The new patch that is coming out the 18th - also contains player updates

For example , my favourite player in my favourite team : Zarate in Lazio is VERY poor and we all know how good he is IRL , same thing with foggia... will players like them get better stats also with the patch , or will the patch that is coming out 18dec only serve as an bugg fixer?

Cheers.

Bugs.........................

Anything else will come later, they've got there work cut out with this alone, without tweaking player stats as well

Nobody really knows because SI haven't said much about it other than the release date in the podcast. Although from past fm games, patches have only improved bugs and do not really make any player changes.

Nobody really knows because SI haven't said much about it other than the release date in the podcast. Although from past fm games, patches have only improved bugs and do not really make any player changes.

The patch that comes out in january/february usually has updated player data. This december one probably won't, as its only been a month.

Is it actually 100% confirmed as being released on the 18th? Or is it they are TRYING to get it out FOR the 18th? I thought the latter and it hasn't been set in stone for release yet? But TBF i havn't listened to the podcast as i dont believe in iTunes!

First I heard of any new patch, thank god there is one on the way though.

Two patches within the first two months of release? Hmmm.

First I heard of any new patch, thank god there is one on the way though.

Two patches within the first two months of release? Hmmm.

The first patch was ready before release.

The first patch was ready before release.

That makes it even worse that they had to release a patch before the game was even released.

That makes it even worse that they had to release a patch before the game was even released.

This is not odd at all. If SI were as evil as people make them out to be, they would have gone gold and not bothered to create a patch for release day. They'd just have started work on FM2010 and leave FM2009 as is.

The reason why it is normal to release a patch on release day is because it can take several weeks to go from the master build to making all the copies, printing the disks and finally getting them distributed to stores. SI can either let all programmers sit idle or they can let them keep working on refining the final product and have an update ready for the day of release. Ask yourself, which sounds more efficient?

Software engineering is an odd business. For example: You can have a contractor build a house and have thousands of tiny mistakes in the framework that nobody will ever know and home owners will be perfectly happy living there because they most likely will never notice. However, a computer does not tolerate mistakes. A CPU either gets it or it doesn't and when it doesn't it won't gracefully explain what the problem is.. it will crash and burn. Software Engineering has less tolerance for mistakes than pretty much any other business out there. I always explain to people that I have two bosses, a human one and my compiler.. and my compiler doesn't care about my feelings.

If people on these boards would understand programming a bit better, they would understand where many of these problems come from and hopefully have a little more sympathy for the developers. There is a reason why the FPS market is doing so well and why they seemingly are so bug-free.. It's because those games are relatively simple. SI took the difficult route and when into a simulation market. It doesn't get much more complicated than that. They have limited resources, short timelines and a very demanding audience.. If a certain bug isn't fixed it's not because they hate us and want to make your life miserable.. It's because another bug took priority. Considering the size of this project, the complexity and the many interactions between data it is not surprising that it won't work perfectly the first time. And there is a golden rule in engineering that says that the the final 20% of a project take 80% of the time to complete and I personally believe that it will take a nearly infinite amount of time to make a large project 100% bugfree.

It's not perfect, but it is reality. The best thing you, as a user, can do is stop complaining and help the developers by filing detailed bug reports.

And there is a golden rule in engineering that says that the the final 20% of a project take 80% of the time to complete and I personally believe that it will take a nearly infinite amount of time to make a large project 100% bugfree.

Good post. Unfortunately, a lot of people on here have zero idea what the process of creating a game is, and most likely imagine flaws in a software product to be like flaws in cheap asian trainers.

Exactly what bugs will be fixed on the new patch ???

We def need a Bugs fix. So happy this is being done ASAP. The processing issue can be the first thing to sort out as this accounts for over 40% of posts in this forum. Data can wait till Jan/Feb as its not as essential. All I will say though is most of these issues should've been fixed at testing stage and some of the unhelpful comments made on this forum with regards to ppl's annoyance are disrespectful to say the least. Every customer has a right to reply, failing to acknowledge the customer creates annoyance and ends up in situations like Woolworths!

Good post. Unfortunately, a lot of people on here have zero idea what the process of creating a game is, and most likely imagine flaws in a software product to be like flaws in cheap asian trainers.

Cheap asian trainers are CHEAP. FM09 isn't. That's the point of most ppl you say don't have a clue. If you pay for a product with a name attached to it then you expect quality and in this respect Sega and SI did apologise, so they are fully aware that they are not Cheap Asian Trainers!

With all due respect its lucky you guys don't work in software engineering for businesses that make critical medical equipment or air traffic control software then!

There are methodologies and testing processes that can make bug free software a reality, yes they cost a bit to implement but what's the margin on a 29.99GBP game?

