Stop milking the FM-franchise with new versions every year!!

[fcunitedfan]

A minor annoyance for more casual fans like me is that is very difficult to participate in the discussion with so many versions around. If you don´t have the latest iteration, it gets pretty confusing to discuss flaws since you don´t know if they are still present in the latest version.

Just think if for example FM05, FM08 and FM11 were the only FM-games around. Instead of small, incremental steps these three games would have been truly different and major sequels.

If you have a question about any version of the game, all you have to do is ask that question on the forums. There's always someone who'll happily answer your question. Also, if you want to discuss a cetain verson of the game, I'm pretty sure others will discuss it with you. There may even be forums on the net specifically made for certain versions of the game.

[Lem]

In general I would agree but I don't believe this is the case with SI.

From an outside point of view they keep staff well, the staff that post on the forums have demonstrated a genuine passion for the game over the years and therefore I don't believe its a case of them not caring about bugs etc.

I am confident that as a company they attempt to make FM as bug free as possible on release unfortunately the type of industry they are in and the depth that FM has to it means its a thankless task.

I wouldn't say it's the individual staff or testers here that don't care, but I'd say the management of the company don't. It's obvious the staff have a difficult job, and only a minority could be letting them down, but they just don't have enough time to complete the workload they have (or are too short staffed - depending how you look at it).
This is down to the overall management IMO as despite the best efforts of the staff it still falls short, and has done for some time. I apologise if it seems I'm blaming the ones on this board, and I hope others realise too that although they often deliver a frustrating message, it's unlikely they are responsible for that policy or attitude.

[Cougar2010]

I wouldn't say it's the individual staff or testers here that don't care, but I'd say the management of the company don't. It's obvious the staff have a difficult job, and only a minority could be letting them down, but they just don't have enough time to complete the workload they have (or are too short staffed - depending how you look at it).
This is down to the overall management IMO as despite the best efforts of the staff it still falls short, and has done for some time. I apologise if it seems I'm blaming the ones on this board, and I hope others realise too that although they often deliver a frustrating message, it's unlikely they are responsible for that policy or attitude.

I would agree with your statement for many companies but SI wouldn't be one of them.

Paul & Ov created CM, created SI, grown over the years, had spells away from the game but are both heavily involved in making FM (Paul codes the ME for instance) while Miles despite not being a coder shows a genuine passion for the game in interviews etc.

[Ackter]

A minor annoyance for more casual fans like me is that is very difficult to participate in the discussion with so many versions around. If you don´t have the latest iteration, it gets pretty confusing to discuss flaws since you don´t know if they are still present in the latest version.

Just think if for example FM05, FM08 and FM11 were the only FM-games around. Instead of small, incremental steps these three games would have been truly different and major sequels.

And also they'd be far, far more bugged on release than if they were incremental. Nothing a dev studio can do can replicate the sheer amount of bugs reproduced by the paying public. They do everything they can before release but you can't overlook the huge impact that having a bugs forum on here can have.

[Wiitastic]

isnt there a total redo (looks wise) every 4 releases ? when was the last time the look of it changed ? is it due for a redo (the look) ?

[stevvy]

I don't see any issue personally.

[Da-man]

This is a bona fide, money-making company (which helps if they want to have a paid staff). They need to produce a product at regular intervals or they will not make the money they need to stay solvent. They make the product and we as consumers decide whether or not to purchase it; if a lot of people purchase their product then the company will continue to produce more products, if not then... I sure most of you get the point. Simple supply and demand; they just don't have the capital to pay devs to support one version of the game for more than a specific period of time. (though I'd love if this was some kind of social service)

[cruyff14]

A minor annoyance for more casual fans like me is that is very difficult to participate in the discussion with so many versions around. If you don´t have the latest iteration, it gets pretty confusing to discuss flaws since you don´t know if they are still present in the latest version.

Just think if for example FM05, FM08 and FM11 were the only FM-games around. Instead of small, incremental steps these three games would have been truly different and major sequels.

I'd say that with it being difficult to participate in discussions is probably more to do with how the forums are set up not really a call to change how the game is released.

I do agree it can be confusing in the forums when they are talking about versions of the game but even then most topics are often started stating what version of the game it's about by putting it in the topic title.

[philly_flyer10]

Please, every game has bugs in it, if you think theres a game on the planet that is released bug free you're crazy. Its the nature of the games industry that these things happen, i have a friend who works for rockstar games and the pressure he is put under during the development process is insane.

Thats the whole point, by skipping a year you remove the pressure to get a game out in 9 months, they have double the time to get a game out in August. Then they will have 12 months to get the next game out instead of the 9 they usually have because 3 months are spent fixing the mess that is the current game.

[Bradley21]

Thats the whole point, by skipping a year you remove the pressure to get a game out in 9 months, they have double the time to get a game out in August. Then they will have 12 months to get the next game out instead of the 9 they usually have because 3 months are spent fixing the mess that is the current game.

See post #152.

[Lem]

I think there are many worse companies, but I still remember the violent conduct issues in 07, which it took only a matter of minutes to notice and should never have got through testing. For me something just isn't quite right and it feels very rushed.
They put the price up the year after that and the release date seemed to be getting later and later each year which seemed to confirm to me they were struggling. If they put a solid game together and relased it early september I'd be much more interested as it's so convenient to run as a background app while I get on with other things.

[Ackter]

It probably didn't get through Testing.

It might have got through Production, though.

[stinger061]

It's a flawed argument. Without a game every year SI wont make enough money to keep producing more games. Even with a 2 year release cycle there would still be bugs as a game of this depth is just to massive not to have it's problems regardless of how long they have to work on it. SI aren't perfect but they are one of the most involved developers in the community surrounding the game and do everything they can to solve issues people are having.

So many posters give off the vibe that they think SI is just trying to screw them over. Do you really think SI want to make a game with bugs in it? They do all they can to produce top class games every year and I for one believe they deliver. Every year there are minor bugs and I can say I've never come across an 'game breaking' issues people seem to claim. Even the biggest of bugs over the years have had ways of getting around them.

[Lem]

It probably didn't get through Testing.

It might have got through Production, though.

If it was found in testing then surely it would have been fixed before release? Unless the paying public are the testers. -shrugs-

[themadsheep2001]

If it was found in testing then surely it would have been fixed before release? Unless the paying public are the testers. -shrugs-

finding it and having time/being able to fix it are two different things

[pigfacemonkeyman]

finding it and having time/being able to fix it are two different things

Yes they are, but not an excuse.

[viiralx]

Stop QQuing.. you pay 30 punds every year to play the best football manager game there is.. and you whine about it? give me a break.

[themadsheep2001]

Yes they are, but not an excuse.

never said it was, but if they cant fix it in time, they cant fix in time. Pretty simple

[pigfacemonkeyman]

Stop QQuing.. you pay 30 punds every year to play the best football manager game there is.. and you whine about it? give me a break.

My pleasure, take it whenever you like.

