Are we all looking for realism?

I'm an occasional poster, avid reader in this forum. After scanning a few post in the week I often find myself wondering what in general people are looking for to make them satisfied with the game? I've come to the conclusion that most don't know what they want, most I find equally like basking in the glory of a 11-0 victory with 42 shots, as much as they like to complain about their injury crisis. To me personally, too much realism sucks, that's not necessarily because being more realistic would make it more difficult, but it would most certainly make it more predictable, less fun. Anyhow what is realistic? who knows until the next big thing happens IRL. Surely the whole point of spending hours playing a football management sim is in the hope that in your reality you can change the current order of merit and somehow make the footballing world more to your preference, or at least to make your mark in the footballing world. Personally I'm not a fantasist, although I appreciate the edited universes some have created, I do like some sort of semblance, but again this goes to show that one persons junk is another's treasure, therefore SI I expect have the impossible job of trying to please the masses when everyone finds different aspects of the game 'unplayable'!!. To me whatever way it comes I'm not going to kid myself, I'm hooked.

Well said. I'm kind of in the same boat as you - I like "relaxed" realism where I can take my League 2 minnows up the leagues , where in reality there's very little chance that these clubs could even afford to get promoted never mind be capable of doing it on the pitch.

My priority would be to always start with what defines a "realistic" event or feature etc, and then to figure out if there is a possible way of replicating it that would also be fun.

For instance, on previous versions I've tried changing the language of the game to the one of the country that I am managing in, because I do strange things like this sometimes. Now it seems more realistic than leaving it all in English, but is it a feature that SI should make compulsory in the game? Obviously not.

On the issue of teams rising through the leagues I think this is a bit of a grey area. The game needs to be fun and fulfill the aspirations and fantasies of the player, whilst also being realistic. The clear lack of teams rising through the leagues and into the champions league shows that most of the times when a user does this it is unrealistic. However it is very fun for the user. My personal feelings on this issue are that it should be possible to achieve this, but the frequency and ease with which it can be done is too unrealistic. If it was made harder would a lot of people enjoy the game less? I think so.

For me personally, every game I play has its own rules and storylines that I use to make the game interesting or more challenging. I wouldn't be that proud of rising through the leagues with a minnow because I know it can be done, but the "project" of doing so would have been immensely rewarding. The sense of achievement is not the same one gained from winning something, it is more about the process.

In this way I think both sides of the spectrum need to be tolerated by the system. At its fullest the game should be as challenging and realistic as possible, but some "unrealistic" options should still be included such as "can't be sacked," or "automatic tactical changes." Why not? Sometimes I play the game and genuinely love engaging in tactical battles with various sides at various levels of football, and other times I just want to try and stay at one club and make it the best at everything, often holidaying through matches and playing in a sort of "director of football" role.

I think there should be a greater level of acceptance that there are many, many ways to play and enjoy the game. Journeyman vs club legend vs international manager etc. Beyond that there is the enjoyment from tactics, signing young players, developing the clubs facilities etc. This is all a testament to the depth of FM. Worrying about people exploiting the game, or "cheating" or playing in an unrealistic way kind of ignores the objective of a game: to have fun.

Surely SI want as many people to have fun playing the game as possible? To do this they should indulge the serious, realism driven players, as well as the more light hearted "cheaters."

Of course, if SI is trying to move the game in the direction of a more online, multiplayer experience, then a focus on preventing exploits is very much needed, and would in a way seal the debate.

I do like the "can't be sacked" suggestion, to be honest. They give us a pre-game editor where we can tip the balance in our favour as much as we like in theory, so a pre-game option in both FM and FMC to be "unsackable" is fair. It won't make winning games and trophies any easier, it merely makes the chairmen (who aren't the best of breeds anyway) put away their guillotines and I've seen a few rant after being sacked post-takeover. I personally wouldn't use the option (I've never been sacked or relegated ever on any FM game where I've played more than 1 season.... FM12-14 totalling 22 full seasons), but it's fair to include it.

