewhere so I just have to be patient but a few hours tesing on PC Worlds "selling fast for Xmas" range would probably have been prudent now dont ya think?)

Please dont suggest that I deserve to miss out on the full FM09 experience just because I have a budget and cant confidently source my own tailor made spec machine - because I expect the majority of gamers are more like me than the "Built my own in the shed" brigade.

This whole forum community has degenerated into a debate about PC specs - how I long for the tactical debates, never again will I be offended by the responsive Post "its your tactics" as at present it seems "its your misfortune to buy a particular PC with a particular graphic card which was not tested properly" !

here here, that chav miles in his tracky bottoms loves himself in the vids, no wonder the game is pants

I understand your frustrations tigerhgrrrrrr (I do hope I've used enough r's there) but this is the reality of PC development. They've released a demo, found some people cannot play it (which happens) and have said they'll work to fix this for release day. That's pretty fair... not ideal by any stretch, and I'm sure they'll test those machines next year (or up the specs ) but they are reacting to the situation.

Edit to say - I'm sure some machines will still not work come release day, but they cannot support everything. On-board graphics (which many people have) are less than ideal, for any modern game.

I hope that by Xmas we will mostly be happy and enjoying the game the way it was intended to be, however next year I suggest the following:

Instead of spending time & effort filming promos at Loftus Road, maybe use that investment to go and buy some High St standard spec machines (Maybe PC Worlds cheapest & most popular models, for instance), then test the game on these until satisfied all is well before going Gold / releasing the demo.

If i sound bitter it is because I cannot view 3d on an almost brand new machine because of the Intel cards compatibility issue (I know that is being adressed elsewhere so I just have to be patient but a few hours tesing on PC Worlds "selling fast for Xmas" range would probably have been prudent now dont ya think?)

Please dont suggest that I deserve to miss out on the full FM09 experience just because I have a budget and cant confidently source my own tailor made spec machine - because I expect the majority of gamers are more like me than the "Built my own in the shed" brigade.

This whole forum community has degenerated into a debate about PC specs - how I long for the tactical debates, never again will I be offended by the responsive Post "its your tactics" as at present it seems "its your misfortune to buy a particular PC with a particular graphic card which was not tested properly" !

I agree that the game should work on more machines especially for those who perhaps dont understand computers that well.

Please dont suggest that I deserve to miss out on the full FM09 experience just because I have a budget and cant confidently source my own tailor made spec machine - because I expect the majority of gamers are more like me than the "Built my own in the shed" brigade. < lol i like that

Er, Miles is not a programmer and I fail to see what effect him appearing in a couple of videos has on the game.

Er, Miles is not a programmer and I fail to see what effect him appearing in a couple of videos has on the game.

the game has always been about the game, no promos,ads.vids etc, well not ott anyway, and this has resulted in great focus on the product which sells itself, now u see the last few years we have seen the situation reversed

the game has always been about the game, no promos,ads.vids etc, well not ott anyway, and this has resulted in great focus on the product which sells itself, now u see the last few years we have seen the situation reversed

Times change. The first video was about SI and what they do. Some of us found it quite interesting. The second introduced us to new features.

Whatever you think of the videos, given that Miles isn't a programmer, they won't have had any bearing on the game itself.

Doing this wouldn't change much. I think just as much the problem is that they're tested on 'clean' machines.

You're always gonna get rpoblems with Intel cards anyway.

It's like this every year.

I do feel a lower key next year may be wise, I dont recall Miles saying "We are really excited about the 3d engine, if you are lucky enough not to have bought some of the many popular High St PC's on the market then you are in for a treat"

I know nothing of specs but if as u suggest Intel cards are pants then that is a worry as "people like me" see the "Intel inside" sticker as have been led to believe its a badge of quality - maybe not?

I dont recall the bias towards machine spec issues every year, just the debate about bugginess.

here here, that chav miles in his tracky bottoms loves himself in the vids, no wonder the game is pants

Sorry but I think that attitude detracts from my point. BTW the "Coboys" poll deserved to get closed but did make me chuckle!

I agree that the game should work on more machines especially for those who perhaps dont understand computers that well.

Please dont suggest that I deserve to miss out on the full FM09 experience just because I have a budget and cant confidently source my own tailor made spec machine - because I expect the majority of gamers are more like me than the "Built my own in the shed" brigade. < lol i like that

Oh dear I feel bad now, was never dissing SI, I want the perfect FM for everyone but I was just anticipatig the replies of the beardy-men.

Er, Miles is not a programmer and I fail to see what effect him appearing in a couple of videos has on the game.