[Quacky]

Its a business closely tied to (another business) of football that conveniently occurs annually and hence changes annually and leads to annual excitement over the new season which handily helps to drive sales of a game such as this.

It would be pretty daft of them not go along with this, they do after all have bills to pay and I'm sure if you worked out your price per hour of play (easy if you have steam version) you'll find its really cheap compared to almost any other mostly single player game and certainly other activities like getting drunk

[martin1988]

What makes you think SI will go bancrupt if they release versions say every two years with season packs in between? First, I suppose the sequels will sell better than they do now since they are bigger, better and properly tested. Second, many will buy the seasonal updates.

Also, many other companies don´t release new games every year and manage to survive. Would you expect Creative Assembly to release a new Total War game every year? We expect sequels to be a few years apart to take full advantage of proper development time, testing and better technology. Why should football management simulations be any exception?

If you want new season packs you would have to get rid of the editor, as someone would just update the transfers and release it for free, like people do right now. SI would make no money whatsoever.

[pigfacemonkeyman]

never said it was, but if they cant fix it in time, they cant fix in time. Pretty simple

There's that word 'Time' again, it is held up as an excuse, like it's OK to release a product, that is known to be faulty, because this is it's intended release date. It is only proof that the game isn't ready.

[Almondo]

I've just skimmed through the thread so forgive me if this has already been said but on the bugs issue a release every two years wouldn't get rid of the bugs at all. If you want evidence of this well the last version of Championship Manager had that 2 year gap and was the buggiest piece of crap I've ever had installed on a computer (and yes I'm including Fallout: New Vegas in that). The problem is that you can all whine and say that they can take the hit etc but Si have a contract with SEGA that says a new version of FM is to be released each year and that isn't going to change at all.

[themadsheep2001]

There's that word 'Time' again, it is held up as an excuse, like it's OK to release a product, that is known to be faulty, because this is it's intended release date. It is only proof that the game isn't ready.

It's hardly faulty, and where did i say it was an excuse? I simply made a statement. Either way sales go up, most people are happy (though i take this from the sales as opposed to anything else, so its a subjective standard), the game keeps improving and they aren't going to change in the near future. If you feel you are being "milked", don't buy it.

[Cougar2010]

There's that word 'Time' again, it is held up as an excuse, like it's OK to release a product, that is known to be faulty, because this is it's intended release date. It is only proof that the game isn't ready.

Christ we would all like to live in a perfect world but we don't.

All industries provide goods and services that aren't perfect, my car got recalled for a "bug" a couple of weeks ago and it got "patched". In the games industry if we waited for a "perfect" piece of software nothing would ever get released.

[themadsheep2001]

I've just skimmed through the thread so forgive me if this has already been said but on the bugs issue a release every two years wouldn't get rid of the bugs at all. If you want evidence of this well the last version of Championship Manager had that 2 year gap and was the buggiest piece of crap I've ever had installed on a computer (and yes I'm including Fallout: New Vegas in that). The problem is that you can all whine and say that they can take the hit etc but Si have a contract with SEGA that says a new version of FM is to be released each year and that isn't going to change at all.

That CM was dire, and thats putting it kindly. Buggier than a Mississippi swamp...

[pigfacemonkeyman]

It's hardly faulty, and where did i say it was an excuse? I simply made a statement. Either way sales go up, most people are happy, the game keeps improving and they aren't going to change in the near future. If you feel you are being "milked", don't buy it.

1 Released with bugs, faulty.
2 I didn't say, you said it was an excuse.
3 'Milked' was used in the OP, and I thought he over-egged it somewhat.
4 I didn't buy FM11, I didn't like certain features and decided against it.
I love most of FM10 and look forward to loving the next version I deem fit to buy. I will not refrain from posting my opinions about aspects of the game I think aren't good enough just to appease the sensibilities of people who may take offence on behalf of someone else!

[tom_numbers]

I know that a lot of this has already been said (I half-skimmed some of page 2), but there seems to be a common misconception prevailing...

If FM was released only every 2 or 3 years, they would add more new features. They would not spend 3 years putting in 800 new features and testing them to perfection, because it would just slow progress too much. Instead, you would suddenly have 2,400 new features unveiled on the unsuspecting users, none of which have been mass-tested, and they would undoubtedly confuse the users - it's like buying an entirely original game every time.

Plus, there would be no income during those two/three years of development (as already stated, free updates are available), while I sincerely doubt that the incremental release would have the necessary double/treble sales figures. Hence, you would need to reduce the number of people working on the game to cut costs. Plus, where do you stand with licencing? I'd imagine it's a damn sight harder to secure rights if you're only will to pay in occasional years?

[martvez]

Plus, there would be no income during those two/three years of development (as already stated, free updates are available), while I sincerely doubt that the incremental release would have the necessary double/treble sales figures. Hence, you would need to reduce the number of people working on the game to cut costs. Plus, where do you stand with licencing? I'd imagine it's a damn sight harder to secure rights if you're only will to pay in occasional years?

!!! Let's not forget that FM is very cheap game and i don't see how 30 - 60 bucks per year could be called milking. I have spent twice that amount for a night out.

[themadsheep2001]

1 Released with bugs, faulty.
2 I didn't say, you said it was an excuse.
3 'Milked' was used in the OP, and I thought he over-egged it somewhat.
4 I didn't buy FM11, I didn't like certain features and decided against it.
I love most of FM10 and look forward to loving the next version I deem fit to buy. I will not refrain from posting my opinions about aspects of the game I think aren't good enough just to appease the sensibilities of people who may take offence on behalf of someone else!

Who said anyone was taking offence, you can post your opinion, and i can post mine. Pretty much every game some form of bug, what matters is how bad they are. FM11 had its issues, but its better than previous incarnations, and a better standard than many games out there. As had been said before its questionable as to whether and extra year will make the bugs any less apparent, and in any case they are not going to change in the near future. We can always and will ask for improvements, but lets keep some perspective

[SCIAG]

isnt there a total redo (looks wise) every 4 releases ? when was the last time the look of it changed ? is it due for a redo (the look) ?

I'm not sure about that, but it got a big change for FM10.
If you look at the screenshots/videos for FM12, you'll see that it doesn't appear to be especially different to FM10 on the screens released so far.

[Danielos]

Looking at the feature list for FM12 it seems every even year is mostly about making small, evolutionary changes while the more major news come the odd years. So you get basically a new sequel every two years anyway...

[Keyzer Soze]

Looking at the feature list for FM12 it seems every even year is mostly about making small, evolutionary changes while the more major news come the odd years. So you get basically a new sequel every two years anyway...

How can you say that when only 5 new features, from 800, had been anounce?

[Danielos]

How can you say that when only 5 new features, from 800, had been anounce?

True, but wasn´t it the same with FM06, FM08 and FM10?

[milnerpoint]

i would say being able to add any nation at any time is a pretty major change considering the way the game has worked for the past 15 years.