I like realism as long as it's fun to play.

Regarding the difficulty I'm more inclined to say that the game is too easy.

I look at it as a game, it has challenges, and I want to overcome those challenges and even set myself challenges. It is like playing chess or any other strategy game, on the computer, it is nothing like real life or a real life opponent, you are going into to it beat a mathematical machine which knows no feelings, and does not act off instincts or does not perceive other peoples feelings, it therefore is nothing like reality and never will be. I for one am glad of that, I love the challenge of beating this AI. Yes the difficulty at times seems to easy, but when you play with a few set challenges to make it harder then you will (well I have found) that it becomes more and more enjoyable!

Personally, I look at FM in complete isolation to this forum, despite visiting it often. I just want something I enjoy playing and that can keep my interest. FM14 failed to do that consistently - not really sure why still - in the same way that FM13 did, which was probably the first release I really got into following the FML-sponsored 7 stages of grief. If I don't enjoy it, then I'll take some time away from it.

But in terms of realism, I'm not really sure what I "want". I'm not that bothered if things aren't particularly realistic, as long as it isn't jarring. The way I usually play the game, I may as well play with fake players given that I never usually start at a high level - by the time I get to where I should recognise players, they've all retired. So that side doesn't really bother me. However, I do like to let my imagination run wild in saves, given I regularly post in FMCU, so anything that's totally immersion-breaking can be difficult.

So I guess my short answer would be that I'm looking for realism up to a point, but I accept there are plenty of places where it can't, or more likely shouldn't, be totally realistic.

As for a couple of other posts...

My priority would be to always start with what defines a "realistic" event or feature etc, and then to figure out if there is a possible way of replicating it that would also be fun.

For instance, on previous versions I've tried changing the language of the game to the one of the country that I am managing in, because I do strange things like this sometimes. Now it seems more realistic than leaving it all in English, but is it a feature that SI should make compulsory in the game? Obviously not.

On the issue of teams rising through the leagues I think this is a bit of a grey area. The game needs to be fun and fulfill the aspirations and fantasies of the player, whilst also being realistic. The clear lack of teams rising through the leagues and into the champions league shows that most of the times when a user does this it is unrealistic. However it is very fun for the user. My personal feelings on this issue are that it should be possible to achieve this, but the frequency and ease with which it can be done is too unrealistic. If it was made harder would a lot of people enjoy the game less? I think so.

For me personally, every game I play has its own rules and storylines that I use to make the game interesting or more challenging. I wouldn't be that proud of rising through the leagues with a minnow because I know it can be done, but the "project" of doing so would have been immensely rewarding. The sense of achievement is not the same one gained from winning something, it is more about the process.

In this way I think both sides of the spectrum need to be tolerated by the system. At its fullest the game should be as challenging and realistic as possible, but some "unrealistic" options should still be included such as "can't be sacked," or "automatic tactical changes." Why not? Sometimes I play the game and genuinely love engaging in tactical battles with various sides at various levels of football, and other times I just want to try and stay at one club and make it the best at everything, often holidaying through matches and playing in a sort of "director of football" role.

I think there should be a greater level of acceptance that there are many, many ways to play and enjoy the game. Journeyman vs club legend vs international manager etc. Beyond that there is the enjoyment from tactics, signing young players, developing the clubs facilities etc. This is all a testament to the depth of FM. Worrying about people exploiting the game, or "cheating" or playing in an unrealistic way kind of ignores the objective of a game: to have fun.

Surely SI want as many people to have fun playing the game as possible? To do this they should indulge the serious, realism driven players, as well as the more light hearted "cheaters."

Good post. I guess therein lies the rub - do they go more realistic, or more fun, or do they have to do either? Could they do both without alienating? A tough question to answer. Every year there's plenty of things asked for that most would look at, scoff, and then say how terrible an idea it is. Most of the time, it probably is, but there are times where it is a "good" idea, but not to everyone's tastes. Is that any less valid?

