Letter to SI - Standards need reviewing?

It pains me to post this because there are already hundreds if not thousands of posts berating the game quality and number of bugs. I'm likely to moan when things are poor (if I believe them to be down to bad implementation) but I'll happily defend SI and the game if critiscim thrown their way is not justified or simply due to individual frustrations (i.e. the whole authorisation debacle or worse, not winning every single game).

What I am unhappy with though is Sports Interactives poor quality control. I do not think it would be correct to point the finger at QA, I think the development team is possibly seriously understaffed. Assumptions yes, but thats all I can work with from here. At worst the game can come across as being developed as a college project, at best we do not spot the negatives and lose ourselves in the fantasty of football management - it can hold my attention and entertain like no other game. The latter often leads to us putting annoyances aside and praising the game for what it is capable of being - tremendous fun and completely engrossing. Do not get me wrong, the game and series has provided me with hundreds of fun hours and it has been worth every penny. What I think is unaccepable is the constant launch of unfinished projects. The games are becoming bigger, and with that the chance of error increases, that I can understand. I do not expect any title to ship without bugs but the franchise launches with more bugs than a tramps bed (No offence to any tramps reading this over the shoulder of someone on the tube).

I believe SI to be failing in terms of quality control and would, quite politely, ask them to dig deep and try to figure out ways in which they could, as a company, improve their standards. Have an open office meeting or something, I'm sure some people with the studio feel the same way. Why are the games released in a poor state? I'm sure there are decent reasons for it. Something is seriously amiss if you think it is of professional quality in this day and age. Sorry to be so blunt and I apologise for taking on the role of outsider with little info thinking I'm right to criticise

Again, I'm aware plenty of products ship with bugs, but we're talking about far too many in FM. Admittedly some people, especially those not 'up on games' or computers can go for an age without noticing anything, but if you step back and take a quick look at FM I think it easy to wonder what on earth is going on from time to time.

If I were to break my annoyances into four brackets I'd divide as follows:

Minor bugs text errors, text not taking account of particular scenarios etc - e.g. Ass Man report talking about how your midfield is losing out to opponent before game has even started, polygons misaligned, bad sorting, incorrect animation, players sliding not walking

Moderate bugs sliders not remembering last used position, views failing until you reset, kits not displaying properly until reset

Major bugs Game crashes, data errors causing application to close

Polish wishlist Better stadium representation - dont do 20% of a job on something, better textures for pitches, better sfx for varied scenarios etc. Why do we still have Champs league finals feeling almost exactly the same as a conference match? Personal preference I know.

There are loads of minor bugs, some moderate bugs and still a number (for some users) of the major bugs. The polish standards are in the eye of the beholder but I do think SI should have made further strides in this area. There is 'acceptable' but what company should be happy with that? I think we, as FM fans, accept FM for what it is but put a neutral hat on and you have to ask yourself - should they not be releasing a better product? It's testing my patience somewhat. I know people will say 'wait until Jan when its been patched again' but should we have to? When its working its great fun and thats not something I tend to be able to be patient with - I want to play now

SI release a Footie Man game every year. Testing routines and practise should be excellent. I cannot emphasise how much of an advantage it is in terms of development (game design, implementation and QA to name three areas) to be tasked with producing an improved franchise, version after version. It helps you plan, you can correct mistakes, you are aware of what needs to be tested and what areas may react negatively to the implementation of idea X, Y, Z and you, probably as IP holders, retain creative control. I can however understand the complete pain of releasing onto the PC platform. You have that bat to beat me with.

None of this 'routine can lead to improvement' comes across in FM as well as perhaps it could.

Take an example match...

http://img231.imageshack.us/my.php?image=matchhatesmarkeddd2.jpg

1) Sometimes there is a random person sitting in the stand - bug

2) The pitch grass and stadium grass are not joined - there is a noticeable gap - sloppy oversight

3) The feet holding up the benches sort badly (flicker) - sloppy

4) Subs warming up do not walk, the slide up and down - sloppy bug

5) The officials, in my games at least, are almost always in white (I think I've seen the ref in green once... I think)

6) All the players are in white... (QPR home is white/blue, Swansea away is black I think) - bug

7) Both keepers (home and away) are always in white (for me)

8) Amaturish blend between pitch grass and stadium grass/edge - sloppy (okay, so I'm mega harsh here...)

9) Match speed slider never remembers its last setting, always starts at notch 0 - bug or poor design decision? I'd like match/highlight sliders ideally but thats personal pref

10) Sometimes my matches will begin in TV view, even though I never manually opt to use this viewpoint - bug

If I wanted to continue (and I'll try to wrap it up now to avoid sending you to sleep) I could mention another load of errors in the 3D View, let alone the main game. Reloading for this match does not correct the error whereby everyone is in white. I have latest drivers.

I love the game when its working, but it has a terriable habit of slapping me in the face and reminding me how broken it can be. I'm tired of people saying wait for the first patch, then the second, then the third. It should be better from day one and I'm sure you know this. I suspect you were working on the first patch the day after the main branch went gold. It might be an idea to stop waiving so many bugs and consider empowering someone to reflect and act on the quality of the game. By the looks of it the team within SI is quite large, surely you have all bases covered? (Except game design).

