Message to SI devs! Match engine killing Fm.

Hi I have been playing since 1999 ( champ man ) and have brought every game you have released. However as a vet of Fm. I am worried that pressure from today's kids to include a graphical representation of the match is sadly killing the game.

I never use the 2d or 3d views, as in my view this isn't Fm. The action bar is what everyone should be using, this along with all the new boxes including the match stats should be all you need.

Please don't give into pressure from kids for graphics, your not graphics programmers and the fact that they are demanding is in my view why the game is starting to lack in other areas. The more the kids demand graphics and moan when it's not so good, the more time you guys spend in the studio working on graphics. This means less time for gameplay features ( your area of expertise ) Please ignore the kids, if they want graphics let them play FIFA. Real football managers want stats, loads and loads of stats. Not FIFA manger.

I have loved this years Fm and look forward to fm 16. Thanks for stealing my life

For starters mate, the match engine differs from the graphical representation.. You can choose to use whatever graphical representation you wish (3D, 2D, commentary, etc.), but that doesn't mean that every one else should conform to your personal preferences. I personally use the 2D representation and have always done, but i don't go telling everyone that enjoys the 3D for instance, that that's not the way to play the game. Accept that everyone plays the game their own way and is entitled to do just that.

I do agree with you that there are parts of the game which should be prioritized in development and improvement than others as the game evolves year after year. For instance, the graphical interface for the general use-case audience for FM 14 was better than that for FM 15. But Fm 15 improved in some areas. I remember the tactics screen debate that lasted months on here.. Anyway, everyone should enjoy their game their own way. The developers are smart and know what NEEDS improvement. And your post/thread title is misleading..

Cheers.

FYI, there are 'graphics programmers' working at SI. Programmers have their areas to focus on, so nothing is taken away from other areas.

FYI, there are 'graphics programmers' working at SI. Programmers have their areas to focus on, so nothing is taken away from other areas.

Yeah, I don't think its a an either/or situation people like to paint it as.

The action bar is what everyone should be using, this along with all the new boxes including the match stats should be all you need.

You know what else was good? Candlelight, horses and consumption.

Speaking of the action bar, is it just me or is there waaaay less text displayed there in FM15 when compared to previous versions?

It feels like back then you could actually follow the game, it had descriptions, provided fairly detailed info, 'radio commentary' so to speak. Now it seems like it barely reflects fouls and shots.

Speaking of the action bar, is it just me or is there waaaay less text displayed there in FM15 when compared to previous versions?

It feels like back then you could actually follow the game, it had descriptions, provided fairly detailed info, 'radio commentary' so to speak. Now it seems like it barely reflects fouls and shots.

It probably has exactly the same content as it always has, because it'll have been "neglected", but now we have other points of focus and ways of determining what happens in the match. When you compare the two, the action bar is quite clearly behind (and often downright incorrect) but previously you had no frame of reference. Your mind filled in the gaps while you watched the text fly by.

The action bar is what everyone should be using, this along with all the new boxes including the match stats should be all you need.

Sorry but I don't agree with that in the slightest.

I've played every version of CM/FM since the start and like everything it has progressed.

While you'll never see me shouting for graphics to be improved over gameplay the fact is that the introduction of 2d & then 3d has enhanced my enjoyment of the game and I would expect to see slow & steady improvement of it from version to version.

I have played the game since its introduction in the early 90's, are not really interested in the latest graphics, but there is no way I would be able to play FM these days without 3d play in the game. When they brought 2d play in CM4 & later 3d that changed CM/FM for the better in my opinion. Going back to text would be like listening to commentary about football on the radio rather than watching it on the telly. We have moved on.

To be honest, if the choice is between paying to watch Sky, and listening to Radio 5, I'd always choose Radio 5. But that's because I hate Murdoch, not because I'm an old stick in the mud!

I am an old stick in the mud, it's just not the reason for the above

It probably has exactly the same content as it always has, because it'll have been "neglected", but now we have other points of focus and ways of determining what happens in the match. When you compare the two, the action bar is quite clearly behind (and often downright incorrect) but previously you had no frame of reference. Your mind filled in the gaps while you watched the text fly by.