Investment = the time & expense. Wasnt expecting Miles & the camera man to pop down PC World in a transit van! Seems to me every wasted second of testing has added to this situation.

Miles was testing Man Citys financial model he said in a blog/podcast, if he'd loaded it on a Compaq machine like mine he'd have seen 3d didnt work so he could have been some use you know!

I know nothing of specs but if as u suggest Intel cards are pants then that is a worry as "people like me" see the "Intel inside" sticker as have been led to believe its a badge of quality - maybe not?

I dont recall the bias towards machine spec issues every year, just the debate about bugginess.

That Intel inside sticker/advert is referring to the CPU (the main brain of the PC) and not the Graphics Card. Its a valid sticker for quality, no problem there.

You have the Brain (CPU - Central Processing Unit) and Artistic Ability (GPU - Graphics Processing Unit). The latter is often, in cheaper machines, sacrificied to lower the cost (Graphics cards, decent ones, can go up to 500quid mate, not that I'd ever buy one at that price, I think mine was 150 new a while back).

It's more of a problem this year as FM is including a 3D engine which will be calling on the Processor and Graphics. Normally the latter didnt matter. It's the price of the series progressing I'm afraid.

Personally I think they are doing the right thing, it will need a 3D engine to move forward - it just hasnt launched too well unfortunately. For the quality on offer, the specs are also very high.

Times change. The first video was about SI and what they do. Some of us found it quite interesting. The second introduced us to new features.

Whatever you think of the videos, given that Miles isn't a programmer, they won't have had any bearing on the game itself.

I found the videos interesting. Things were always going to be more market orientated when someone like SEGA got involved.

While I have sympathy with the people who can't run the game, thats the nature of PC gaming. I had to get a new PC for FM08, and in a couple of years I wouldn't be too surprised to find my machine struggling with the latest games. My problem with all this is that it is going away from what made the original games great - great in depth, all involving experience. there have been plenty of management games with all-singing all dancing match displays. Where are they now?

...My problem with all this is that it is going away from what made the original games great - great in depth, all involving eperience. there have been plenty of management games with all-singing all dancing match displays. Where are they now?

I think the SI game has stood the test of time due to the passion they (original creators and new chaps that come on board) have for the series. SI are really only known for CM/FM. They are the masters of the series, if you could get over the database look of the game and played a few matches - that was it - hooked for life

The other titles come and go, publishers change their priorities, key team members that pushed for a footie management game leave, teams disband and so on.

SEGA are trying to open FM up to a bigger audience, and I think thats a good thing overall.

I found the videos interesting. Things were always going to be more market orientated when someone like SEGA got involved.

While I have sympathy with the people who can't run the game, thats the nature of PC gaming. I had to get a new PC for FM08, and in a couple of years I wouldn't be too surprised to find my machine struggling with the latest games. My problem with all this is that it is going away from what made the original games great - great in depth, all involving eperience. there have been plenty of management games with all-singing all dancing match displays. Where are they now?

lets hope SI follows ther "lead" hehe

That Intel inside sticker/advert is referring to the CPU (the main brain of the PC) and not the Graphics Card. Its a valid sticker for quality, no problem there.

You have the Brain (CPU - Central Processing Unit) and Artistic Ability (GPU - Graphics Processing Unit). The latter is often, in cheaper machines, sacrificied to lower the cost (Graphics cards, decent ones, can go up to 500quid mate, not that I'd ever buy one at that price, I think mine was 150 new a while back).

It's more of a problem this year as FM is including a 3D engine which will be calling on the Processor and Graphics. Normally the latter didnt matter. It's the price of the series progressing I'm afraid.

Personally I think they are doing the right thing, it will need a 3D engine to move forward - it just hasnt launched too well unfortunately. For the quality on offer, the specs are also very high.

Thank you that was enlightening - as I suggested I know little of whats inside the grey box. Does seem though my card (G33/G31)should work its the Intel card bug issue and it amazes me that SI missed that.

lets hope SI follows ther "lead" hehe

They won't. But you can hope.

There are loads of graphic cards out there, and there are loads more different variations on the same chipset of card which leads to a hell of a lot of testing in order to see if they can run the game. Plus that doesn't even begin to take into account the unique system settings and driver files on every pc - I don't believe that any two are the same - means that it's pretty impressive to get any game working on a majority of systems. Which is why modern developers prefer consoles as it cuts down hardware testing to the minimum required.

Thank you that was enlightening - as I suggested I know little of whats inside the grey box. Does seem though my card (G33/G31)should work its the Intel card bug issue and it amazes me that SI missed that.

Pleased to help where I can.