[Bradley21]

The play anywhere feature is a massive revolution, to pass it off as a small addition is ridiculous.

[Keyzer Soze]

True, but wasn´t it the same with FM06, FM08 and FM10?

Actually, in FM2009 you got the introducing of 3D match engine! Odd year... and a pretty major feature! Dont you agree?

[Danielos]

Actually, in FM2009 you got the introducing of 3D match engine! Odd year... and a pretty major feature! Dont you agree?

That was exactly my point! Odd year = major new features, Even year = minor new features

[Keyzer Soze]

That was exactly my point! Odd year = major new features, Even year = minor new features

Right, bad example. I mix up my odd's and evens!

You know, sometimes the little features are the one that gives more fun to some people. I remember in FM2010 (even year) the feature about the nets moving with the ball (in FM2009 the nets look more like some wood boards), to me was such a joy to see, that i start viewing the games in 3D.

So, that feature... for me... it was a big feature. for you, and perhaps many people, its just a small feature. It's all very subjective. I dont think we should separate all the new feature in big and small. I believe that the whole that makes the evolution of the game. I find very narrow to considerer something like: FM2009-> 3D feature game, FM2010-> zzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzz, FM2011-> agents feature game, etc etc

in all those games, in every year... hundreds of new features were implemented, allowing that FM2010 is completely diferent then FM2009, FM2011 completely diferent from FM2010.

But thats my opinion, and for this reason i buy the game every year: i can find in every new edition reasons (features) to buy the game.
If you dont find... then buying the game every 2 years (or 3 years) its perhaps the better choice.

[r0x0r]

What is an expansion price, compared to a full game price?

I paid more for WoW: Cataclysm than I did for FM11. Or the same amount, worst ways. And that's an expansion pack.

The difference between how CM did it and FM does it is basically semantics. CM4 and CM03/04 cost the same price in a shop. The only difference was that CM2, 3 and 4, as opposed to the xx/yy's in between, had an all new look, and major behind the scenes overhauls. FM is now modular enough that this no longer needs to happen, a new look can be thrown out as a skin, and there's really no need to rip out the bulk of the engine and start again, as each individual module can be remade and thrown in as the years go by.

[The Welsh Lad]

I don't know if it has been said but after reading the first post I felt compeled to go straight to replying.

One word FIFA!!!!!!!!!!!

You pay the same price every year for what slightly better graphics and new player additions. Oh, and this year Rooneys new hair line

[Eugene Tyson]

To the OP - you can just wait and buy the game in February when a patch is realeased, if it bothers you that much.

I'd say to play the demo first and see if you enjoy the new features. If you don't, I'm sure there will be a database update by someone for FM11.


Certainly no reason for them to stop releasing the game every year.

I think you have the opinion that they make the new features the year before they are implemented into the game, and are rushed in.

I don't think that's the case. I reckon work started on the Agents after FM09, and still not in FM10 but released in FM11, for example.


I'm sure a lot of years, work, dedication, long hours, lost boy-/girlfriends, pastries, coffee, stress, screaming matches, love, hate, friendships and other things have all been involved in making the new feature.

And it's not done in 9 months, I'm sure other things have been made in 9 months by the FM crew. But certainly, I don't think any new features are added willy nilly.

[Only One Sean Dyche]

I would be dissappointed if SI stopped doing it every year. I think A game of football manager has for me about 9 months of playability before I start to need a new version. The new features although the game is quite similar still the new changes make enough difference for me to want to play it all over again. I think i'd have 2 years off playing fm if it was done in 3 year stints. All games do it, its not milking it, its refreshing it and making it exciting again.

[Wiggz]

OK, throwing my hat into the ring on this one as I created a similar thread last year.

I have no issue with annual games, if the improvements warrant it. The fact is, getting into bed with SEGA has meant a push to be more profitable and more frequent with releases regardless of performance increase.
It's a very modern and business-like approach but it's certainly not in keeping with the aesthetic that people back in the CM days fell in love with.

I have always maintained that releases of ANY software should be point/version release driven rather than deadline driven. Developers have been ignored more on this front and forced to deliver to a deadline rather than a qualitative approach.

In short, FM2012 - I won't be buying it, but might ask for it as a gift....the fact is the areas of improvement, whilst vast, are of such a granular level to not impact the majority of game players, which sadly, doesn't reflect the hardcore gamers anymore.

I just wish people were less greedy and focused on quick wins now (even though not in the past) and more focused on quality.

[Wiggz]

To the OP - you can just wait and buy the game in February when a patch is realeased, if it bothers you that much.

I'd say to play the demo first and see if you enjoy the new features. If you don't, I'm sure there will be a database update by someone for FM11.


Certainly no reason for them to stop releasing the game every year.

I think you have the opinion that they make the new features the year before they are implemented into the game, and are rushed in.

I don't think that's the case. I reckon work started on the Agents after FM09, and still not in FM10 but released in FM11, for example.


I'm sure a lot of years, work, dedication, long hours, lost boy-/girlfriends, pastries, coffee, stress, screaming matches, love, hate, friendships and other things have all been involved in making the new feature.

And it's not done in 9 months, I'm sure other things have been made in 9 months by the FM crew. But certainly, I don't think any new features are added willy nilly.

I agree with your sentiments but that only lends more credence to the OP's debate relating to annual greed. The fact is, if they sat and brainstormed improvements....and they weren't ready in time for "FM2010", then why, if the other improvements didn't merit it (which they might or might not - up for debate) did they not skip it and make sure they nailed it for FM2011?

There is only one answer to that....and unfortunately it's SEGA & Greed

[Eugene Tyson]

How do you know any of that to be true? That is just what you think.

The business model of any business is to make a profit.


I guarantee you that new features you see in the game are not done in 9 month periods, but rather worked on for several versions and implemented when ready.

[Eugene Tyson]

I agree with your sentiments but that only lends more credence to the OP's debate relating to annual greed. The fact is, if they sat and brainstormed improvements....and they weren't ready in time for "FM2010", then why, if the other improvements didn't merit it (which they might or might not - up for debate) did they not skip it and make sure they nailed it for FM2011?

There is only one answer to that....and unfortunately it's SEGA & Greed

Because they thought they nailed it for the version they released it in. Or at least brought it as far as they could. And without user feedback they would just be guessing on ways to improve it.

I don't agree with this "Sega & Greed" I think that's a load of nonsense.

Sega have far many more games and the profits from FM are probably only a very small fraction of what they make globally.

[milnerpoint]

I have no issue with annual games, if the improvements warrant it. The fact is, getting into bed with SEGA has meant a push to be more profitable and more frequent with releases regardless of performance increase.
It's a very modern and business-like approach but it's certainly not in keeping with the aesthetic that people back in the CM days fell in love with.

People fell in love with the game surely. not the strategy used when deciding when to release the game?

[Wiggz]

Because they thought they nailed it for the version they released it in. Or at least brought it as far as they could. And without user feedback they would just be guessing on ways to improve it.