Okay, thats it! I'm not one to throw my toys out of the pram or demand you come to my house and hand over a refund, I'll continue playing FM (which, with the patch, I am enjoying on the whole I have to say) but its becoming quite fractured. I thought FM07, completely patched, was very tight. There are so many great things about SI, from the likes of the dev team (Neil Dejyothin in particular) responding to people, the mods answering questions 24/7... the fact the game is supported with patches and so on... but it's time to take a look at the product, it will benefit us all in the long run and I would love to see more people come on board and enjoy FM for what it is - the most entertaining footie manager game I've ever played.

Feel free to flame me now

Great post! Well thought out, well structured and some real pertinent points have been raised. Let's just hope they take this on board.

5) The officials, in my games at least, are almost always in white (I think I've seen the ref in green once... I think)

6) All the players are in white... (QPR home is white/blue, Swansea away is black I think) - bug

7) Both keepers (home and away) are always in white (for me)

Strange - my keepers and officials are always in different colours (sometimes my keeper in green sometimes in yellow)

Great post. I have thought about this alot. Maybe SI should only release this game every two years, and in between they can release several patches to update the game before game release. A release once a year just seems too much work for SI ?!

Feel free to flame me now

Before anyone does flame T4RG4, can I just say: "don't". Even if you don't agree with everything he's said (and I certainly don't agree with it all), please appreciate that it's a constructive, well thought out, articulate and intelligent post, and God knows that's a rarity at the moment!

So let's keep the pro and con debates constructive tonight, eh? Cheers.

outstanding post.

the only thing i would have to say to si is that instead of trying to impliment new features into the game such as the 3d viewing, which whilst is good to have, i doubt was completley necessary, they should focus on fixing all the "bugs" and annoyances that the games consistently presents.

Fantastic post T4RG4 - Would like to see SI's response on this.

Good post indeed.

I'm going to raise a question here tho... I have none of the issues mentioned, is this a graphics setting thing? My laptop and desktop run on the high setting.

5) The officials, in my games at least, are almost always in white (I think I've seen the ref in green once... I think)

6) All the players are in white... (QPR home is white/blue, Swansea away is black I think) - bug

7) Both keepers (home and away) are always in white (for me)

9) Match speed slider never remembers its last setting, always starts at notch 0

All my kits, both players and ref are normal.

The match slider thing is odd because mine remembers exactly where it is.

I'm expecting this to get locked very shortly.

I'm expecting this to get locked very shortly.

Why?

It's an excellent post; thought-provoking, well-written and brings up a lot of interesting points.

Excellent post. Glad to see some people are capable of posting constructively and without once degenerating into pointless ranting.

I think that this is precisely the type of post that SI will reflect upon.

Nice post, but it can be summed up in one sentence really "Sort your fu*king act out"

Nice post, but it can be summed up in one sentence really "Sort your fu*king act out"

Don't bring that here, no need. Thanks SI for responding to a quality thread.

great post.

Its well written and has some valid points. Makes a change to have a post like this, which SI should take on-board, rather than the normal "This game is rubbish" and "I'll never buy it again" or "Worst ever FM" etc...

I agree that I do find it amazing how each year the FM series is released with so many bugs (after so called testing) and then a patch or two is released (after the general public have played the demo for two weeks) and the game plays so much better. It makes you think that as the earlier post mentioned - that maybe a release should come out every two years so that it can be tested thoroughly! OK this would mean a loss in sales as the revenue from each release would be every two years instead of annually - but there could be a lot of people turning there backs on the game year in year out due to the amount of bugs which means less money coming in for SI/SEGA..... Something to consider.

Anyway i love the FM series - especially when the patches have been released

outstanding post would be an understatement...

Totally agree with it all...

I'd agree with most (not all) to an extent, the problem with such a critique is that it assumes you can have black and white i.e right or wrong, the OP surely knows that's a very tall order for such a programme.

There are things which better QA would have prevented, text errors both spelt, grammatical and contextual shouldn't happen for example.

The major problems which afflict the final product are largely down to the need to develop till the last possible moment and code lock at the latest possible date imo, there are sound reasons for this methodology.

I wouldn't include the 3D ME in this critique as it's a first edition and I'd expect it to improve rapidly from this point.

I do believe testing/QA can be improved, to be secure and effective it has to be done more in house and that is not cheap.

Let's hope sales doubled this year and it can be funded;)

I'm not sure if this counts as a flame or not, (I hope not; I don't FEEL angry) but what can any of us know about SI's staffing or testing controls? I have worked in small divisions for big companies before - okay, nothing to do with gaming - and I know that if the big company sets a deadline for a project you sure as hell better meet it.

No one can deny glaring bugs were released in the demo, but I think the blame - if you must blame anyone - lies with the money men. Perhaps it was the impending release of Champ Man's 3D game that necessitated the rushed bug-ridden demo. Perhaps FM's testers were screaming, "No, you still haven't sorted these bugs," but were met with the reply, "I know we need another couple of weeks to iron out the problems, but the guys upstairs will fire us all if we don't get the demo out along with the final code by the deadline."

Hm, not sure what I'm trying to say here. Certainly not out and out disagreeing with the OP, but maybe that SI are a victim of the big boys as much as us. They've certainly taken enough obcene flak with good grace.