With regards to it being the Intel bug, I havent looked at the required system specs for FM09 for a while, nor have I been keeping up to date on what SI have said in relation to the Intel graphics chip situation. As far as I'm aware they are hoping to fix some things which will probably increase the number of machines that will be able to play the game/play the game with 3D mode.

There are so, so, so many graphics cards and on-board graphics (this being the cheaper option which is fine for everything bar demanding games) out there that when combined with the dizzying amount of processors, types of memory, types of harddrive blah, blah that it can not only be a nightmare to purchase a PC for yourself, but to development and test for. Hopefully more people will be playing come the 14th, and beyond that SI might enable yet more machines to run the game.

Pleased to help where I can.

With regards to it being the Intel bug, I havent looked at the required system specs for FM09 for a while, nor have I been keeping up to date on what SI have said in relation to the Intel graphics chip situation. As far as I'm aware they are hoping to fix some things which will probably increase the number of machines that will be able to play the game/play the game with 3D mode.

There are so, so, so many graphics cards and on-board graphics (this being the cheaper option which is fine for everything bar demanding games) out there that when combined with the dizzying amount of processors, types of memory, types of harddrive blah, blah that it can not only be a nightmare to purchase a PC for yourself, but to development and test for. Hopefully more people will be playing come the 14th, and beyond that SI might enable yet more machines to run the game.

This has all given me a little more understanding & sympathy for SI however although its is an odd suggestion, if they had done the "PC World - buy & try" thing they would have known about this before too late, or even if it was too late they could have announced that some Intel cards may not work correctly in conjunction with the game. This could have helped prepare us disappointed ones. I am overdue a PC upgarde, the PC with the G33/G31 is my girlfriends which she is kindly sharing with me for the demo - although now Im not needing to use it as 3d isnt an option!. I was all set to buy a new budget PC from PC World but knowing now that this game wont run on some PC's with the acceptable recommended spec (!!!) has put me off. Feel I should save the £350 for the new PC and probably the £30 for the game although I will buy it, I guess FM09 in 2d is still worthwhile but it could have been so, so much more. Promises unfulfilled for me !

Pleased to help where I can.

With regards to it being the Intel bug, I havent looked at the required system specs for FM09 for a while, nor have I been keeping up to date on what SI have said in relation to the Intel graphics chip situation. As far as I'm aware they are hoping to fix some things which will probably increase the number of machines that will be able to play the game/play the game with 3D mode.

There are so, so, so many graphics cards and on-board graphics (this being the cheaper option which is fine for everything bar demanding games) out there that when combined with the dizzying amount of processors, types of memory, types of harddrive blah, blah that it can not only be a nightmare to purchase a PC for yourself, but to development and test for. Hopefully more people will be playing come the 14th, and beyond that SI might enable yet more machines to run the game.

You seem to know your stuff, do you know if this meets the min spec for FM09? (I am confused by all the spec numbers!!!!)

http://www.pcworld.co.uk/martprd/store/pcw_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@0461407356.1225786994@@@@&BV_EngineID=cccdadefijlefemcflgceggdhhmdgmk.0&page=Product&fm=null&sm=null&tm=null&sku=841394&category_oid=

Firstly, SI have done a tv promo for the last 3 games, whether or not they've actually been aired on Tv however..

The intel bug has happened to oh so many games, so thats not really the end of the world, it will be fixed for the games release.

Sports Interactive were satisfied with the game, but they have to cut it off at some point, otherwise it wouldn't have been released in time. We would've had just as many if not more moaners if they stalled the release date.

Again I will say, FM is in the same boat as basically every other PC game out there! It requires a basic and modern graphics card to play the game! I really don't think its much to ask, its a high end game and thus you need to upgrade to match the specs. My PC cost me £400 last year and runs everything like a dream, I could make a PC that plays FM09 fine on £200 I suspect. I understand people can't / won't do that. But it does clearly state the minimum specifications. And they released them quite a while before the demo, so its no surprise a lot of users can't play it

I understand your frustrations tigerhgrrrrrr (I do hope I've used enough r's there) but this is the reality of PC development. They've released a demo, found some people cannot play it (which happens) and have said they'll work to fix this for release day. That's pretty fair... not ideal by any stretch, and I'm sure they'll test those machines next year (or up the specs ) but they are reacting to the situation.

Edit to say - I'm sure some machines will still not work come release day, but they cannot support everything. On-board graphics (which many people have) are less than ideal, for any modern game.

They've released a Gold Demo, not a Beta demo, there's a big difference, this code has gone to release, there will be plenty of people who will have issues on day of release.