I don't agree with this "Sega & Greed" I think that's a load of nonsense.

Sega have far many more games and the profits from FM are probably only a very small fraction of what they make globally.

As far as they could.....in the time they were given?. Whether SEGA are being greedy or not is moot for that particular debate.....the fact remains they are releasing to a deadline rather than a qualitative based deadline instead. The problem is they are not alone and in order to compete in the market they have to release similarly....when in Rome, and all that eh? I'm not blaming them entirely...but somebody needs to take a stand, and I can't see them doing it with cash being flashed in front of their faces.

People fell in love with the game surely. not the strategy used when deciding when to release the game?

Absolutely...the game was made for fans by fans effectively. When new big updates were wheeled out, I, and many like me, stood there in awe of the new features. As I've said on numerous threads...there comes a time when you can't do much with a product you've continuously tweaked for years, apart from a bit of window dressing and a bit of bug tracking. So do tell me why releases are still coming in the same timeframe as they were when FM was first released even though the increase in performance/quality has a downwards trend year on year (not overall obviously). As stated above..I don't blame them as they need to compete...doesn't mean I like it.

To support my argument (or at least one side of it) - TV Show cancellations show that improvement, story and quality reach a plateau which is directly comparable to the gaming industry. (see Duke Nukem Forever for an example) - the issue is the gaming industry has a slightly skewed trend of purchasing in the market...one day it will pop.

[Ackter]

Sega don't pull SI's strings, the most they can do is nudge them a bit. You'll be surprised to hear this, but Sega does things SI's way, not vice versa. They know how important SI are to them.

[milnerpoint]

The game is still made by the fans, for the fans, the feedback on these forums go a long way towards the development of the next game, they pay close attention to what is said on here and the devs get involved in debates about their features, there isnt another game out there i know of with as much direct interaction with the game dev's, i could be wrong on that but someone would have to point it out to me.
At least SI's updates are free, i worked out last night, in order for me to play COD black opps to its fullest, it has cost me over £100 after buying the game and the 4 updates i have had to pay for, thankfully SI dont go down this path.
I wouldnt say in anyway the quality of FM has gone downhill in recent years, completely the opposite, the product for me has gotten better each year, which brings us to the age old arugment, who is correct? You say they should re-think their releasing strategy, someone like myself see's no issue at all with yearly releases and have had no problem with any version of the game released, which one of us is wrong?

[RossWallace25]

I like a new game every year. Something to look forward to as the new season comes around.

[CaptainPlanet]

Apart from via testing I've seen very little that's indicated that forum feedback is a large contributor towards FM progression.

[rancer890]

I love how this argument keeps popping up every year. FM will be released every year till the day Sega goes bankrupt or the world blows up, whichever comes first. I'm not going to bother reading 3 pages because it's the same arguments every year.

1) CM didn't stop making the game one year because the game sucked (well that's part of the reason), it was lack of sales. Now why would SI risk losing an entire year of sales and future customers to their competitor in FIFA Manager?

2) Every single sports video game on earth has annual releases, and they're ALL a little more polish and a roster update. If you don't like how FM is released every year, don't buy a single sports video game.

3) It's not greed, it's the fact that Sega need money to survive, SI need money to survive. Sega and SI need money to be able to produce more games. Sega and SI need the money to pay employees. Miles and Co. need the money to feed their families.

4) Yes, FM has a deadline. In a matter of fact, we've have to deal with deadlines since we started school. Unfortunately we have to rush things sometimes to meet deadlines, whether at school, at work. We aren't perfect, so expecting us to make something that is perfect is absurd. Sorry, FM won't be bug-free.

5) SI do care. They will help you if you ask. They're honest about some bugs not fixed after the 3rd patch. They will fix your saves if it's fixable. EA don't care about you. They only care about your money. They will ban you online for saying truthful things about their company. They don't care about cheaters, as long as they make their money, you can do whatever the feck you want. They delete threads on forums that criticize EA.

6) SI has 60 something employees. Tens of millions buy the game. Of course not all bugs are going to be found out. It'll take 20 years to test out 10 million different partitions. Yes, they didn't fix the minimum release clause bug in Spain and Brazil, but it's not the end of the world. Yes, you might not be able to get that 18 year old youngster from Spain on cheap, but you're going to have to deal with it whether you like it or not.

7) SI don't release new features till they have tested it and it's ready to be in the next game. Things like board confidence, 3D match view, DLR, and 'Manage Anywhere, Anytime' took a few years to develop. But yes there will be bugs in the first year that feature is released.

In short, if you don't want to buy it every year, don't. It's not like you're forced to.

[Eugene Tyson]

As far as they could.....in the time they were given?. Whether SEGA are being greedy or not is moot for that particular debate.....the fact remains they are releasing to a deadline rather than a qualitative based deadline instead. The problem is they are not alone and in order to compete in the market they have to release similarly....when in Rome, and all that eh? I'm not blaming them entirely...but somebody needs to take a stand, and I can't see them doing it with cash being flashed in front of their faces.

You're confusing coroporate greed with them delivering something the fans want on time.

If you hate the game that much then don't buy it. If they have a drop in sales they'll have to figure out why and fix it.

Best you can do is boycott it, and hope others follow suit.

[themadsheep2001]

I love how this argument keeps popping up every year. FM will be released every year till the day Sega goes bankrupt or the world blows up, whichever comes first. I'm not going to bother reading 3 pages because it's the same arguments every year.

1) CM didn't stop making the game one year because the game sucked (well that's part of the reason), it was lack of sales. Now why would SI risk losing an entire year of sales and future customers to their competitor in FIFA Manager?

2) Every single sports video game on earth has annual releases, and they're ALL a little more polish and a roster update. If you don't like how FM is released every year, don't buy a single sports video game.

3) It's not greed, it's the fact that Sega need money to survive, SI need money to survive. Sega and SI need money to be able to produce more games. Sega and SI need the money to pay employees. Miles and Co. need the money to feed their families.

4) Yes, FM has a deadline. In a matter of fact, we've have to deal with deadlines since we started school. Unfortunately we have to rush things sometimes to meet deadlines, whether at school, at work. We aren't perfect, so expecting us to make something that is perfect is absurd. Sorry, FM won't be bug-free.

5) SI do care. They will help you if you ask. They're honest about some bugs not fixed after the 3rd patch. They will fix your saves if it's fixable. EA don't care about you. They only care about your money. They will ban you online for saying truthful things about their company. They don't care about cheaters, as long as they make their money, you can do whatever the feck you want. They delete threads on forums that criticize EA.

6) SI has 60 something employees. Tens of millions buy the game. Of course not all bugs are going to be found out. It'll take 20 years to test out 10 million different partitions. Yes, they didn't fix the minimum release clause bug in Spain and Brazil, but it's not the end of the world. Yes, you might not be able to get that 18 year old youngster from Spain on cheap, but you're going to have to deal with it whether you like it or not.