I mean compared with like three years ago max, not back when when we only had 2d or nothing. It really feels like most of the descriptive text has been cut. Or maybe the game speed threshold to showing it has been lowered, something, I dunno. I might be remembering things wrong but I could swear there were way more commentary lines saying what was going on in the game than there are now.

I have played the game since its introduction in the early 90's, are not really interested in the latest graphics, but there is no way I would be able to play FM these days without 3d play in the game. When they brought 2d play in CM4 & later 3d that changed CM/FM for the better in my opinion. Going back to text would be like listening to commentary about football on the radio rather than watching it on the telly. We have moved on.

Yeah, but according to the OP, you're the problem YOUNGSTEVE. You whippersnappers and your 8-track tapes...

I mean compared with like three years ago max, not back when when we only had 2d or nothing. It really feels like most of the descriptive text has been cut. Or maybe the game speed threshold to showing it has been lowered, something, I dunno. I might be remembering things wrong but I could swear there were way more commentary lines saying what was going on in the game than there are now.

Maybe it has, I haven't really noticed. It could be that they've cut back on it, but not really sure why they would - can't be that it takes up too much space, they're just text after all. It'll be quite a job to bring in vast swathes of new text with translation and all that, but it makes no sense to cut lines. To me anyway, they could well have done. It definitely does seem a bit sparse now.

Wow, lots of anger stired up here. That wasn't my intention, all I am saying is fm and chapman before it has never and should never be about graphics. And I am worried that the developers are under to much pressure to deliver this for users. I wanted to remind them that there are still purist that use the action bar and don't even enable the match engine. All I ever see online is compaints about the game being unplayable due to the 3d match engine. There's a simple solution to this... Turn it off!

Wow, lots of anger stired up here. That wasn't my intention, all I am saying is fm and chapman before it has never and should never be about graphics. And I am worried that the developers are under to much pressure to deliver this for users. I wanted to remind them that there are still purist that use the action bar and don't even enable the match engine. All I ever see online is compaints about the game being unplayable due to the 3d match engine. There's a simple solution to this... Turn it off!

Doesn't the 'action bar' use the same Match Engine as 2D and 3D?

Yes way less. I am worried it may be removed completely thus killing the game for some.

Doesn't the 'action bar' use the same Match Engine as 2D and 3D?

Well I disable it every year so I guess not.

3d graphics do not equal match engine. You're confusing your argument.

The text runs off the same match engine as the 2d and 3d representations.

Well I disable it every year so I guess not.

disable isn't the right word

sure, you may run in commentary only, but it'll still be the same match that goes on (whether you want to look at text, watch dots move around a screen, or some robot-looking things run around)

I think as long as SI keep commentary in the game [can't see why they'd take it out] then you'll be fine with your 'action bar' going forward

Well I disable it every year so I guess not.

Its still the same ME, just your choice of viewing is different.

Whether you choose commentary, 2d or 3d the ME is always the same.

Aren't you somewhat confusing 'match engine' with 'graphics' here? The same match engine calculates what's happening regardless of how you personally choose to render the results of those calculations on your monitor.

Personally, I simply enjoy watching the 3d view and find it helpful – probably because it's most like watching football on TV, so it's what I know and understand. Is it perfect? No, of course not. Would I like more life-like graphics? Sure, why not.

If that means I am not a member of the FM master race, so be it.

In terms of less commentary than older versions I'm not certain but in the back of my mind I seem to remember a thread from a couple of years ago where SI said the commentary lines had been "Tidied Up" and there was less non-relevant lines in there now, probably around the same time non-relevant PPMs got taken out.

No this isn't a thread to offend or say I'm "master race"??? ect. It's just remind the development team that not everyone needs or wants graphics! I guess I was always going to get trolled here but it wasn't my intention to upset anyone. I guess everyone has there own way of playing but please don't insult me for having mine. I'm sure there are many other people who don't use 3d or 2d. I have said my part and won't be replying to anyone's post your welcome to post weather you agree or disagree ect. keep up the good work Si ignore the haters for fm 2015.