Anyhow suggesting people are ignorant because they expect a bug free product is a bit rich. When I buy a piece of hardware I expect it to be bug free, why is software any different because it's easier to update?

SI bringing out a patch already? - how inconvenient for the pirates - SI are taking the p1ss surely?

Cheap asian trainers are CHEAP. FM09 isn't. That's the point of most ppl you say don't have a clue. If you pay for a product with a name attached to it then you expect quality and in this respect Sega and SI did apologise, so they are fully aware that they are not Cheap Asian Trainers!

By cheap asian trainers, I was referring to "products with a name attached" e.g. Nike or whatever. They are cheap to produce, it's idiots on the highstreet who pay high prices for them. Is FM cheap to produce?

Mr Pimpnuts, your comparison is a bit off, medical/air traffic systems often cost millions of euros, and often there is one release per decade. Many systems still run on Unix because they're sure the existing software has few bugs.

How about you compare it to Adobe Photoshop? At upwards of €900, with annual releases, Photoshop performs a much, much less complex task than FM, and yet regularly ships with bugs or missing features. They get away with it because a free patch will be released and another expensive release will be out soon anyway. Now, if you say the same thing for a football management game which costs 30 times less, its not acceptable?

With all due respect its lucky you guys don't work in software engineering for businesses that make critical medical equipment or air traffic control software then!

Wonder why medical equipment is so expensive and takes many many years in testing before it can finally be put in production? You're comparing apples to oranges.

There are methodologies and testing processes that can make bug free software a reality, yes they cost a bit to implement but what's the margin on a 29.99GBP game?

Sure.. but.. take this golden rule in engineering: You have have it good, fast or cheap, pick any any two.

Anyhow suggesting people are ignorant because they expect a bug free product is a bit rich. When I buy a piece of hardware I expect it to be bug free, why is software any different because it's easier to update?

It is different because hardware is infinitely more simple than software. Hardware tends to do the same couple of simple operations over and over again. The early processors I wrote assembly for only had about 20 instructions to execute (20!!!) and we're talking a CPU here. Now, trying to tell the CPU to execute those 20 instructions hundreds of billions of times in the exactly the right order... that's called software and that's the hard part. I've done assembly programming for several years.. it's a pain.

PS. Galvin beat me to it

<There are methodologies and testing processes that can make bug free software a reality, yes they cost a bit to implement but what's the margin on a 29.99GBP game?"

Haha. Yes in <theory>. I have experience of a LOT of methodologies and end-to-end testing strategies and it's always something outside of the standard structure that comes up otherwise of course it would be spotted!

With all due respect its lucky you guys don't work in software engineering for businesses that make critical medical equipment or air traffic control software then!

There are methodologies and testing processes that can make bug free software a reality, yes they cost a bit to implement but what's the margin on a 29.99GBP game?

Anyhow suggesting people are ignorant because they expect a bug free product is a bit rich. When I buy a piece of hardware I expect it to be bug free, why is software any different because it's easier to update?

But those get programmed on demand for one specific system unlike games that are made for the thousands of different hardware settings players have.

They also cost a little more then £30 I guess.

But those get programmed on demand for one specific system unlike games that are made for the thousands of different hardware settings players have.

They also cost a little more then £30 I guess.

EXACTLY! I work with one life-critical system, all the hardware is provided by the software suppliers so they don't have ANY hardware related issues such as drivers.

Whereas si seem to have to support every graphics card and on board chip since about 1995 ;-)

GavinZac

...Now, if you say the same thing for a football management game which costs 30 times less, its not acceptable?

No, its not acceptable Not the amount of things they miss. I believe one or two people from SI have said they are dissapointed with the number of things that got through this year and they hope to correct that for the future.

Thats just the bugs though. If you go further and talk about polish, it's very poor.

If I was a billionaire I would award SI a multi-million euro contract to make me an enterprise ready football management sim, within a time frame of say 4 years.

You know what? It still would ship with some bugs. Heck, whats that statistic, 70% of software projects can be considered a failure?

You are right of course, no *cheap* software is ever bug free, I was being flippant.

But SI should have picked up some of the more major ones (Serie C crash, 13 players on the tactics screen, all the A-League stuff, etc.) that have been ruining peoples enjoyment of the game. To be fair to them (SI) though their patches are always pretty decent.

Consumers shouldn't have had to come to expect buggy software as the standard. A lot of console games are released without major bugs, yeah console games only have to run on one set of hardware but the bugs above aren't hardware related. And if people can write complex free/open source software that doesn't have major bugs why can't a huge games corporation do the same thing?