7) SI don't release new features till they have tested it and it's ready to be in the next game. Things like board confidence, 3D match view, DLR, and 'Manage Anywhere, Anytime' took a few years to develop. But yes there will be bugs in the first year that feature is released.

In short, if you don't want to buy it every year, don't. It's not like you're forced to.

Pretty much love this post,

[kingjericho]

The differences that SI make every year between the games are little, bearing in mind we are paying for a full game. The expansion pack system would be a good choice IMO.

[CaptainPlanet]

Established franchises can release turd for years on end and the general gaming public will still buy it and give it rave reviews, only a tiny percentage want the bar raised, the rest are sheep who would play farmville if it had a football.

[milnerpoint]

is it nice up there on your pedestal?

[wally13]

The differences that SI make every year between the games are little, bearing in mind we are paying for a full game. The expansion pack system would be a good choice IMO.

Not really how the gaming industry works though is it, if it were there be boatloads of big games that we could add to list, C.O.D, FIFA, as these games barely change from year to year

[CaptainPlanet]

is it nice up there on your pedestal?

Yes. Is it nice under your bridge?

[themadsheep2001]

The differences that SI make every year between the games are little, bearing in mind we are paying for a full game. The expansion pack system would be a good choice IMO.

Thats not particularly true either, look how much work goes into the ME time for just one example (follow the changelist on the ME feedback)

You say expansion pack, what exactly would you want people to pay for?

[shirajzl]

Established franchises can release turd for years on end and the general gaming public will still buy it and give it rave reviews, only a tiny percentage want the bar raised, the rest are sheep who would play farmville if it had a football.

That's spot on. It's not just about SI, which people are so touchy about. You get loads of games that people blindly pay their hard earned money for, even though those games are not worth it. Moreover, people pay 10-15 pounds/dollars for simple expansions, even add-ons. Total War series chuck in a few new units, Call of Duty releases a few more maps etc.

[themadsheep2001]

That's spot on. It's not just about SI, which people are so touchy about. You get loads of games that people blindly pay their hard earned money for, even though those games are not worth it. Moreover, people pay 10-15 pounds/dollars for simple expansions, even add-ons. Total War series chuck in a few new units, Call of Duty releases a few more maps etc.

No, according you they are not worth it. They may feel it is worth it. That is where customer choice comes in.

[Brian Shanahan]

And Civ 4? I've never played a more bugged game on release. Half the people using that game before the patch just had a black screen with characters running around on top of it.

Still heavily bugged even now, for example I found the other day that there is a way to get all remaining techs from either Oracle or Liberalism, just by clicking right mouse and left mouse together when choosing the free tech. Accessing the Civilopedia as you choose the tech bugs you back into tech choice straight after. You can do this as much as you want. This bug has been unfixed since day one, and is pretty much gamebreaking if used.

Also there is the well known culture production bug. Set city to producing culture and queue something up behind it the turn the culture borders are due to expand and you get the hammers of the culture counted twice (with settlers and workers counting double). And here is a worse bug based off it.

Or how about the cheese culture win. Turn off espionage, get writing tech, turn on the espionage slider, cottage everything you don't need to feed your 3 legendaries. Post a sub-1000a.d. win in the HOF over at CFC. This one works on the fact that the espionage slider is not removed when espionage is, it is just recoded to give culture. No AI is even remotely capable of realising this and doesn't act accordingly.

They would recoup that selling more copies of the game(and the update) instead of losing customers. Like many people have said they skip years or don't buy anymore. It's actually quite good marketing.

Lem hate to break it to you but FM10 and 09 were the two top selling games on any platform last year in the UK. And I believe that worldwide FM11 was the top selling PC game (but I'm not sure on this one). By February this year FM11 sold nearly 800,000 copies worldwide, a pretty impressive figure for what is effectively a niche game.

[Wiggz]

You're confusing coroporate greed with them delivering something the fans want on time.

If you hate the game that much then don't buy it. If they have a drop in sales they'll have to figure out why and fix it.

Best you can do is boycott it, and hope others follow suit.

Firstly, the whole point of me replying to this thread was to show that "I don't hate the game" at all. I LOVE the game and want to see it thrive. I also want to see lasting, and creative improvements which warrant the price tag annually. If they are not there however, I don't see how this justifies the expenditure for fans, using simple logic.

I know it will sell, and sell well, regardless of improvements. Fans miss years and then come back, others are after that one little change that's been made and that one off payment each year isn't a bank breaker. It's the integrity of the game I worry about.

When I was playing CM back in the day and we got games like CM Italia, and CM Deutsche etc....seeing those nice new boxes with COMPLETELY different leagues was just beautiful. We're beyond those simple times now though...the game has evolved, and for the better in my opinion. But even evolution needs time to take stock and have a rethink before something radical happens.

Look, the fact is we all love the game (either in it's former guises of current) and we all want it sustained...I just want to see a little more thought into the future of the game rather than year to year (and yes, I know that the ideas the devs have stretch beyond the 12 month cycle!)

Hope you understand where I'm coming from!

[Eugene Tyson]

Warrant the price tag of about €30 a year? Hardly bank breaking?

What improvements that were added do you think don't warrant the "price tag"?

Why are you concerned about the integrity of the game? What's wrong with it as it is? Again, if you don't like the new features for FM12 then don't buy it. I think there are updated databases floating about.

Do you think evolution ever stops? Evolution never takes time to take stock and have a rethink. That point you made about evolution makes no sense.


Do you not think they are putting thought into the game? Do you think that the new features that are introduced were only started working on 12 months ago? I would not say so. I'd say a lot of features we see in FM12 will have started work 24 or even 36 months ago.

Do you think the programmers just wander into work and go "ok what will add to the game today?"


Did you know that there are over 800 improvements to Football Manager 2012?

Let me ask you this, with so many improvements to the game, do you think it's right to hold off for 24 months to release the game every 2 years? Because by that rate they'd have 1600 improvements, possibly more.

With all the new improvements there are nuances that cause some bugs within the game. And the FM team work tirelessly throughout the FM12 year to fix these bugs that have crept up in the 800+ improvements and to fix them. Not only that. But they are then working on another 800+ improvements for the game.


Do you really think it's worth waiting 2 years for new improvements?


For the €30 or €40 whatever it is. You get 800+ improvements, plus a team from SI working over the next 12 months to polish off the updates, fix bugs etc.

[kccircle]

Is amazed at how much people value £25

Probably spent more than most on FM over the years with an annual purchase since CM2 (including FML from start to finish) and struggle to find ANYTHING that offers anywhere near this value for money out any of my purchases over a similar time frame

Would even pay a similar amount each year for a date upgrade

[Eugene Tyson]

I used to buy games for the PS3 and I'd finish them in a week, never to pick them up again. At twice the price of FM.

I think I play FM at least 3 or 4 times a week - for at least 4 or 5 hours lol. It's great value for money.