Another 3D fan here. It definitely improves the game, IMO.

disable isn't the right word

sure, you may run in commentary only, but it'll still be the same match that goes on (whether you want to look at text, watch dots move around a screen, or some robot-looking things run around)

I think as long as SI keep commentary in the game [can't see why they'd take it out] then you'll be fine with your 'action bar' going forward

Hmmm well in preference there's a box to disable 3d match engine. So I guess that's not right. maybe it's the same engine as the 2d. Tbh I wouldn't know as I've only ever looked at the action bar which tells me what's happening so I can't say if it's different to anything else that maybe happening on the 2d screen. Ps I saw this after my last post. Bye all happy Fming

No this isn't a thread to offend or say I'm "master race"??? ect. It's just remind the development team that not everyone needs or wants graphics! I guess I was always going to get trolled here but it wasn't my intention to upset anyone. I guess everyone has there own way of playing but please don't insult me for having mine. I'm sure there are many other people who don't use 3d or 2d. I have said my part and won't be replying to anyone's post your welcome to post weather you agree or disagree ect. keep up the good work Si ignore the haters for fm 2015.

I think you are going a bit OTT tbh.

No one is slating you, sure some of us are disagreeing with your opinion that the 2d/3d isn't important but thats life we all have different opinions.

You also seem to not understand the difference between the ME and the way you view it which isn't helping you.

Finally SI have different staff working on different areas of the game so those working on the graphics do just that and don't take time away from other staff working on the gameplay.

The ME is the ME. It's always the same ME, just different ways of viewing it.

In terms of less commentary than older versions I'm not certain but in the back of my mind I seem to remember a thread from a couple of years ago where SI said the commentary lines had been "Tidied Up" and there was less non-relevant lines in there now, probably around the same time non-relevant PPMs got taken out.

I see! That might explain it. Like I said before, it's basically the rather generic commentary stuff. Like 'player X advances with the ball' and 'sprays a pass down the right'. Right now it seems to cover only the important events, i.e. chances, bookings... I have to say I sort of miss it, it made the game more lively and lifelike. Another thing is there's no commentary in replays, I swear there used to be.

So the OP realises he's wrong and back-tracks all the way out of the thread

There is only one ME. The 2D rep, 3D rep and text rep are all separate modules, which take whatever the ME has produced and represent it on screen. That isn't just opinion, it's fact. It's also fact - confirmed by mods and SI themselves (plus common sense) - that there are dedicated graphical programmers who are working on the 3D (and probably 2D) representations. So they're not taking resources away from other parts of the system.

The OP just wants to use the action bar. Fair enough. But how many would share that opinion? 1 in 10? 1 in 100? 1 in 1000? I imagine it would be an extremely small minority, especially now that you kind of have to view the graphical representations unless you're an absolute expert in interpreting the stats. It isn't going anywhere, and will continue to be developed.

Aren't you somewhat confusing 'match engine' with 'graphics' here? The same match engine calculates what's happening regardless of how you personally choose to render the results of those calculations on your monitor.

Personally, I simply enjoy watching the 3d view and find it helpful – probably because it's most like watching football on TV, so it's what I know and understand. Is it perfect? No, of course not. Would I like more life-like graphics? Sure, why not.

If that means I am not a member of the FM master race, so be it.

I agree with you. I know it is the same engine for all, but I find I can learn more by watching it in 3d, as well as being more enjoyable.

Like I said previously, I am not a person who yearns for the latest graphics in a game, & I am happy the way SI improves the look of the game without effecting the game itself, which is more important. I was really happy playing CM in text only, but agreed with SI when they added 2d, as it was the time to do so. I am not really sure what the OP is questioning here, as you can turn the 2d/3d graphics off & play in glorious text if you want.

Well I disable it every year so I guess not.

The Match Engine and 3D graphics are too different things. The whole match runs of the match engine whether your viewing via the action bar, 2D or 3D. What I think you are referring to is the graphics, rather than the ME; thats why I think everyones got confused.

Hi I have been playing since 1999 ( champ man ) and have brought every game you have released. However as a vet of Fm. I am worried that pressure from today's kids to include a graphical representation of the match is sadly killing the game.

I never use the 2d or 3d views, as in my view this isn't Fm. The action bar is what everyone should be using, this along with all the new boxes including the match stats should be all you need.