Had this been a Beta release, then i could understand your point of view & why people are defending SI, but this is it, the final release...

Si need to look at the standard of the in house testing, as time & time again we get a game released that requires a patch on day 1, any good development team will tell you, that if you are in that situation something is not right, either its time frame, or lack of ability to spot obvious mistakes...

Times change. The first video was about SI and what they do. Some of us found it quite interesting. The second introduced us to new features.

Whatever you think of the videos, given that Miles isn't a programmer, they won't have had any bearing on the game itself.

Actually, they would. The OP is suggesting that rather than spend the money producing adverts (ie hiring a film crew, paying for the shots to be edited, paying for crew to be carted around London etc etc - you get the picture) SI could have produced a cheaper, yet lower key, advert then spent the rest of the money employing one or two extra programmers - or buying many more types of hardware to test the game on. It's not a hard point to grasp: I hope you understand it now!

Actually, they would. The OP is suggesting that rather than spend the money producing adverts (ie hiring a film crew, paying for the shots to be edited, paying for crew to be carted around London etc etc - you get the picture) SI could have produced a cheaper, yet lower key, advert then spent the rest of the money employing one or two extra programmers - or buying many more types of hardware to test the game on. It's not a hard point to grasp: I hope you understand it now!

It's not a hard point to grasp, true, but it's also an incorrect point. SI, like most businesses, have a budget. And that budget is allocated into different departments, development, research, advertising, HR, and so on. Their marketing dept have been allocated a budget most likely since April. The development team were also allocated a budget.

Now, let's pluck a figure out of the air and say the marketing budget was £500K. This doesn't mean that the dev team budget was cut by £500K, or that SI had to forgo a couple of programmers just to ensure they had their marketing budget. There is a finite number of devs/programmers you'd want working on a project anyway. I'm quite, quite sure that, with a company of SI's size and stature, had they needed more developers, they'd have recruited them.

So, I'm afraid your point is moot.

It's not a hard point to grasp, true, but it's also an incorrect point. SI, like most businesses, have a budget. And that budget is allocated into different departments, development, research, advertising, HR, and so on. Their marketing dept have been allocated a budget most likely since April. The development team were also allocated a budget.

Now, let's pluck a figure out of the air and say the marketing budget was £500K. This doesn't mean that the dev team budget was cut by £500K, or that SI had to forgo a couple of programmers just to ensure they had their marketing budget. There is a finite number of devs/programmers you'd want working on a project anyway. I'm quite, quite sure that, with a company of SI's size and stature, had they needed more developers, they'd have recruited them.

So, I'm afraid your point is moot.

I disagree. I didn't suggest that by giving money to advertising, money was being taken from development and implying that development was being hindered as a result. What I was suggesting is that rather than spend their whole advertising budget on advertising, some could be shifted (or even allocated in the first place) towards other areas - one of these I suggested could be more developers, another suggestion was more testers buying more hardware (as SI have admitted they didn't test many common, but older, graphics cards during their testing phase) - however these are merely two suggestions, I'm sure there are plenty more things that SI could have spent money on to improve the game rather than advertising!

Sorry to be blunt, but I don't have the time to get caught up in a huge discussion about this. It's all irrelevant anyway as SI have already acted in one way. If you want to dissect this post, then fine, but don't be offended if I don't reply

That Intel inside sticker/advert is referring to the CPU (the main brain of the PC) and not the Graphics Card. Its a valid sticker for quality, no problem there.

Hah! That's what they want you to believe! Apparently marketing plans worked out. Seriousy though, current Intel desktop CPUs are superb and offer good bang for the buck. Not so long ago you could get the same processing power and system stability from Intel's competition for but a fraction of what Intel charged for it. Some of Intel's CPUs used to be hideously overpriced at times - and yet they still sold well. After all, they shipped with that sticker that read "Intel inside".

Actually, they would. The OP is suggesting that rather than spend the money producing adverts (ie hiring a film crew, paying for the shots to be edited, paying for crew to be carted around London etc etc - you get the picture) SI could have produced a cheaper, yet lower key, advert then spent the rest of the money employing one or two extra programmers

There's a couple of things wrong with that: This reasoning is based on the assumption that the development and testing budget for the game was affected by the advertising. That's the first that springs to mind for a start. Actually, even before that comes that it's the kind of reasoning that's assuming the results of what has happened (whatever it is) after the demo's release is in fact the result of a badly funded testing stage in the first place. And lastly nobody knows if Sega and the lads had to sell their women and children into slavery in order to get these promo vids being made at all. How much was that fish, and was it really all that much?