[Wiggz]

Warrant the price tag of about €30 a year? Hardly bank breaking?

What improvements that were added do you think don't warrant the "price tag"?

Most to be fair, if I'm assuming the price tag will be the same as FM2011

Why are you concerned about the integrity of the game? What's wrong with it as it is? Again, if you don't like the new features for FM12 then don't buy it. I think there are updated databases floating about.

I won't buy it, but I'd be happy to receive as a git from somebody. Like I say, I love the game, just don't like the annual release method

Do you think evolution ever stops? Evolution never takes time to take stock and have a rethink. That point you made about evolution makes no sense.

You're right, it didn't make any sense...will teach me to try and interpret my thoughts that early in the morning. What I meant, simply, was that in order for us (the game in this analogy) to evolve, we must take note of all the areas that need changing, and put them into action. These aren't overnight changes however. Now porting that to the game-world, I don't see a need to release a game if a big change or improvement that SI have worked on, hasn't hit a deadline. Wait for it and release it in all it's glory.


Do you not think they are putting thought into the game? Do you think that the new features that are introduced were only started working on 12 months ago? I would not say so. I'd say a lot of features we see in FM12 will have started work 24 or even 36 months ago.

Do you think the programmers just wander into work and go "ok what will add to the game today?"

I absolutely don't think that, but if they are sitting on a world beating improvement, or a slight change that would be a game changer, then my own view, and yes it's utopian, is that these should merit a pause in the release schedule in order to imbue the game with the additional quality rather than drip feeding


Did you know that there are over 800 improvements to Football Manager 2012?

Some of what you call improvements, I call bug fixes and slight tweaks

Let me ask you this, with so many improvements to the game, do you think it's right to hold off for 24 months to release the game every 2 years? Because by that rate they'd have 1600 improvements, possibly more.

With all the new improvements there are nuances that cause some bugs within the game. And the FM team work tirelessly throughout the FM12 year to fix these bugs that have crept up in the 800+ improvements and to fix them. Not only that. But they are then working on another 800+ improvements for the game.


Do you really think it's worth waiting 2 years for new improvements?


For the €30 or €40 whatever it is. You get 800+ improvements, plus a team from SI working over the next 12 months to polish off the updates, fix bugs etc.

I'll say it again. I understand the business model is structured in such a way that annual releases pay for employees, continue development, align with publisher strategy, and all of the above, and I don't blame them. I just wish it was different. Perhaps what I'm really wishing for is Opensource type development, but I know that there are heavy prices to pay for that so I don't particularly think it would work (and yes it certainly wouldn't from a Business perspective.)

It's not a narrrow minded view, or a naive one, it's a Utopian one...which, as many will say, isn't perhaps realistic.

I concede however that £30 isn't a lot to pay each year.....but that's a standalone expenditure. I'm not making a standalone argument.

[Wiggz]

I can see that my argument isn't going to be strengthened by my constant dilution of it on this thread so I'll leave it there.

Suffice to say that £30quid isn't a bad price for FM. Annual releases aren't always a bad thing. Improvements are always welcome, and last but absolutely not least, SI do a great job of developing the product.

The caveats to the above are, respectively, depending on the product, if they are warranted, if the are indeed improvements, and if they keep their core market at heart.

That is all.

[milnerpoint]

I used to buy games for the PS3 and I'd finish them in a week, never to pick them up again. At twice the price of FM.

I think I play FM at least 3 or 4 times a week - for at least 4 or 5 hours lol. It's great value for money.

I bought the newest F.E.A.R game a few weeks ago for the best part of £40, its already completed and i prob wont ever touch it again, so £30 for a game i have played constantly for the best part of a year now i would say is good value.

[Eugene Tyson]

Actually what really got me was this idea of some sort of "greed" by Sega or SI, and it's not the first time I've seen postings like that, and it just irks me.

For one thing, they have improved contract negotiations, by allowing lockable areas. That is an improvement over last years model that was frustrating to use. The agent will go back and look for other ways to get that cash, or they might accept it as is. There was no bug in the Contract Negotiations, per se, it was just awkward. And they improved it.

I don't for one moment believe it was as simple as adding a "lock" icon beside the contract negotiation.

And that goes for the other 799+ improvements.

[pigfacemonkeyman]

Actually what really got me was this idea of some sort of "greed" by Sega or SI, and it's not the first time I've seen postings like that, and it just irks me.
For one thing, they have improved contract negotiations, by allowing lockable areas. That is an improvement over last years model that was frustrating to use. The agent will go back and look for other ways to get that cash, or they might accept it as is. There was no bug in the Contract Negotiations, per se, it was just awkward. And they improved it.

I don't for one moment believe it was as simple as adding a "lock" icon beside the contract negotiation.

And that goes for the other 799+ improvements.

Why?

xxxxxx

[Wiggz]

Actually what really got me was this idea of some sort of "greed" by Sega or SI, and it's not the first time I've seen postings like that, and it just irks me.

<snip>

I can see how it would. I stand by what I say though. Some call it greed whereas others would call it "a sustainable business model". To me it's one and the same. Again, let me reiterate, I don't blame them for it as to live and make cash in the business society we have today, you have to dine with the devil....I simply don't like it.

And as for the remarks relating to the improvements. How many honestly are improvements, i.e. make the original concept better, and how many are fixes for badly implemented concepts in the first place? This again could well be attributed to development deadlines.

(yes, I know a bit about development deadlines myself)

[Eugene Tyson]

Well I don't know if this appeases you or not, but FM12 will have twice as many fixes/updates that FM11 had.

I see this as a massive change.

As I say they could make updates for FM13 (which lets say would be 800 again) then release those into FM14 (lets say another 800) so now they have 1600 fixes/updates and who knows what havoc that could play. I'm sure they are up the walls already making patches for FM to fix bugs that crept in during production.

It doesn't make sense to double the workload on fixing bugs and potentially messing up a lot of things on 2 year releases.


I feel they need a yearly release.

[krisco1978]

Things you can do If you can't afford £30 a year

A. Don't buy the game
B. Get a better job
C. (if your too young to work) Get your parents to get a better jobs

[Wiggz]

Well I don't know if this appeases you or not, but FM12 will have twice as many fixes/updates that FM11 had.

I see this as a massive change.

As I say they could make updates for FM13 (which lets say would be 800 again) then release those into FM14 (lets say another 800) so now they have 1600 fixes/updates and who knows what havoc that could play. I'm sure they are up the walls already making patches for FM to fix bugs that crept in during production.

It doesn't make sense to double the workload on fixing bugs and potentially messing up a lot of things on 2 year releases.


I feel they need a yearly release.

I can see your point.....time based releases are sometimes a good idea for this very reason. However as any project manager will tell you, you have a triangle of development in projects. You can set out with it fairly rigid in terms of the Timeline, Cost and Quality of the project. if you really want to push the boat out and provide quality exceeding original concept, you have to either give way on your budget or your timeline.