I believe one or two people from SI have said they are dissapointed with the number of things that got through this year and they hope to correct that for the future

I know, one of the people was Paul Collyer and it doesn't get much higher up than that. There's no doubting too many bugs got through gold; some people are still having problems after the pre-release patch. However, the issue here is whether or not its acceptable to require a software update after purchase. Personally, I would go with a resounding yes. Remember, these are people who have finished their 'job' and are now making something they've already sold better. Someone spoke about hardware - If I could get an Nvidia rep to come by and adjust my fan a bit so my laptop stopped getting so hot, that'd be fantastic. Will it happen? No, it's my hardware now and my problem now, unless the entire thing melts.

If I was a billionaire I would award SI a multi-million euro contract to make me an enterprise ready football management sim, within a time frame of say 4 years.

You know what? It still would ship with some bugs. Heck, whats that statistic, 70% of software projects can be considered a failure?

I wouldnt. I'd create a new team and start the thing from scratch. Four years? Multi-million Euro? Might as well do it properly I dont doubt it would ship with bugs, I'd be the first to admit nothing ships without fault, but we're talking about obvious faults going through here. They are either not found (QA team too small? Too inexperienced? Made up of randoms with no control by SI?), too many are waived by the development team or... and this is my biased favourite, they dont have anyone suitably responsible for the collective design and overall quality of their product. To be responsible for such a role it needs to be a dedicated position.

Personally I think that'd help them out a lot from day one. Perhaps they could tackle bugs with thorough design? I think a little more anticipation of problems would go a long way to increasing the overall quality of the game.

However, the issue here is whether or not its acceptable to require a software update after purchase. Personally, I would go with a resounding yes.

I'm in complete agreement here.

Of course it's acceptable for software developers to release patches to fix bugs, however it's unacceptable for them to rush out a product with such obvious bugs that makes it unplayable for some then release lots and lots of patches - because there is always some user out that never gets the patches and essentially gets ripped off.

You are right of course, no *cheap* software is ever bug free, I was being flippant.

But SI should have picked up some of the more major ones (Serie C crash, 13 players on the tactics screen, all the A-League stuff, etc.)

The Serie C crash doesn't affect most people, luckily I count myself in that group. No doubt though, it is a major bug - it must have been either a total lack of testing, or a very unfortunate coincidence that nobody in testing got the bug. And it's been fixed! Otherwise... seriously, a temporary graphical glitch when you arrange the players a certain way "ruins" people's enjoyment of the game? :confused: I can't comment on the A-League stuff as I haven't heard what's wrong with it, but I'd imagine it's more testing problems.

Consumers shouldn't have had to come to expect buggy software as the standard. A lot of console games are released without major bugs, yeah console games only have to run on one set of hardware but the bugs above aren't hardware related.

No, they're testing related. FM, in terms of scale, dwarfs most console titles. You literally couldnt experience every part of the game in one lifetime.

And if people can write complex free/open source software that doesn't have major bugs why can't a huge games corporation do the same thing?

Open source projects quite often have massive bugs, and its the users who find them; indeed, it's the users who fix them! Who knows, maybe I could have a go at fixing the Serie C bug (its already done though, apparently)? Unfortunately, for FM to be profitable, SI cannot afford to release it as open source software (mind you, they should still compile it on Linux ) because a certain evil corporation would just love to dip into FM's code.

I guess SI are damned if they do and damned if they don't. If they waited until Jan/Feb to release the next patch then there would be complaints. Now that they are releasing a patch before Xmas, people are complaining about a game that is 'bug ridden'. It seems that the fact that SI have a massive fanbase that use these forums and interact with staff on a daily basis can sometimes be their downfall. I wonder if we would have been so critical had we no forum or website to see what bugs are evident - would we notice so many?

At the end of the day, yes there are things that are wrong with the game - SI are now fixing it with a patch that will be released quicker than anyone believed. We are talking about a vast game, with a vast amount of variables and a vast fanbase that are 'testing' it.

No, they're testing related. FM, in terms of scale, dwarfs most console titles. You literally couldnt experience every part of the game in one lifetime.

I think this is what most would expect - but I'd disagree. If you think of a simple action game, you still have to check the entire world for bugs. You might find areas the character gets stuck on, NPC's break when walking through certain areas - missions do not link, thousands of lines of text to check. Open world games which try not to direct your play session... its an absolute nightmare. Many of these games can also said to be created from scratch.

FM has been based on the same premise since... well, forever. They must have gazzillions of hours of thought into how to make Footie Manager games, problems encountered and so on. They game is updated every year by what is essentially the same team. They have massive advantages which counteract the fact they are developing on PC.