BTW, my FM09 installed and worked first time. Just for the record.

I have to say that was one of the most constructive criticism posts ever to be on this forum. Well done T4RG4.

the only thing i would have to say to si is that instead of trying to impliment new features into the game such as the 3d viewing, which whilst is good to have, i doubt was completley necessary, they should focus on fixing all the "bugs" and annoyances that the games consistently presents.

Seconded. (and some more letters to allow me to post)

Must agree with the rest. It is very thought out, and pretty good post. (I agree with some, but not with all)

No one can deny glaring bugs were released in the demo, but I think the blame - if you must blame anyone - lies with the money men. Perhaps it was the impending release of Champ Man's 3D game that necessitated the rushed bug-ridden demo. Perhaps FM's testers were screaming, "No, you still haven't sorted these bugs," but were met with the reply, "I know we need another couple of weeks to iron out the problems, but the guys upstairs will fire us all if we don't get the demo out along with the final code by the deadline."

I can see why you'd think that but it's a false assumption, the date is agreed, if SI don't agree the date it doesn't happen, I know categorically that Sega do not over ride SI in this manner.

This year of course the date had to be agreed by many more parties than normal but SI would have had the final say.

The release date actually isn't pertinent, the problem is that going Gold has to be as close to the release date as possible, I can't really spell it out any more than that.

Many thanks for the positives. I'm aware its my POV and I'm happy for people to argue against it constructively. Feedback is most appreciated. I think I was lucky to benefit from thinking before writing whereas I can, as easily as anyone, fall into replying to an existing negative thread when things go wrong because its easier than creating my own when calm

Strange - my keepers and officials are always in different colours (sometimes my keeper in green sometimes in yellow)

Yep - I do not doubt it. I wish I had the same thing though. It's so hard to think of reasons why I have this problem. We could be in different leagues, different display settings, it could be down to both home teams having majority white in their home kits and so on. I've seen someone have the same problem as myself and they have raised the issue in the bugs forum to which I've added.

Releasing every couple of years - Valid suggestion, but I personally think (hope?) SI have the ability and backing to manage a more stable release each and every year. Of course, if they came out and said that isnt possible then who am I to argue.

SI should fix all the bugs then implement features - Some would no doubt go along with this, but would the majority? I know I for one would miss seeing a new FM game and miss that new feature wonder that makes me purchase the latest edition. SI would miss out massively on a years income (I'm not aware of the Sega/SI deal, but perhaps Sega pay for the upkeep of SI and therfore hold the profit?) and what business would wish to do that? I think they could improve the underlying code and release a new title with additional features - I'm sure this is what they are trying to do anyway.

I'd agree with most (not all) to an extent, the problem with such a critique is that it assumes you can have black and white i.e right or wrong, the OP surely knows that's a very tall order for such a programme...

Yep, appreciate that and agree. It's my personal POV and not black and white. Thing is, I get the sense that nobody 'directs' the game within SI, that the team discuss the project (as they should) but, to go against Spock, the needs of the many sometimes cause confusion. I would think it very hard to take stock of FM and attack issues with the project if I could not have a large say in its development. What I'm trying to say is, there is no designer of FM (as far as I am aware) and therefore nobody on the team is aware of all modules and responsible for the knock on effect of each feature implementation/general quality of all features. I believe NeilD said those implementing also design their modules with input from the team. That, to me, for a game as complex as FM is less than ideal and perhaps the reason why some features feel less complete than they perhaps could. I am not saying, in any way, that a designer should be the dominator of a project. He/She is merely there to think, full-time, about everything everyone wants to do and to go about seperating the noise from the crowd in order to help deliver a sound project. Wearing multiple hats (coder and designer) is not ideal on a project such as FM. It'd be healthier, if you do not work this way already, to have designer and module implementer bouncing off one another. Very much along the lines of a code buddy checking your work.

On your point about the 3D ME - yes, its the first interation and it'll improve (the match certainly has with the patch) but if you applied that thinking to a new game it wouldnt quite hold up (I know you arent trying to). You cannot release something in a poor state and say 'next time out it'll be better'. The difference with FM is your ability (and willingness which is very much appreciated) to patch quickly and quite effectively. If something is going to be included, it needs to be solid. Visually I think its just about acceptable, but in my first post I mentioned that is never something that you should aim for. It is the minimum standard and that is in the eyes of those who understand and enjoy FM. I'm not trying to be argumentative in any way, I'm just trying (perhaps poorly) to reiterate my point about raising standards internally leading to everyone being better off.

I'm not sure if this counts as a flame or not, (I hope not; I don't FEEL angry) but what can any of us know about SI's staffing or testing controls? I have worked in small divisions for big companies before - okay, nothing to do with gaming - and I know that if the big company sets a deadline for a project you sure as hell better meet it.

Certainly not a flame Sir As mentioned, I'm perfectly willing to admit I'm making assumptions. That is all I have. Well, assumptions made on what little info (some correct, some do doubt wrong) I've taken from this forum and SI postings. I do have experience in the games industry, its actually my profession which goes someway to explaining why I'm quick to acknowledge the point about me not having all the facts. I also appreciate the efforts SI have to go to in order to release the game each year and the interaction with the forum for which they often receive little praise. If I were part of SI I'm sure I'd get to see what was happening and my views on some things would change. I'm here as a fan though.