Please don't give into pressure from kids for graphics, your not graphics programmers and the fact that they are demanding is in my view why the game is starting to lack in other areas. The more the kids demand graphics and moan when it's not so good, the more time you guys spend in the studio working on graphics. This means less time for gameplay features ( your area of expertise ) Please ignore the kids, if they want graphics let them play FIFA. Real football managers want stats, loads and loads of stats. Not FIFA manger.

I have loved this years Fm and look forward to fm 16. Thanks for stealing my life

You're trying to present yourself as a victim due to the ire that has been directed at you but you have come on here with such a mocking and insulting tone calling 'kids' moaners and accusing them of 'killing the game'. I'm not a 'kid' but I see no issue what so ever with improving the graphics. The more realistic the representation of the game on the pitch the greater the immersion which is the whole point I would have thought, this being a simulation after all. Besides better graphics are the way the computer industry is going, do you want SI to stay in the past or do you want them pushing the limits?

What is important is that the depth of simulation isn't affected which if the last 2 editions are anything to go by shows it is the exact opposite. The simulation has become more complex than ever, so much so in fact that the ME actually struggles to keep up, due to the limited number of animations in the ME and the comparatively huge number of variables that need to be calculated from the player stats, morale, condition, pitch condition etc...

I don't care for cutting edge FIFA graphics but there is definitely room for improvement which is what they appear to be doing. Your suggestion of telling people to play FIFA doesn't make any sense, it is like telling a player of civ 5 to go play call of duty they are completely different genres of game. Why do you view playing FIFA as a lesser activity anyway? Sometimes I want to play a game which is time consuming then there are other times when I want to play a game which is just a quick bit of fun, what's wrong with that?

i dont think anybody expects fifa graphics, but to say they should use text only and that working on the graphics takes away from the overall game is nonsense.

FYI, there are 'graphics programmers' working at SI. Programmers have their areas to focus on, so nothing is taken away from other areas.

Finally SI have different staff working on different areas of the game so those working on the graphics do just that and don't take time away from other staff working on the gameplay.

It's also fact - confirmed by mods and SI themselves (plus common sense) - that there are dedicated graphical programmers who are working on the 3D (and probably 2D) representations. So they're not taking resources away from other parts of the system.

Seriously, do you guys genuinely believe this? How about exercising even the smallest iota of critical thought before you post? SI do not have an infinite pool of money with which to pay wages, neither do programmers work for free. Therefore money spent improving the graphics does 100% take away from other areas of the game being improved. That's an indisputable fact, so cut out the illogical, apologist nonsense.

I actually think that there is a very good point wrapped inside what is in all honesty a pretty sensationalist OP.

The question is are good graphics central to what this game is? In all honesty I would say yes, because the perfect Management Simulator would have perfectly realistic graphics, therefore that is something to aspire to. I love the 3D and find it adds a lot to my experience. Even small things like seeing height/weight differentials, celebrations, flares in the crowd, or an absolutely grassless pitch etc helps immerse me in the world. Some things, like the players shirts all getting dirty are a bit crap, and some things are lacking imo, such as a 3D manager character who my players could run to and hug when they score, extended celebrations post-match, trophy ceremony, and fan signs, for example. To be honest, the idea of playing in 2D really doesn't appeal to me at all at this stage.

On the other side of the coin is the point that the OP alluded to whereby an insufficient range and quality of animations can at times make the game experience worse, aka the "why did my player inexplicably do that?!" effect. I'm sympathetic towards this because even a FIFA level of graphics and motion capture would struggle to relay the many subtle nuances of player behavior that make management the job that it is. Imagine things like a realistic body language engine - allowing you to easily see from the sidelines who is nervous, fired-up, cocky etc just by observing their movement. Another thing would be a realistic player awareness engine - I could watch a player in the build up to a goal I concede and clearly tell that he has no idea that he has an unmarked player moving behind him, or even that he is fully aware of the threat but is just being lazy.

I'm not proposing these as realistic near-term developments, but it is in these kind of areas that the goal of FMs graphics will be different from the goal of every other 3D representation of football. Essentially this problem should be called "Representing the Mental Attributes in the 3D Engine," as this is the most important and difficult part of the issue for me.

I do think SI should consider this: How plausible is it that we could produce a level of graphics that could relay to the user things like a defender being wrong footed, or a midfielder being unaware of a runner behind him, or the ball taking a bobble and causing the striker to shoot high and wide? If the answer is that it isn't really that plausible, which I suspect, then an out of the box solution may be needed.

