Jump to content

SuperMeppen

Members+
  • Posts

    325
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

20 "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn"

About Me

  • About Me
    UK

Interests

  • Interests
    Football

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. He'd be marked as ineligible for a league match if that were the case, no?
  2. Like the OP, my last real involvement with the FM franchise was back in FM12 (which I started playing again for a bit earlier in the year), though I did try playing FM21 but it was just so full of bloat and stuff that was just not enjoyable. And even on a decent PC it took so long to get through - it took hours to get through a game week, and I never messed with tactics or training. I think it says something that CM01/02 still has such an active community around it. I think, in truth, this franchise was lost to me a long time ago and is never coming back. SI are locked-in to providing at least the same amount of depth currently, and stuffing in further features that don't really add much other than even more bloat (in my opinion etc).
  3. I don't really have much skin in this game - I very much lapsed back after FM12 and whilst I did try to get into FM20 - and only because it was given away free by Epic Games - I found that to be so horrendously bloated and unfun that I deleted it and it completely killed all my interest in the series. However, there's always a little part of me wanting to get back engrossed, I actually went back to FM12 a bit late last year and it was so much more streamlined and actually fun! I still delegated all press conferences/team talks etc (because they have always been awful), but it zipped along at a reasonable pace and I was actually able to play through seasons in a reasonable time-frame (which is a key consideration for me.) Anyway, I do still follow these forums every once in a while, and having seen the announcement by Miles, whilst I agree with many others that having some transparency and engagement with the fanbase is good, I thought the actual content of his blog was very <shrug>. I accept that many want to see a much better 3D representation, so that's good for a lot of people and the inclusion on women's football is important - but outside of that, there's no actual hint of any things that change the core structure of the game aside from a passing comment about making it better for long-term saves. It's basically an announcement that is mostly devoted to saying "We're getting new graphics!" I do fully get that a) the game is a while away still, that b) they are probably still working to lock-down the features and c) they need to keep these things back so it can be used in the PR blitz in the build-up to release - so I didn't expect any real depth to his piece, but at the same time I would've liked at least some breadcrumbs dropped dealing with some of the non-engine/graphic related stuff. Like, are they revamping/improving/completely re-doing the useless man-management tools available to deal with play grumbles, the boring, overdone press stuff, the social media junk? Is scouting going to be looked at fresh? Is training? All that kind of stuff - you know, where most of the playing time is spent. But nada. Again, I didn't expect chapter and verse on this stuff, but some little teasers. I accept that the elephant in the room there is that they still want FM24 to do well, so they can't say too much, but still - from a lapsed player that currently can't even be bothered to try FM23 via Game Pass at no cost (other than time), then it would've been nice to have something to make me start thinking that perhaps FM25 could pull me back in.
  4. So I'm no fan of the overly-bloated FM these days, so I've gone back to the last version I bought, which was FM12 and already it is so much quicker to get through stuff. I mean, there's still bloat, but nowhere near as bad as what it has become. Anyway, I digress. I picked Liverpool and forgot just how awful the squad was back then - there's no depth, no transfer kitty and no interest in anybody wanting to buy Andy Carroll. I therefore need some help on a tactic that makes use out of the starting squad so I can survive long enough to get some cash and buy some actually-good players. I've tried playing a 4-1-2-2-1 (think of it as a 'V' in front of the defence), hoping to utilise Downing or Bellamy as a proper wingers on the left as neither are wide midfielders (dependent upon form), with Kuyt/Maxi on the right as a defence winger. I then have Adam/Henderson/Gerrard in midfield (based on form/who isn't injured) sitting in front of Lucas as my anchor. The defence has my full-backs on Support duty and Suarez is up front (with Carroll getting the occasional game, but he's never going to be any good, is he?) It hasn't gone well in my two attempts so far, being sacked at Christmas on my first go (albeit I had a variant of that formation) and I've just ended my second attempt which at least had Suarez starting to score a few this time. I know it's a long time back, but does anybody have some tips they can give me? Even some players I can buy with my meagre £7.5m transfer kitty to flesh-out the squad would be good, but the way I see it, everybody bar Gerrard, Suarez, Henderson and Reina are pretty much expendable (does Coates ever develop well?)