At the end of the day, they have pressures like any business. I do believe they have room to improve despite this (and I'm sure they'd agree). In development its often the developer themselves that sets the quality target - publishers often ruin it for you (ooh the bias ). Lets not forget that SI are a reputable developer and I'm sure Sega allow them a lot of freedom (in terms of general development and perhaps complete game design). I think SI send the game for approval, one of the versions gets through to be classified as Gold and all the while they are still working on it. They are aware of plenty of fix requirements before we even get our hands on the demo I'm sure.

I do feel sorry for them with the whole activation issue though - nightmare! This forum also brings them quite close to the 'customer' and to stand some of the comments you have to have quite a thick skin!

great post

Great posts, i have become fed up with the amount of bugs being released with the games. Why should i have to spend money on the internet to fix a game i bought from a shop? I know they cant all be perfect but they get a year to make the new game.

This will be the first year for 11 years i wont be purchasing cm/fm, i need a new home computer and was going to buy 1 to play the game like i have my last 2 computers but having to activate a game i spent £30 for in the shops!

Not everyone has the internet, ive just bought my first house and its not high on the agenda, i only go on it at work!

Sorry for the rant but having played the game for 14 years and a loyal customer i feel cheated!

I think the issues are always going to focus on the money and commercial side especially with Sega on board.

For a few years now SI have released the game when it simply appears unfinished in some quarters and have then had to wade through the tide of dissatisfied customers demanding a new patch or what not.

We're lucky that at the moment the official patches are still free as can see this as the next money making idea coming on board at some stage!

I'm expecting this to get locked very shortly.

This won't get locked: it is constructive and considered. It is the type of post we actively encourage, and as long as the thread stays constructive it will never get locked. Good to have some valid discussion rather than shouty abuse

As others have said, a very good post. No one will get flamed on these boards for posting constructively.

I would like to go through some of the issues you've raised though and share my experiences:

Take an example match...

http://img231.imageshack.us/my.php?image=matchhatesmarkeddd2.jpg

1) Sometimes there is a random person sitting in the stand - bug

2) The pitch grass and stadium grass are not joined - there is a noticeable gap - sloppy oversight

3) The feet holding up the benches sort badly (flicker) - sloppy

4) Subs warming up do not walk, the slide up and down - sloppy bug

5) The officials, in my games at least, are almost always in white (I think I've seen the ref in green once... I think)

6) All the players are in white... (QPR home is white/blue, Swansea away is black I think) - bug

7) Both keepers (home and away) are always in white (for me)

8) Amaturish blend between pitch grass and stadium grass/edge - sloppy (okay, so I'm mega harsh here...)

9) Match speed slider never remembers its last setting, always starts at notch 0 - bug or poor design decision? I'd like match/highlight sliders ideally but thats personal pref

10) Sometimes my matches will begin in TV view, even though I never manually opt to use this viewpoint - bug

1) I genuinely have never noticed this, so it may well be a minor bug.

2) Again this is not something I've ever noticed so while it may be a bug, it's very minor. That being said, a lot of minor bugs can be just as bad as one or two major ones.

3) This has not happened for me. As you'll see, a lot of the other issues you post after this one also haven't happened to me (and I've not seen very much mention of them on the forums) and this leads me to believe that some of the issues you describe may be in some way down to your PC, or your particular installation.

4) Agreed, this can also happen on occasion to players after scoring a goal.

5) This had never been an issue for me, I've seen officials in grey, yellow, green, blck etc, etc.

6) Again, this has never ever happened to me.

7) See number 6.

8) Not noticed this personally, it may be there but is very minor. It's the kind of issue that would be picked up in testing but deemed such a low priority that it never gets fixed for fear of making something else worse.

9) Again this does not happen to me. My match speed slider has stayed where I set it for every game I've played.

10) This does happen to me and is the most annoying issue I've experienced in the game.

Now I know that just because these issues don't happen to me doesn't mean that they are not issues. However, I feel that the issues that people should be annoyed about are the ones that affect everyone. I say this because there are so many different combinations of components in PC's that you couldn't possibly test them all. And that's what I feel's happening for many of your issues, i.e. they're in some way being cause by your machine. So i think it's important to identify which issues are caused by the game and which issues are caused by people's PC's.

Personally, since I got through the activation process, the only real issue of note for me is your number 10. I accept that the 3D view is hardly Pro Evo standard, but I never expected that for a first attempt. What I wanted when I discovered 3D was being introduced was a 3D view that helped me create good tactics and just steeped the game up a little from the 2D view without making it too gimmicky. I feel SI have done this with the 3D view, and I'm sure this is an area that will improve greatly over the years.

As for the testing practice itself, I worked in games testing for a long time (for Sony as well as for a small independant company) and I think what people have to remember, particularly with a game like this, is that exhaustive testing is impossible. With a game of this scale it's not possible to get even close. The text bugs are the only things I can currently think of that should definitly not have got through, that is sloppy. But apart from those I can't think off the top of my head of any issues that affect a lot of people that should not have been missed in testing. Perhaps injuries but I think these have already been fixed in the patch. And as I said, the kind of issues you've mentioned about the match screen, if not a result of your machine, are the kind of bugs that would have a very low priority. As the release date got closer people at Sega/SI may have had to make a decision as to whether to delay the release as a result of bugs still in the game. not many companies would delay the release as a result of a few minor issues unfortunately.