This is the only nagging issue for me. Good graphics are always desirable, but good enough graphics to convey what is needed seems an almost impossible task. What should the game be aiming for?

Seriously, do you guys genuinely believe this? How about exercising even the smallest iota of critical thought before you post? SI do not have an infinite pool of money with which to pay wages, neither do programmers work for free. Therefore money spent improving the graphics does 100% take away from other areas of the game being improved. That's an indisputable fact, so cut out the illogical, apologist nonsense.

You are actually incorrect, for what it's worth. Distinct teams work on the ME and graphical elements.

It's not that I 'believe' it out of blind faith. I know what I said (and what RTH says) because this is the way it is. We deal with SI on a much closer level and some have even been to the SI towers and/or worked for SI. These things aren't just made up. Just think about it for a second. You really think programmers do a little bit of ME then a week later some graphics? The junior guys, possibly, but the 'main' teams stay in their area.

It's not that I 'believe' it out of blind faith. I know what I said (and what RTH says) because this is the way it is. We deal with SI on a much closer level and some have even been to the SI towers and/or worked for SI. These things aren't just made up. Just think about it for a second. You really think programmers do a little bit of ME then a week later some graphics? The junior guys, possibly, but the 'main' teams stay in their area.

I know one very good friend who works there. Even in his junior time he wasn't bounced around.

YKW, that's the last time you speak to anyone in that manner, it's incredibly rude and won't be tolerated further.

The question is are good graphics central to what this game is? In all honesty I would say yes, because the perfect Management Simulator would have perfectly realistic graphics, therefore that is something to aspire to. I love the 3D and find it adds a lot to my experience. Even small things like seeing height/weight differentials, celebrations, flares in the crowd, or an absolutely grassless pitch etc helps immerse me in the world. Some things, like the players shirts all getting dirty are a bit crap, and some things are lacking imo, such as a 3D manager character who my players could run to and hug when they score, extended celebrations post-match, trophy ceremony, and fan signs, for example. To be honest, the idea of playing in 2D really doesn't appeal to me at all at this stage.

On the other side of the coin is the point that the OP alluded to whereby an insufficient range and quality of animations can at times make the game experience worse, aka the "why did my player inexplicably do that?!" effect. I'm sympathetic towards this because even a FIFA level of graphics and motion capture would struggle to relay the many subtle nuances of player behavior that make management the job that it is. Imagine things like a realistic body language engine - allowing you to easily see from the sidelines who is nervous, fired-up, cocky etc just by observing their movement. Another thing would be a realistic player awareness engine - I could watch a player in the build up to a goal I concede and clearly tell that he has no idea that he has an unmarked player moving behind him, or even that he is fully aware of the threat but is just being lazy.

I'm not proposing these as realistic near-term developments, but it is in these kind of areas that the goal of FMs graphics will be different from the goal of every other 3D representation of football. Essentially this problem should be called "Representing the Mental Attributes in the 3D Engine," as this is the most important and difficult part of the issue for me.

I do think SI should consider this: How plausible is it that we could produce a level of graphics that could relay to the user things like a defender being wrong footed, or a midfielder being unaware of a runner behind him, or the ball taking a bobble and causing the striker to shoot high and wide? If the answer is that it isn't really that plausible, which I suspect, then an out of the box solution may be needed.

This is the only nagging issue for me. Good graphics are always desirable, but good enough graphics to convey what is needed seems an almost impossible task. What should the game be aiming for?

Focusing on the better part of the post, yes of course it would be great to have FIFA-like graphics. I don't think anyone would argue this. FIFA has a simple ME, but a very good physics/graphics engine. FM is the other way around. The perfect sim would probably have FIFA-like graphics/physics with the FM ME. Combining ME with 2-3 million lines of code to FIFA-like graphics won't and cannot happen overnight. It's a monumental task - one that's taking shape though. Think of the robot-like running/dribbling of FM12 (FM13 too?). We're now seeing mo-capped players for the first time and this will just get better with time.

Does it matter that FM doesn't have FIFA graphics? No. Would it be nice to have? Definitely.