I'd like to think that the timeline given to FM releases was based on the need to heavily control and thoroughly test the additions in FM....I'm not entirely sold on that though due to the already mentioned thriving development that goes on in the background in terms of updates for releases not even announced yet.

[Berbatov9]

To be completely honest each new version adds a lot of new nice features that make the game more immersive because the developers have real passion for football.

So a new version every year for me is deal.

Ge lost please.

[Dave80]

After reading through 1 and a half out of 3 pages I decided I had to post.

Firstly, and most importantly - the OP's original point, and topic title, is farcical at the very least. How can you say a game that costs £25 flat rate - providing hundreds of hours of gameplay at such a low cost in comparison to other games on the market - is somehow "milking" consumers? Absolutely ludicrous.
Take COD for example, you want milking, what do you call £50 for the game and then £10 for map updates every few months - that's milking.

Secondly, as a lot of people have said, this topic comes up every so often - and the fact that you are having to now obviously shows that it interests a very small minority of the community. It wouldn't be viable to release a game every few years and be able to afford to make the dramatic changes that you clearly envisage. Like the announcement had mentioned in the post about FM12, there have been over 800 changes made since FM11 no matter how big, or small. Fact is - the vast majority are happy, and trying to stir up a fuss over a non-issue is just pointless.

As someone said on the first page, if you'd rather have a gap between the games, don't buy FM12, get the transfer update for FM11 then buy FM13 when it comes out. As for me, I've already pre-ordered my copy of FM12, as have many others.

[pigfacemonkeyman]

After reading through 1 and a half out of 3 pages I decided I had to post.

Firstly, and most importantly - the OP's original point, and topic title, is farcical at the very least. How can you say a game that costs £25 flat rate - providing hundreds of hours of gameplay at such a low cost in comparison to other games on the market - is somehow "milking" consumers? Absolutely ludicrous.
Take COD for example, you want milking, what do you call £50 for the game and then £10 for map updates every few months - that's milking.

Secondly, as a lot of people have said, this topic comes up every so often - and the fact that you are having to now obviously shows that it interests a very small minority of the community. It wouldn't be viable to release a game every few years and be able to afford to make the dramatic changes that you clearly envisage. Like the announcement had mentioned in the post about FM12, there have been over 800 changes made since FM11 no matter how big, or small. Fact is - the vast majority are happy, and trying to stir up a fuss over a non-issue is just pointless.

As someone said on the first page, if you'd rather have a gap between the games, don't buy FM12, get the transfer update for FM11 then buy FM13 when it comes out. As for me, I've already pre-ordered my copy of FM12, as have many others.

And I thank you all for the testing you will do that enables me to maybe purchase it after the final patch.

[mutmekep]

First of all i agree that you don't have to buy the game year after year , from the last games i only own 2007 and 2010 and i don't plan to buy the next instalment either.

I don't want to upset the dedicated players and i do understand their feelings since i am a purist in the genres i prefer but the direction development has taken made the game far less fun and from what i read about the latest game for many people it isn't fun at all .
Keeping the game in simulation level makes it uninteresting for casual gamers , i am not talking about instant success but being the better team and not winning sucks and no it isn't acceptable to happen even a single time because it defeats the purpose of gaming , you are worst you lose you are better you win or teams are equal so you have a draw , anything else outside this line is frustrating .
I can go in specific issues but it will make the post too long , in general it is a slow complicated game where you can fail for no obvious reason ; i am also playing Aurora a deep , complicated , spreadsheet 4X game where failure is the norm but SI should know that this kind of games will never make it to the big market because people do not have the time or the will to invest in specially when the game throws you into a chaos of information .
I guess there is a choice to be done: fans or casuals , although i am a casual in FM i 'd say go for the fans cause there is no way you can satisfy both.

[Dave80]

First of all i agree that you don't have to buy the game year after year , from the last games i only own 2007 and 2010 and i don't plan to buy the next instalment either.

I don't want to upset the dedicated players and i do understand their feelings since i am a purist in the genres i prefer but the direction development has taken made the game far less fun and from what i read about the latest game for many people it isn't fun at all .
Keeping the game in simulation level makes it uninteresting for casual gamers , i am not talking about instant success but being the better team and not winning sucks and no it isn't acceptable to happen even a single time because it defeats the purpose of gaming , you are worst you lose you are better you win or teams are equal so you have a draw , anything else outside this line is frustrating .
I can go in specific issues but it will make the post too long , in general it is a slow complicated game where you can fail for no obvious reason ; i am also playing Aurora a deep , complicated , spreadsheet 4X game where failure is the norm but SI should know that this kind of games will never make it to the big market because people do not have the time or the will to invest in specially when the game throws you into a chaos of information .
I guess there is a choice to be done: fans or casuals , although i am a casual in FM i 'd say go for the fans cause there is no way you can satisfy both.

I can't agree, even casual gamers are used to losing every once in a while, and quite frankly making the game 'fast and easy' would simply ruin all that SI has built up over the years. Football is unpredictable, which is why I love it, and I wouldn't change it for the world.

[GR Choke]

SI/Sega would make more money each year buy selling a new FM each year?

[milnerpoint]

I don't want to upset the dedicated players and i do understand their feelings since i am a purist in the genres i prefer but the direction development has taken made the game far less fun and from what i read about the latest game for many people it isn't fun at all .
Keeping the game in simulation level makes it uninteresting for casual gamers , i am not talking about instant success but being the better team and not winning sucks and no it isn't acceptable to happen even a single time because it defeats the purpose of gaming , you are worst you lose you are better you win or teams are equal so you have a draw , anything else outside this line is frustrating .
I can go in specific issues but it will make the post too long , in general it is a slow complicated game where you can fail for no obvious reason ; i am also playing Aurora a deep , complicated , spreadsheet 4X game where failure is the norm but SI should know that this kind of games will never make it to the big market because people do not have the time or the will to invest in specially when the game throws you into a chaos of information .
I guess there is a choice to be done: fans or casuals , although i am a casual in FM i 'd say go for the fans cause there is no way you can satisfy both.

I think almost everything you have described there is exactly why i love FM
If it changed to suit any of that i would be off.

[mutmekep]

I can't agree, even casual gamers are used to losing every once in a while, and quite frankly making the game 'fast and easy' would simply ruin all that SI has built up over the years. Football is unpredictable, which is why I love it, and I wouldn't change it for the world.

It isn't about losing it is that victory is not guaranteed every time i am the best team and in any case fast and easy is the way of the future , as i posted i generally support developers making games for their fun base and not for the general crowd but it will be manly enough to put a sticker on the box saying casual gamers don't bother.

For as long as there is any chance not to win games like this at least 5-0 (i am the red team) i won't buy.

[Cougar2010]

It isn't about losing it is that victory is not guaranteed every time i am the best team and in any case fast and easy is the way of the future , as i posted i generally support developers making games for their fun base and not for the general crowd but it will be manly enough to put a sticker on the box saying casual gamers don't bother.