EDIT: I forgot to say that I personally think '09 has been the least bugged release for a while. Unfortunately the activation issues have masked this quite a bit, which is perfectly understandable.

Great posts, i have become fed up with the amount of bugs being released with the games. Why should i have to spend money on the internet to fix a game i bought from a shop? I know they cant all be perfect but they get a year to make the new game.

This will be the first year for 11 years i wont be purchasing cm/fm, i need a new home computer and was going to buy 1 to play the game like i have my last 2 computers but having to activate a game i spent £30 for in the shops!

Not everyone has the internet, ive just bought my first house and its not high on the agenda, i only go on it at work!

Sorry for the rant but having played the game for 14 years and a loyal customer i feel cheated!

You have the option to activate the game via a toll free phone number as well as the internet. There have been many posts highlighting the issues while trying to activate the game but in light of the number of people that have posted with issues it probably only amounts to about 10% of the paying public which in the overall market is not bad.

I don't think SI have cheated anyone with this years release, no-one is forced to buy it. Paying £30 and having to activate it is not exactly a big ask. If you buy any Microsoft software, which you will pay a lot more for, you have to activate it over the internet or phone. Most software companies are moving down the line of on-line activation as probably 95% of people have the internet and certainly 98% have a phone.

I agree that the game should be released every 2nd year. The sheer number of bugs is ridiculous. The more I play the more it becomes clear that this game is months away from being finished.

In my opinion if SI want to restore their reputation after this debacle, they should spend time making this game what it should be and only then take the time to build and properly test the next version. I think the only way is to take 2 years to do it and just give us an addon for next season.

I doubt they will though. I can understand why they'll want to rush out the next version but will I buy fm2010? no chance.

Excellent, constructive post. Part of the reason I haven't posted much since joining these forums is due to the lack of threads such as these.

Whilst I think people should be discussing training, tactics, players, matches etc... I, personally, am mainly interested in reading and taking on board views that may improve the game. I prefer to play the game myself and not pay too much attention to tips and tricks that other players have put forward. But I agree, for the most part, that a smoother, less bug-ridden FM would be so much more enjoyable.

The release of games every two years, whilst patching the current game to keep up with events during transfer windows etc, might be a good idea if it is at all possible. Also, to add to this point, players generally find that the second patch come january/february makes the game much tighter and more enjoyable. A release every two years would enable players to continue playing the "tighter" patched version for longer, whilst adding further updates and leaving SI with more time to develop the biennial release.

Perhaps to keep revenue levels acceptable, they could create a patch before the second, real-life season, and charge maybe £15 for it? Just an idea. It's probably not possible, but hey ideas have to start somewhere!

Chopper99 - Good response.

I can totally accept many of my minor irritations with the 3D View (as used in the original example to highlight an area I think needs improving - quality control) may be on a few machines. Thing is, we tend to allow that because its Football Manager and that has to run on so many machines... Some people cannot use 3D, so at times I do wonder how widespread the field is in comparison to many other PC games. I cannot say I've ever seen so many niggly faults in a PC game, let alone a game that is updated each year and from the same team.

I've had all-white-kit matches twice now, but most of the time is behaves itself and both teams wear their correct kits. This makes me think its more likely to be a bug (perhaps) than an error with my setup. I do have white keepers and officials all the time though. Everything was updated before FM arrived, but to be sure I'll check again for there is nothing worse than blaming SI for quality control only to find out my 1998 Voodoo GFX card is at fault

I've also had some matches that, despite my default selection of Classic View being remembered, will not show the action even though its being played out. All the players remain static and I have to select the TV view then return to Classic for it to show the match properly.

Out of interest - which Sony studio did you work for?

Release every couple of years - This comes up quite often, but I'm not sure I'd vote for that route just yet. Thing is, I believe there is still much that could be instigated within the development and QA of Footie Man to enable a solid annual release that we would, on the whole, be more than happy with. Saying that, I did miss out on FM08 due to being unhappy with the design of the confidence system so I am on bi-annual purchases at present

I certainly don't think that releasing the game every two years is the way to go. Economically it's not an option, and it would also allow competitors to take advantage of the fact that FM was not being released every year.

As I said earlier, if you put aside the authentication issues, which would have happened even if this was the first game released since FM07, are there really that many bugs that people can confidently say are not down to their own PC in some way?

Despite taking a big step forward with 3D I stand by my view that this is one of the least buggy releases for a while.

Take an example match...

http://img231.imageshack.us/my.php?image=matchhatesmarkeddd2.jpg

1) Sometimes there is a random person sitting in the stand - bug

2) The pitch grass and stadium grass are not joined - there is a noticeable gap - sloppy oversight

3) The feet holding up the benches sort badly (flicker) - sloppy

4) Subs warming up do not walk, the slide up and down - sloppy bug

5) The officials, in my games at least, are almost always in white (I think I've seen the ref in green once... I think)

6) All the players are in white... (QPR home is white/blue, Swansea away is black I think) - bug

7) Both keepers (home and away) are always in white (for me)

8) Amaturish blend between pitch grass and stadium grass/edge - sloppy (okay, so I'm mega harsh here...)

