FM09 decimal match ratings.... not liking it!

Hello fellow FM09 gamers....

I just wanted to point out that I don't like the way the ratings are. The decimal ratings are kinda.. I dont know, they dont fit... Does sky sports give decimal ratings to players after each game? NO... And also What differs a 7.8 from a 7.9? In my eyes they should correct this with a patch if possible... I liked the normal 6/7/8/9/10 ratings... and then you have an average of that...

Looking to hear what others have to say about the issue.. thanks...

i like it, if a player is playing 7.9 the i know he is playing very well not far off an 8. however if someone is playing 7.0 then i know he could be doing better as he aint far from dropping to a 6.9

maybe a 7.5 system as opposed to 7.1 7.2 7.3

i also think it isn't really great and doesn't help the game much...

Yeah dont like it . Bring back old style.

Like this much better, dont get new system back or let us choose.

This system is better than the old one in my opinion, sometimes in the old system a 7 was too high, but a 6 was too low. Now it has more detail. So please leave this new system in for the next versions

For the people who don't like it: well, why not just ignore everyting after the dot?

it will take time to get used to i guess. i do agree that at the moment it's not easy to have a glance to see who play well or not. I really need to have a close look to see how they perform.

Like it a lot!

The extra detail, knowing that a 7 rated player is actually not far off a 6 (7.1), or a 7 rated player is not far off an 8 (7.9), is brilliant.

And also What differs a 7.8 from a 7.9?

0.1

I actually think its good, its easier to differentiate the players

How exactly can you not like it? It works exactly the same as before, except it doesn't round numbers up and down for you. Therefore all you need to do is round it up and down yourself and you will have the same rating system as in previous years

Not to undermine anyones intelligence, but understanding numbers to one decimal place at a glance is about as basic as maths gets

I think they should just fix the ratings in the first place instead of showing decimals. Seems to me that 90% of all players get a rating from 6-8 and rarely over/under that. Ratings should be spread out much more.

Hello fellow FM09 gamers....

I just wanted to point out that I don't like the way the ratings are. The decimal ratings are kinda.. I dont know, they dont fit... Does sky sports give decimal ratings to players after each game? NO... And also What differs a 7.8 from a 7.9? In my eyes they should correct this with a patch if possible... I liked the normal 6/7/8/9/10 ratings... and then you have an average of that...

Looking to hear what others have to say about the issue.. thanks...

Sorry mate, I like the decimal version.

I agree with other posters that 7.9 indicates close to 8 etc and that tells me a lot.

It simply dose'nt fit and as mentioned,you don't see it in reveiws.

Maybee they could have just the 6.0/6.5/7.0.. etc etc.

Have to admit I did prefer the old way

I like the decimal points, only i think would be better if the increasing between ratings are 0.5 instead of 0.1, it would be more clear.

I think they should just fix the ratings in the first place instead of showing decimals. Seems to me that 90% of all players get a rating from 6-8 and rarely over/under that. Ratings should be spread out much more.

All 6-8s is exactly what you get in newspapers, which is what people appear to be demanding. Personally I prefer the new system.

I like the old system better. If i had a player that had a 7 that i felt was too high, or a 6 that was too low, i just checked their stats to see who actually was the worst one of them.

Hello fellow FM09 gamers....

I just wanted to point out that I don't like the way the ratings are. The decimal ratings are kinda.. I dont know, they dont fit... Does sky sports give decimal ratings to players after each game? NO... And also What differs a 7.8 from a 7.9? In my eyes they should correct this with a patch if possible... I liked the normal 6/7/8/9/10 ratings... and then you have an average of that...

Looking to hear what others have to say about the issue.. thanks...

The problem with the normal "6/7/8/9/10" ratings was that players only scored 6 (Bad game), 7 (Good game), or 8 (Scored a goal). It was almost impossible to score any other rating without your player scoring a hattrick or conceding a penalty. They might as well have scrapped the 1-10 scale and replaced it with a 1-3 scale, as the majority of the scale wasn't in use and you only really had 3 options.