Actually, they would. The OP is suggesting that rather than spend the money producing adverts (ie hiring a film crew, paying for the shots to be edited, paying for crew to be carted around London etc etc - you get the picture) SI could have produced a cheaper, yet lower key, advert then spent the rest of the money employing one or two extra programmers - or buying many more types of hardware to test the game on. It's not a hard point to grasp: I hope you understand it now!

someone from SI could correct me on this but i'm pretty sure Sega is covering marketing costs

PC's and PC gaming is inherantly a difficult area and an area that requires patience and unfortunately RESEARCH. Mainstream companies (i.e dell, Mesh, HP) give you these apparent 'great deals' precisely because they save on hardware.

Example: Yes this £450 PC HAS Quad Core....Yes this PC HAS 640GB HD BUT (and this is the big one), they save money by installing frankly awful intel graphics cards.

Now I know full well that people can't always afford £1000 rigs but thier are alternatives. The problem is, and this alludes to my first point, is that the casual gamer (which is increasing in number because of FM's massive commercial success) does not and often does not want to know about PC hardware. It is a laborious process finding out about graphics cards.

And this is where the problem lies...in my opinion not with SI but with the medium the game is produced on. The 'proper' FM can only be released on PC (yes there are slimmed down versions on consoles but not the same) and the casual gamer is not a PC expert.

So blaming SI is not the answer. Unfortunately the answer is: do some research and when you're buying that cheaper PC from dell/mesh/hp ask that they take out the intel gfx card and put in a resonably priced GFX card instead (i.e Nvidia 7600gt £50-60).

If you can't be bothered with all the research (which as I said earlier is inherent in PC gaming)....get it on the Xbox 360.

Firstly, SI have done a tv promo for the last 3 games, whether or not they've actually been aired on Tv however..

The intel bug has happened to oh so many games, so thats not really the end of the world, it will be fixed for the games release.

Sports Interactive were satisfied with the game, but they have to cut it off at some point, otherwise it wouldn't have been released in time. We would've had just as many if not more moaners if they stalled the release date.

Again I will say, FM is in the same boat as basically every other PC game out there! It requires a basic and modern graphics card to play the game! I really don't think its much to ask, its a high end game and thus you need to upgrade to match the specs. My PC cost me £400 last year and runs everything like a dream, I could make a PC that plays FM09 fine on £200 I suspect. I understand people can't / won't do that. But it does clearly state the minimum specifications. And they released them quite a while before the demo, so its no surprise a lot of users can't play it

A/ I didnt know about the Intel bug on other games

B/ Right about release delay moaning (would have been unbearable)

C & D/ Specs only released days before demo, but that irrelevant as my PC meets the spec but wont run 3d! (see Intel issue). Refer to my inital Post for how SI WOULD have known about that before "(not so Super) Sunday"!

Like it or not, some of us would rather play a footy management sim than build computers - although after the weekend I am now wondering which would be most frustrating!

They've released a Gold Demo, not a Beta demo, there's a big difference, this code has gone to release, there will be plenty of people who will have issues on day of release.

Had this been a Beta release, then i could understand your point of view & why people are defending SI, but this is it, the final release...

Si need to look at the standard of the in house testing, as time & time again we get a game released that requires a patch on day 1, any good development team will tell you, that if you are in that situation something is not right, either its time frame, or lack of ability to spot obvious mistakes...

Just to clarify, they (SI) have said there will be a day one patch. Therefore, the game you are playing now (demo) can be quite different to the one you will be able to fix the day the retail game is launched. I do agree that its a shame this board fills with some silly bugs each and every year.

You seem to know your stuff, do you know if this meets the min spec for FM09? (I am confused by all the spec numbers!!!!)

http://www.pcworld.co.uk/martprd/store/pcw_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@0461407356.1225786994@@@@&BV_EngineID=cccdadefijlefemcflgceggdhhmdgmk.0&page=Product&fm=null&sm=null&tm=null&sku=841394&category_oid=

Sorry for the very late reply - hadnt checked this thread. If you want to get my attention, you can always message me direct through this site, or better still, email Hooders@Hotmail.com and/or shout for my attention via Messenger. I've got it running most of the time regardless of whether I'm working or at home.

To respond to your question - Dont know, would have to look at SI's requirements for the game (which I'll do in a second). Alternatively you might get a better deal elsewhere if you could tell me what your budget is? E.g. could you spend 50quid on a graphics card? (the PC World machine looks to have Integrated Graphics again, i.e. they are cutting costs which might put you back in the same boat as now). If that isnt possible, you could maybe lower the spec of other parts to free some money for the graphics component as everything else on that PC is more than fine for FM from what I can see.