9) Match speed slider never remembers its last setting, always starts at notch 0 - bug or poor design decision? I'd like match/highlight sliders ideally but thats personal pref

10) Sometimes my matches will begin in TV view, even though I never manually opt to use this viewpoint - bug

If I wanted to continue (and I'll try to wrap it up now to avoid sending you to sleep) I could mention another load of errors in the 3D View, let alone the main game. Reloading for this match does not correct the error whereby everyone is in white. I have latest drivers.

I love the game when its working, but it has a terriable habit of slapping me in the face and reminding me how broken it can be. I'm tired of people saying wait for the first patch, then the second, then the third. It should be better from day one and I'm sure you know this. I suspect you were working on the first patch the day after the main branch went gold. It might be an idea to stop waiving so many bugs and consider empowering someone to reflect and act on the quality of the game. By the looks of it the team within SI is quite large, surely you have all bases covered? (Except game design).

Okay, thats it! I'm not one to throw my toys out of the pram or demand you come to my house and hand over a refund, I'll continue playing FM (which, with the patch, I am enjoying on the whole I have to say) but its becoming quite fractured. I thought FM07, completely patched, was very tight. There are so many great things about SI, from the likes of the dev team (Neil Dejyothin in particular) responding to people, the mods answering questions 24/7... the fact the game is supported with patches and so on... but it's time to take a look at the product, it will benefit us all in the long run and I would love to see more people come on board and enjoy FM for what it is - the most entertaining footie manager game I've ever played.

Feel free to flame me now

Ok, I'm not flaming you but my response is as follows:-

1. Very minor detail has no effect on gameplay at all.

2. As above.

3. As above.

4. As above.

5. As above.

6. As above.

7. Not for me, keepers jerseys are different colours in various games, and again, as above.

8. As above.

9. As above.

10. As above.

As I said above, I am not flaming you, but these bugs/errors you mention above are very minor and have no effect on the gameplay,(which is superb), at all.

Chopper99 - Good response.

I can totally accept many of my minor irritations with the 3D View (as used in the original example to highlight an area I think needs improving - quality control) many be on a few machines. Thing is, we tend to allow that because its Football Manager and that has to run on so many machines... Some people cannot use 3D, so at times I do wonder how widespread the field is in comparison to many other PC games. I cannot say I've ever seen so many niggly faults in a PC game, let alone a game that is updated each year and from the same team.

I've had all-white-kit matches twice now, but most of the time is behaves itself and both teams wear their correct kits. This makes me think its more likely to be a bug (perhaps) than an error with my setup. I do have white keepers and officials all the time though. Everything was updated before FM arrived, but to be sure I'll check again for there is nothing worse than blaming SI for quality control only to find out my 1998 Voodoo GFX card is at fault

I've also had some matches that, despite my default selection of Classic View being remembered, will not show the action even though its being played out. All the players remain static and I have to select the TV view then return to Classic for it to show the match properly.

Out of interest - which Sony studio did you work for?

As you say, each person can only judge the quality by what they get on their own machines. I've had few problems on mine so obviously I feel the game is of a fairly high standard, but obviously other people will feel differently if they've had different experiences.

But I also try to judge it from the reactions on the forums and from what I've seen so far not that many people are experiencing serious issues now that most of the authentication problems have been resolved.

I think with a game like this it's difficult to tell what was simply missed in testing and what has been deemed either too risky to attempt to fix before release or too low priority to fix before release. There's a lot of risk vs reward assement that goes on when it comes to prioritising bugs for fixing.

As for Sony, I used to work as a lead tester in Sony's offices in Liverpool, working on both 1st party and 2nd party titles (i.e those develped by Sony as well as those published by Sony and developed by smaller companies.)

I certainly don't think that releasing the game every two years is the way to go. Economically it's not an option, and it would also allow competitors to take advantage of the fact that FM was not being released every year.

Economically it may be the best option. Sales will take a hit next year after this years problems. They could still make money from an addon for fm2009 which by then will be relatively bug free. Seems a better option than releasing another bug-infested mess and further diminishing their reputation.

As I said earlier, if you put aside the authentication issues, which would have happened even if this was the first game released since FM07, are there really that many bugs that people can confidently say are not down to their own PC in some way?

Yes

Despite taking a big step forward with 3D I stand by my view that this is one of the least buggy releases for a while.

I stand by my view that you either have barely played the game or you haven't checked the bug forum.

As for Sony, I used to work as a lead tester in Sony's offices in Liverpool, working on both 1st party and 2nd party titles (i.e those develped by Sony as well as those published by Sony and developed by smaller companies.)

I used to work upstairs in development Small world.

What I sense is that some people do not mind minor bugs. For me, and make no mistake I'm a bit of a task-master when it comes to this stuff, it is indicative of weak approach generally. When minor graphical issues which can be fixed without danger (such as misaligned ground) are passed over it depresses me. Of course, I'm making assumptions which we all end up doing if not part of the dev team. I may well have been in a position to mention a generally poor release (bugs and lack of polish) for many an FM release, its only this time around I felt compelled to say something. Whether or not this version is worse in general than previous titles in the series, it's too early for me to say. At present I do not think its strikingly one way or the other though (if I had to make an early call).