I think.

By the way - I'm not trying to attack you GavinZac - I have the utmost respect for your well explained points and I'm merely discussing this off the top of my head

FM has been based on the same premise since... well, forever. They must have gazzillions of hours of thought into how to make Footie Manager games, problems encountered and so on. They game is updated every year by what is essentially the same team. They have massive advantages which counteract the fact they are developing on PC.

Actually, they aren't as different as you'd think, in terms of having a settled code base. Most games are based on an engine which takes years to develop, and is then used for years afterwards - e.g. the quake engine, :Source, GTA, CryEngine and so on. Games after the release of these engines are essentially just modpacks or slight adaptations! And yet, those bugs you reffered to still occur - there are places in GTA where you can drop into "blue hell", there are walls you can get stuck in in Half Life 2, there... well, I didn't play enough of Far Cry as I couldn't get the hang of not getting shot whilst wandering around the first beach scene. But I'm sure there's bugs

If you want to see what can happen when an action console game is developed from scratch too quickly, check out the awful, awful "Just Cause".

Just Cause - ha, yes I'd wager this has something to do with the people on the development team too though As for reuse of Engines... yes, but the environements are created from scratch and the collision bugs I'd suggested do not really eminate from that. Passing engines to other teams as well, it often gets them off the ground that much faster but you still have to get to grips with what works and what doesnt. In my experience coders just love to rewrite as much as they possibly can because the previous chap didnt 'get it' and they do.

I think we're in agreement overall - FM could (should) ship with less killer bugs but it'll never be as clean as some would expect. Patch download on release day is fine too, if anything it shows they care about their product and that, for me, goes a long way to making up for failings elsewhere.

Patch download on release day is fine too, if anything it shows they care about their product and that, for me, goes a long way to making up for failings elsewhere.

While we're talking about "Just Cause", it's fitting to note that I paid more for that game than I did for FM09, yet it is far more bug riddled, including one mission I actually can't complete. And you know what? Despite over a year of complaints and requests, a certain *spits* Eidos Interactive have yet to release a patch. FM's interface issues? Man, the Just Cause team managed to -remove- the ability to play an action game with a joypad for the PC version!

In summary, FM/SI are certainly not perfect. But at least they aren't Eidos.

The Serie C crash doesn't affect most people, luckily I count myself in that group. No doubt though, it is a major bug - it must have been either a total lack of testing, or a very unfortunate coincidence that nobody in testing got the bug.

What nearly everyone in these forums seems to forget is that the bug may have been introduced very late in the process. Theoretically you have to test the whole software project every time you make a change*. It is possible that the seriec C had run fine for weeks, but a fix that got in right before the build went gold introduced the series C bug and it didn't get caught, because the extended run tests had just been completed and there was not enough time to run those again before the gold disk had to be delivered. This is exactly why I forbid anyone in my engineering team to release fixes shortly before an event even if that particular fix has been verified and tested by QA. (We're in the live broadcasting business, so if anything goes wrong, you'll notice if you're watching TV). I have ordered a two week release cycle after a particularly painful incident where our system went down during a major sporting event due to sloppy programming and a 'rogue' release by one of our engineers.

I have been playing FM2009 without any major or even minor problems. The most noticable bug is the duplicate shirts in the tactics options screen. However, I consider that bug 'cosmetic' or 'trivial' in severity, so I can understand why SI has put that one on low priority and why the first patch didn't contain the fix for it.

In short. SI is not evil. They're a business and their main goal is NOT to make the game perfect. Their goal is to make money and to turn a profit. That's the business world for ya. The sooner you can accept that fact, the better your life will be. All you can do as a user is to either vote with your wallet and not buy the game or help the developers out by taking some of the work out of their hands and get them detailed explanation of what you feel is a bug. Is it fair to have to do this? Probably not.. but welcome to the real world. Get used to it.

*) I remember having a (short) conversation with Marc Vaughan (I believe) a long time ago, probably when I was beta testing for CM4 or FM2007 about automated testing and other test methods. I believe back then SI hadn't introduced it yet but they were working on it. This is the first step towards continuous build and test systems that are becoming very popular in software houses. It can be a pain to introduce, but once you do, you'll never look back.

Will we be getting a Mac patch anytime soon?

Cheap asian trainers are CHEAP. FM09 isn't. That's the point of most ppl you say don't have a clue. If you pay for a product with a name attached to it then you expect quality and in this respect Sega and SI did apologise, so they are fully aware that they are not Cheap Asian Trainers!

FM09 is not cheap? Put it into perspective! 30 quid, for a whole year and countless hours of gaming? Compare that to any other leisure activity and say it isnt cheap!