Now while they've not fixed the underlying cause, they have at least improved the range of scores someone can receive, ie there's a difference between someone who gets 5.6 every game (Previously rounded up to 6) and someone who gets 6.4 every game (Previously rounded down to 6). This is a massive help in telling the good performers from the bad.

So on that respect I like it, but it's far from perfect. Ideally I'd like to see 1-10 used with only whole or perhaps half numbers, but the whole scale used so that 1 and 10 are scores that can be achieved. The current system strikes me as a quick fix to a deeper problem, but I'm happy with it for now.

I preferred the old system personally,

i just won a game 4-0 and only 1 player had a rating of +8 while 3 or 4 didnt even get above a 7 despite a brillaint team performance.

I then beat West Ham 3-0 with Riera scoring 1 and making another only to get a final rating of 6.1!!!

I'm also notliking the new rating system. I am thinking the usual 7 then 7.5 then 8 kind of idea would be alot better

Give it a bit of time and you will get used to it.

For someone who doesn't like decimals the OP used a lot of "." in their post.

I think they just take some getting used to.

There were real problems with the previous ratings where they could go through very sharp rises and falls, with some particularly inexplicable drops for keepers who had saved plenty of shots and then had none to deal with for a while.

If these ratings are a product and sign of a more complex calculation, I don't mind.

The simplest ideas are always the best. Replacing the classic 1-10 rating system and going decimal resulted in stats that are not instantly understandable, not easy on the eye graphically - 'nor more useful than the old way.

I think all a lot of people will ever be able to do is tolerate it, myself included.

Jeeze why do people complain so much over this game?You know as well as I do you're just going to keep playing the game. It gives you a more accurate rating on how a player is doing in the game get over it. People need to just stop complaining already

Jeeze why do people complain so much over this game?You know as well as I do you're just going to keep playing the game. It gives you a more accurate rating on how a player is doing in the game get over it. People need to just stop complaining already

No ones complaining..just stating opinions.

I much prefer the new system,it gives a more accurate reading how your player's are preforming,a 7 is basically a 7 and you can get quite a few of them in a tight game,a 7.9 compared to a 7.1 lets you know who you should maybe change,add this to the new ass manager ingame feedback and you are now in total control!

i love it, i was sick of players being on a 7 and then just as the siren would go it dropped to a 6, now it just goes from 6.6 to 6.4 (or similar) a lot better (but still annoying as it didn't deserve to go down at all).

a .5 system would be better in my opinion,the system now is annoying and takes time to spot whos playing well and whos not playing well

The new decimal rating is redicules if you ask me. Now the only use 5.5 to 8.0. before they used 5->9.

What about starting using the whole scale. If you dont know SI you could use 1->10... It would be freaking awsome if you did for a change.

i've gotten used to it. it is alot better than the old system like some people have said.

there is a difference between a 7.0 , a 7.2, a 7.5 and a 7,9

I don't much care about the visual representation as long as the scale is sensitive enough to be useful. If in a single match the only truly applicable ratings are 5-9 (where 5 is exceptionally bad and 9 is exceptionally good and 99% is 6-7) in whole numbers, well, then I simply can't tell the difference at a glance between how well a player is performing.

And apparently, the community was in uproar when SI dropped the average to 5 instead of 6. So letting the rating system use the entire 1-10 scale effectively would cause mass insurrection here, e.g. rating a player 4 for a fairly bad game and 1-2 for an atrocious game (and the flip side an 8 for a good game, 9-10 for an excellent game; but nobody seems to be mind the good scores). Given that, the system now in place with the decimal points is the only system which can express the fidelity I want and not cause upheaval for "unfair rating".

i actually like this style, only i don't think that it is possible to get a 10. In my tottenham game, fraizer campbell scored 5 goals in 30 minutes and still couldn't get a 10 (he had 9.9 )

Does sky sports give decimal ratings to players after each game?

They didn't give single digit ratings till they saw CM/FM doing it. I reckon sky'll start using decimals in the next couple of seasons, by which time we'll have forgotten all about 'how it used to be'

To me, I just see the rating as the 'average' of the player's newspaper ratings.

i like the new system more. now i finally can see the difference while a match is taking place. in fm2008 half team had an 7, quarter a 6 and another quarter an 8.