Internomad I was not suggesting that they each had an effect on gameplay. I was merely suggesting such minor things could be eradicated before release. At least those that are identified during testing anyway. Polish is something that could do with a little more focus, lots of fixes in 'minor' areas might create a substantially tighter project. If such an approach is carried over into other areas this thread might never have seen the light of day. FM has gained, rightly or wrongly, a dissapointing reputation for being bug ridden. No smoke without fire as they say. If there were to be a general tightening of presentation and stability, and within that I consider bug count as something that would have to be reduced, FM may stand a far better chance of being accepted in wider circles. At the moment its quite easy for people to dismiss FM as a bug-ridden database. It's only those that have become accustomed to its inner workings that appreciate the great game it often is. If the quality was improved and more people came on board, I think it would benefit us all.

One day I'd like to see my team play in a special match, not just imagine it to be special because it's titled 'Champions League Final'. With the 3D view now here (which I now prefer over 2D and could never see myself going back) I think this need to improve must be highlighted. The more we can see, and lets make no mistake the 3D view enables us to see the game as we have never been able to, the tighter the presentation needs to be. Just as I might list possible bugs that others havent seen, it does not mean they are any less likely to be bugs. If you see what I mean? Bah, I'm waffling now.

I'd love to see a general improvement in as many areas as possible, as would we all I'm sure. It still feels very rough in places and FM has been around a while...

Economically it may be the best option. Sales will take a hit next year after this years problems. They could still make money from an addon for fm2009 which by then will be relatively bug free. Seems a better option than releasing another bug-infested mess and further diminishing their reputation.

I disagree, simply because I don't think this release can be described in any way as a bug infested mess.

I was on the boards for the release of FM06, 07 and 08 and I can tell you that there were a hell of a lot more complaints and bugs reported around the release of both 07 and 08 than there has been this year. That tells me that the release this time round has improved.

Yes

Like what? Yes is hardly a substantial answer and is unlikely to convince anyone that you have a valid complaint.

I stand by my view that you either have barely played the game or you haven't checked the bug forum.

As I said, I've been around these forums long enough to be able to gauge the reaction to a release. The overall impression this time round is that people are a lot happier with the game (activation issues aside)

I played the demo and had the game ordered.

I liked the demo and the new features.

Unfortunately, my laptop is just scraping the barrel as far as min. sys. req. is concerned so I'm waiting until the final patch as I did with 07 and 08 (when I'll have improved my system).

I think the main issues were the activation process, which is sorted now, and the injury crisis, which has again been sorted.

I don't think there is any more bugs on 09 than there was on previous versions, and it's easily enough fixed. Which is what SI are doing.

Ironing out the creases, so to speak.

I certainly wouldn't call it a bug-filled mess!

I used to work upstairs in development Small world.

Wow, it is a small world. Did you work in the F1 team?

I worked in Internal QA rather than Submissions. Anyway, back to the topic...

What I sense is that some people do not mind minor bugs. For me, and make no mistake I'm a bit of a task-master when it comes to this stuff, it is indicative of weak approach generally. When minor graphical issues which can be fixed without danger (such as misaligned ground) are passed over it depresses me. Of course, I'm making assumptions which we all end up doing if not part of the dev team. I may well have been in a position to mention a generally poor release (bugs and lack of polish) for many an FM release, its only this time around I felt compelled to say something. Whether or not this version is worse in general than previous titles in the series, it's too early for me to say. At present I do not think its strikingly one way or the other though (if I had to make an early call).

I understand what you're saying. Unfortunately it's common for games to be released in a poor state these days and then need a patch. This is even more common now that console games can already be patched. I prefered it like it was when I used to test games, a game had to have most issues fixed otherwise it would not pass submissions, and if that meant the release date was missed then the release date was missed. Unfortunately things have changed and bugs in releases are almost the norm now. What I do know is that 09 (from what I've seen) seems to be less buggy than 07 or 08 (activation issues aside). So that tell me that SI seem to be improving.

Also unfortunately, despite people saying they'd rather SI delayed release and got rid of any bugs first, there would be uproar if the game actually was delayed. And this uproar would most likely come from the same people currently asking for the release to be dealyed.

Like every year we'll soon be sitting down and discussing the FM 2009 project and what we could have done better and how to improve things in the future and have taken on board your comments.

Shouldn't this be the type of thing a programming team do BEFORE they create a new game?

Yes, I was there between 97 and '02. I worked on the first internal F1, designed the next one then jumped ship.

Patching - absolutely, but for me (and perhaps just via my machine when it comes to the Matches) I have never spotted so many errors. Often I'll see a console title being patched when I log into Live, but I'd no idea why it needed a patch or what it was patching. In FM I come on here asking for them to fix X,Y,Z. I'd wager some of the automatic patches on console are to enable compatibility with future services as well (i.e. NXE for Xbox).

Patching is also fine IMO, I'd rather they address balance issues (i.e. injuries) than leave it to version two. There is however a fine line between releasing a stable product and releasing with many an area unfinished. I've seen, many a time, things being left because someone didnt want to touch them or go back to that area, rather than having little time to action a fix due to impending release. That's no call on SI's behaviour, I've never been privvy to their inner cave

I do hope you're right and the series is improving, thats certainly the reason the post was created in the first place. I guess we'll know more after a few months of play, after reading fix lists in forthcoming patches (assuming there will be at least one more) and then FM10 will be on the way...