Personally, if SI were willing to go down that route, I would introduce a third gamemode to sit alongside full fat and FMC. Sandbox mode. No idea what it would involve, but maybe integrate it with a more powerful and intuitive IGE so you can charge through the gameworld doing whatever you like. Garry's Mod for FM. Miles' Mod if you will. Then these more esoteric features could be worked in as part of that, to give people who want that kind of game somewhere to go, and not affecting those who want bleeding edge realism.

Of course, if SI is trying to move the game in the direction of a more online, multiplayer experience, then a focus on preventing exploits is very much needed, and would in a way seal the debate.

Not really sure where you get this from though. Do you think they are, or is it just more a general point given that a lot of games are going that way? I'd be very much surprised if they verged into that territory again, and if they did, I imagine it'd be standalone, like FMO being released over here, rather than messing with FM itself. I think they'll keep FM strictly single player at it's core, and I applaud them for doing that where other developers are tacking on multiplayer and DLC just to try to sell more copies.

I win about 50% of my games, with the rest split evenly between draws and losses. That's exactly the level of challenge that I like. I want to generally win, but not go into any given game completely confident that I'll win. I am good at developing players, but I'm wrong a fair amount of the time. I think my tactics are solid but they're far from game-breaking. I'm happy with that. All of it. I'm a good player, but not an all-conquering juggernaut. I recognize that if they made this game really realistic I'd become crap. Because if the game was ultra-realistic and I didn't become crap, I'd actually be managing a real football team instead of working a low-level IT job.

And I don't want to be crap. I'm not going to pay $50 a year to be crap in a virtual world. I'm crap enough in the real world thanks.

I'm not interested in too much realism. Like board sackings after a takeover that have nothing to do with performance especially tick me off. Board interference in general ticks me off, actually, even though it doesn't impact me very often. I'd turn all that off in two seconds if I could. TBH I don't even understand the logic of people who argue in support of things like that... realism at the expense of fun.

Also, I'm currently managing Bristol City. If I had taken them over knowing that no matter how well I played, I'd never be able to get them higher than the level of a top championship team/occasional premier league relegation fodder because that's all that their finances would ever allow... well, how could I get fired up long term about playing a scenario like that?

Like I said on another thread, I wish all of the 'realism' features could be turned on or off with a series of checkboxes instead of essentially dividing the game in two with FMC like they did. I don't like Board interference. I'd like to be able to play in a sandbox setting where I couldn't be fired sometimes. But that's me. Maybe you don't want the above but you might not like team talks and want them out, and so on. No one change will make everyone happy... customization is the best way to go long term.

Gotta add this: I hope FM never tries to move away from single player as the core. FM has been a great enough franchise that I've stuck with it through Steam, through a few changes that I didn't really like, but I've got no interest in Multiplayer and would drop this game if it started turning into Call of Duty with a ball.

Realism would mean your local s**t club never achieving anything.

I like taking teams from the bottom divisions all the way to champions league victory.

Realism would mean your local s**t club never achieving anything.

I like taking teams from the bottom divisions all the way to champions league victory.

What makes that "unrealistic" would be the short amount of time a player achieves this which ties into difficulty level.

Small clubs making it to the top division have been done before...Just not in 4 season. . .

As much realism that leaves me still enjoying playing- enjoyment usually means winning more than losing, so there has to be a balance with realism.

nah just enjoy the fun.

given up any hope of seeing realism where i want to see it.

As much realism that leaves me still enjoying playing- enjoyment usually means winning more than losing, so there has to be a balance with realism.

If I am winning all the time, I will get bored quickly. Its like playing chess with a sub par opponent all of the time.

If you are winning all of the time then its nothing really to manage, you're just playing for results.

"realism" for me is simulating football correctly and making sure matches and stats are a correct replica of the history of the sport. Winning all of the time wouldn't be such a borefest if it felt like I really earned it meaning I invested a lot of time in coming up with the right tactics and gameplan. I don't want to dominate the game if I rarely make any adjustments.

I started playing FM for the strategy, I put down FIFA and PES a long time ago.