For as long as there is any chance not to win games like this at least 5-0 (i am the red team) i won't buy.

Your having a laugh right?

You expected to win that game 5-0?? There are games like that happen in every league in the world every week and yet you want a piece of software were you are guaranteed a win producing those stats. If FM worked liked that it would be rubbish!

The match in question went one of two ways:

A) Chelsea scored first then sat back defending their lead playing on the counter, you equalised and probably finished the match stronger but couldn't get a winner or
B) You scored first couldn't find a second to close the match out and Chelsea nicked a goal.

[shirajzl]

Your having a laugh right?

You expected to win that game 5-0?? There are games like that happen in every league in the world every week and yet you want a piece of software were you are guaranteed a win producing those stats. If FM worked liked that it would be rubbish!

The match in question went one of two ways:

A) Chelsea scored first then sat back defending their lead playing on the counter, you equalised and probably finished the match stronger but couldn't get a winner or
B) You scored first couldn't find a second to close the match out and Chelsea nicked a goal.

Your point is clear, but he has a point, too. FM is not for casual gamers anymore. It's not easy to pick it up, play for an hour or two and be successful while focusing solely on picking a team and a tactic. I'm not saying there's something wrong with FM being complex and aiming for reality, but the point is it's not as easy-going as it used to be (like those games 5+ years ago).

[Cougar2010]

Your point is clear, but he has a point, too. FM is not for casual gamers anymore. It's not easy to pick it up, play for an hour or two and be successful while focusing solely on picking a team and a tactic. I'm not saying there's something wrong with FM being complex and aiming for reality, but the point is it's not as easy-going as it used to be (like those games 5+ years ago).

I don't think anyone is really denying that tbh.

SI made a choice years ago that they wanted to go in the simulation direction rather than arcade. No doubt some fans will be/are happy with this direction while others aren't, you can't please everyone.

If you are a casual user and you don't want to/can't put the time in on FM then there is nothing wrong with that. It doesn't make FM a bad game its just not for you.

[kingken]

i can only get to play the game for a few hours each day, and im only in 2016-2017 season and i buy the new version every year and think its worth it, although if fm 12 starts crashing like fm 11 did for me for months on end il be rethinking buying it every year.

[Eugene Tyson]

The game crashing constantly is not the makers of FM fault. It's your computer. Get your computer sorted out.

[Brian Shanahan]

It isn't about losing it is that victory is not guaranteed every time i am the best team and in any case fast and easy is the way of the future , as i posted i generally support developers making games for their fun base and not for the general crowd but it will be manly enough to put a sticker on the box saying casual gamers don't bother.

For as long as there is any chance not to win games like this at least 5-0 (i am the red team) i won't buy.

So basically what you want is an auto-win button? I'd suggest pretty much stop playing any game that ever comes out, except maybe CM2010.

Oh, and for those of you who are decrying the fact that FM does not pander to the "casual" market, look at what's happened with the release of Civ 5. They dumbed down that game a lot for the casuals and apart from a few players who either can't see the faults or who are interested in seeing how far they can break the game they've lost the majority of their established fanbase and gained a few short-term sales (if even that) from casuals who'll play it once and then get rid of it. Signs are beyond that they've decided to go with the "crappy game on facebook, imitating farmville" route, that all creatively bankrupt studios go with.

[shirajzl]

So basically what you want is an auto-win button? I'd suggest pretty much stop playing any game that ever comes out, except maybe CM2010.

Oh, and for those of you who are decrying the fact that FM does not pander to the "casual" market, look at what's happened with the release of Civ 5. They dumbed down that game a lot for the casuals and apart from a few players who either can't see the faults or who are interested in seeing how far they can break the game they've lost the majority of their established fanbase and gained a few short-term sales (if even that) from casuals who'll play it once and then get rid of it. Signs are beyond that they've decided to go with the "crappy game on facebook, imitating farmville" route, that all creatively bankrupt studios go with.

Comparing football game with a strategy game is misguided. Football is widely popular, there are millions of people who watch it casually and would probably like to play the game that way, but can't. There are far less people who casually enjoy strategy games. The appeal of FM is that you can simulate reality in a way...Very few other genres can do that.

[Eugene Tyson]

It's just a game like any other game. I'm not that into playing WOW, but I know others who are and spend a fortune on it playing online.

It's just a game. It costs a measly £25 a year. Get over it.

[Eugene Tyson]

I wish FIFA and PES would stop milking their product. And I sure do hope that Apple stop bringing out a new device every 12 months!!! Grrr gets on my nerves makes me so angry !

As if FM is breaking the bank for anyone?

[shirajzl]

The discussion has gone astray a little bit, but the point is SI can sell a new version every year and they will do it as long as they can. It's business. These kinds of threads appear every year because people take FM far too seriously and hope the company would lay low for a few years just so they can make a perfect game for their fans. That's deluded.

[Brian Shanahan]

Comparing football game with a strategy game is misguided. Football is widely popular, there are millions of people who watch it casually and would probably like to play the game that way, but can't. There are far less people who casually enjoy strategy games. The appeal of FM is that you can simulate reality in a way...Very few other genres can do that.

I'm sorry, but why are you making such a stupid arguement? Millions of people play strategy games, even up to the point where Starcraft (11 million sales for the original) is a professional comeditive activity in Korea. And if you look at the sales of Civs 3 and 4 they sold 3 million for 4 and 2 for 3. These numbers are doing very well compared to Football Manager. You cannot say that strategy games are niche products unless you ignore the facts.

But then again comparing two different styles of games, I was showing an example of a franchise noted for developing indepth complex games which don't pander to the bottom of the market going for that same bottom of the market and getting badly burnt by it. While Civ 5 did very strong, sales tailed off very quickly because a) the game was badly designed, b) the game was badly broken, c) the developers instead of trying to fix the game, used the patches to nerf successful strategies, d) it demanded top of the line (or better) computers to run, despite being visually a lot worse than it's predecessor, which came out with a FM like strategy of being playable on out-of-date rigs. My arguement was that when you ignore your current customers in the hope of gaining new ones, you'll a) lose your current base, and b) you'll probably not pick up new ones (who's going to buy a game based on the premise "we've dumbed it down for you!")

[george04]

From SI's perspective.... this is one of the most stupid ideas ever. The amount of money generated from releasing a new game every year is huge.

From a consumers view point .... compared to console games, FM is exceptionally cheap. Plus it is always nice to have a new game and Si always add new features.

[MSCCG]

I reckon the way to go in the future is a new released game every few years, with paid-for addons between releases that you can buy with special "FM bucks" that you have to pay real money for. With FM bucks you can pay for updates to specific leagues, or every single league for a special price, pay for new widgets in the match engine, and new options in player negotiations. Imagine how much money they'll earn.

Actually, that's what FMO should have been.

[Ackter]

You'll earn very little - the SI fan base wouldn't stand for that.