Penfold83 - Yes, it'll be before FM10 I'm sure they have pre-dev meetings, plenty during and a post-mortem at the end.

T4RG4: Your spot on with your posts, and as a person that falls in the angry not so constructive posting mode quite often I'm quite impressed that you manage to keep a cool head. Actually this post says everything I've felt about FM2009.

Before anyone does flame T4RG4, can I just say: "don't". Even if you don't agree with everything he's said (and I certainly don't agree with it all), please appreciate that it's a constructive, well thought out, articulate and intelligent post, and God knows that's a rarity at the moment!

So let's keep the pro and con debates constructive tonight, eh? Cheers.

Every word of that seconded

Thanks for the constructive post T4RG4.

Like every year we'll soon be sitting down and discussing the FM 2009 project and what we could have done better and how to improve things in the future and have taken on board your comments.

Did I miss a little praise for SI showing the class of giving this kind of response?

Yes, I was there between 97 and '02. I worked on the first internal F1, designed the next one then jumped ship.

Slightly before my time then, I didn't start there until 2003. I did however have to spend 6 months testing F1 at one point

Great Post!

However, I have as many others in this thread not experienced or do not consider many of the things you mention as bugs as very agrevating. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the thing with the stadiums (no spectators) Is something that can be changed with user-graphics if someone was willing/able to do this. I belive it was talked about before the demo was released, but SI should correct me if I have misunderstood something.

For me, the biggest flaws is the tactics screen duplicating people which is plainly annoying to look at, the competition related bugs like the dutch premier league bug where there is only lined up one training match and the ass man do not create new ones if asked to do so (i know do it yourself but i'm lazy!!) and the competition starting too late (though I don't know if it is a first season phenomenon have not gotten that far). Also, I understand that there are several different fixture clash bugs, national team call up bugs and some can't play past a certain date bug.

The really cool thing, though, is that I have personally not yet experienced many of the problems people clamor about. Activation, the only thing was the o and 0 thing but that was easely sorted. Injuries, simply switch to a custom training schedule. Etc. And I am generally very happy with the game, though I havn't had the chance to play for more than a couple of months...

There are some new feature I don't like, like the issue where if a youth team player gets a full time contract he automatically starts to train with the seniors, instead of the managers themselves being able to decide where he trains by moving him up from the under 18/19squad and the descision to exclude talents under the age of 16. But that is just a personal oppinion.

Obviously, this game still needs a couple of patches to be perfect, but I would like to see SI use the great features inherent in Steam, for instance to releas 'hot fixes' to some of the bugs that surely do not take long to fix, for instance the duplicated player on tactics screen (that is I don't belive it is complicated to fix, but what do I know!!).

However, I would still like to thank SI for the game which has the potential to become one of the greatest in the series. Your work is still appreciated!!

I can't stand the fact it doesn't remember what "mode" you view the game in, I waste 10 seconds at the start of almost every game switching to my desired view because the game has just *decided* to switch it for me.

It's quite shocking that they would release the game in this state and clearly this is a case of "pressure from above".

I think you have to recognise that a major innovation like 3D is going to bring more problems, personally I feel the game makes great strides forward every year but yeah I know there are going to be issues for the first month or so and just take it calmly.

Wow, that's one of the best posts I've read on these forums for quite a while, and also really sums up how I feel about the game. There are so many flaws in the game that have been there since the series began, and it's disheartening when you play the game (I haven't played the game, but I have played the demo) and still see bugs in the game that have been in there since FM05, the main one being clubs repeatedly bidding for your players when you have quite clearly stated that he is not for sale at any price.

I have been saying for the last couple of years that it may be time to completely re-write the game much in the same way the game changed from CM01/02 to CM4, as there are aspects of the game that are looking a little tired, for example the main news screen has been the same since CM4 more or less. I wouldn't mind waiting a year or two for a new game with SI maybe releasing data patches in between, but alas peoples wages and overheads have to be paid, and unfortunately revenue cannot be raised by releasing data patches each year.

I'm by no means ranting here but I just wish that SI could pick up on these obvious bugs, these are bugs that are picked up straight away by the FM community when a demo is released. What bugs me more is that I can feel an absolute epic of a game is just in touching distance and talking about a game that could rival CM01/02 in the popularity stakes, but each year the glitches seem to push it further away. Maybe next year rather than releasing a game with new features, how about ironing out what they have and updating the database, this is by no means a swipe at SI, but this way they can spend all year perfecting the engine they have, but then would people be willing to pay upwards of £25 for a game that is essentially a data update.

As I have said I haven't yet bought the game, and now the authentication furore seems to have died down it may now be a good time to part with my cash, but I am in two minds as to whether to buy the game now or wait until the New Year when a) A second and possibly final patch is released and b) It may be cheaper !

Overall I do think SI have the fans thoughts first, they did release a patch on release day, this is unlike many other games especially Civ 4 where the game was unplayable on release and people had to wait something like two months before a patch was released, also what other game has such an active community providing different graphics, updates and modifications?

If I could speak to someone from SI face to face all I'd say is this:-

"Listen to your community, as they are the heart and soul of the game."