  5. For those that are unhappy with the state of the game on release, so long as you keep buying it Day 1 then SI have no reason to change the way they work. Why would they? The noise on this forum - regardless of how many years you've supported the franchise - is tiny compared to the number of players that will never experience and/or care about the perceived issues because of the way they play (i.e. pick a big team, press 'Go' and start again after a few seasons). The only way SI will have genuine impetus to look at things is if one of two scenarios happen: 1) A serious competitor launches and starts eating into their sales; or 2) people just stop buying FM en-masse. Now number 1 just isn't going to happen any time soon, because which publisher has the resources & talent to take it on? And, as this forum proves year-on-year, number 2 seems unlikely as you all buy it anyway, even if you've been burned by a previous experience. It's like Stockholm Syndrome. From SI's perspective, I have no doubt that they want to fix everything that they have as a bug but the reality is, as mentioned at the top, a lot of the bugs just aren't going to be seen by the majority of players (or cared about enough to curtail their enjoyment) - so to spend time/resources on a lot of stuff isn't commercially viable and never will be. Plus I'm sure there are already a few people working on next year's game in some capacity.
  6. This thread has been interesting, because you could go back 10+ years to see lots of talk about long-term AI squad building and the quality of newgens/development/reputation (either too good/not good enough/not getting played/not willing to go on loan etc). It's been an issue for years and years, just wearing slightly different clothes - I think I recall even as far back as FM 2007 having the problem of AI squads being awful once current players had retired. I mean the simple answer to it is that whilst I have no doubt that SI do put some resource into looking at it and making tweaks, it's never going to be a massive priority (and I also accept it's probably a mammoth task to try and fix on such an old codebase). SI will put money and time into stuff that the majority of players are likely to experience - and like it or not, I'd imagine (and be fairly confident in saying) that the vast majority of the fanbase will pick a big club in a big league, play a few seasons (perhaps no more than 5 or 6), then quit and start all over again with somebody new. They will never encounter these issues (and many others that generate a lot of posts on here). This forum is not going to be anywhere near representative of the userbase as a whole in how they play. I think those hoping for SI and their Sega overlords to do anything to change this are sadly misguided. FM is locked into a yearly release schedule and will always need new shiny stickers to put on the box to give people a reason to want to upgrade beyond database changes. Wasn't it FM21 (or 22?) where one of the touted headline features was being able to influence a nation's youth development, but somebody ran some really extensive tests and the actual impact was close to 0 - and it was confirmed by SI that it was working as intended? Again, most players would never, ever play long enough to ever see anything from that feature (even if it did drastically change things), but it sure sounds like a good thing to have! I don't really blame SI, they are working within the constraints placed upon them, not just by Sega, but the userbase too - whilst people will say they would prefer SI to skip a year, I don't think the majority of players would. Besides, it would be commercial suicide, especially when, as I say, the vast majority of people won't even see/think/care about any problems. The only thing that would ever see significant change (perhaps even building a new game from scratch) is if a worthy competitor showed up and started eating SI's lunch. But which companies can you see wanting to put in the money to take SI on? I can't think of any, and so this cycle will continue until enough people stop talking about how 'this will be the last time I buy it on release' and, you know, actually stop buying it (and the irony there is that if too many people stopped buying it, there's even less incentive for Sega to want to provide enough funding needed to fix everything). And so the world continues to turn.
  7. Yes, that's possible I guess, but then if that is the case it makes the comparison versus completely 'real life' meaningless in the context of the original question raised.
  8. I'm clearly missing something in the maths, but I'm assuming the stats above (and those taken from your tests) are taken from years worth of games - so a good size sample. So with that said, a home win rate of 66% in FM versus 48% in the PL (for example) is a massive difference, and way outside of any reasonable range (which you'd expect statistically to be measured in the 2/3 points either side, not nearly 20%!) Or am I really missing something obvious here?
×
×
  • Create New...