Poor graphics, Ackter.

Seriously, do you guys genuinely believe this? How about exercising even the smallest iota of critical thought before you post? SI do not have an infinite pool of money with which to pay wages, neither do programmers work for free. Therefore money spent improving the graphics does 100% take away from other areas of the game being improved. That's an indisputable fact, so cut out the illogical, apologist nonsense.

You are actually incorrect, for what it's worth. Distinct teams work on the ME and graphical elements.

Thats not what he is alluding to.

He is saying that if SI don't employ staff to work on the graphics they would be spare wage capacity to pay other staff to work on other areas of the game.

On the surface its actually a fair point and I don't know exactly how SI works of course but there is a point where throwing more staff at an area doesn't actually improve it which I suspect is a situation SI are more or less in.

On the surface its actually a fair point and I don't know exactly how SI works of course but there is a point where throwing more staff at an area doesn't actually improve it which I suspect is a situation SI are more or less in.

SI have increased resource in a number of separate teams (including the Match Engine), but your underlying point is a good one. The ME code is a vast, complex beast, and it takes months for "new" members of that team to get up anywhere near up to speed. The scale of the complexity is such that balancing the ME is fraught with challenges, and too many cooks can spoil the broth in that particular area.

I actually loved the old way with the action bar, I embraced the 2D visual representation and I now enjoy the 3D view, it's all about preference,and I love SI more for evolving the game but also not taking away the foundations of the game so that anyone can enjoy the game in any viewpoint they like, whether it be action bar, 2D or 3D.

Choice is great.

It's also fact - confirmed by mods and SI themselves (plus common sense) - that there are dedicated graphical programmers who are working on the 3D (and probably 2D) representations. So they're not taking resources away from other parts of the system.

Seriously, do you guys genuinely believe this? How about exercising even the smallest iota of critical thought before you post? SI do not have an infinite pool of money with which to pay wages, neither do programmers work for free. Therefore money spent improving the graphics does 100% take away from other areas of the game being improved. That's an indisputable fact, so cut out the illogical, apologist nonsense.

I actually think that there is a very good point wrapped inside what is in all honesty a pretty sensationalist OP.

Oh...wait...I see what you did there! You changed my name to a hilarious but related word! Sound the Richard Keys Banter Alarm!

You make a decent point (then tried to spoil it by using the old "defenders of the faith" argument), although I doubt the OP was looking at a balance sheet when making his point. He was saying that Programmer A would have been working on something core in the game if he wasn't working on the graphical side. If they did completely scrap the graphical side - which the OP was advocating - then from a financial perspective they could hire more people to work on the core. Not that they necessarily would, as it could be a case of too many cooks, but it's definitely possible. Not that they'd ever can the graphical side, but theoretically, yeah.

On the other side of the coin is the point that the OP alluded to whereby an insufficient range and quality of animations can at times make the game experience worse, aka the "why did my player inexplicably do that?!" effect. I'm sympathetic towards this because even a FIFA level of graphics and motion capture would struggle to relay the many subtle nuances of player behavior that make management the job that it is. Imagine things like a realistic body language engine - allowing you to easily see from the sidelines who is nervous, fired-up, cocky etc just by observing their movement. Another thing would be a realistic player awareness engine - I could watch a player in the build up to a goal I concede and clearly tell that he has no idea that he has an unmarked player moving behind him, or even that he is fully aware of the threat but is just being lazy.

I see where you're coming from. I think FIFA tried to add that in 15, although they talked a much better game than it actually ended up achieving in reality. Seems to just be limited to a bit of a jostling cutscene after a bad tackle. It's probably the zenith of things - I don't think we'll ever be able to tell body language from looking at them in FM, but would be pretty good if we could I suppose.

I do think SI should consider this: How plausible is it that we could produce a level of graphics that could relay to the user things like a defender being wrong footed, or a midfielder being unaware of a runner behind him, or the ball taking a bobble and causing the striker to shoot high and wide? If the answer is that it isn't really that plausible, which I suspect, then an out of the box solution may be needed.

It's plausible, I guess, but it's several miles above where they are now. One thing I'd also note is that they've always been resistant to putting any kind of really close camera angles in to the current 3D rep. This was always put down to one of two things - they don't want to risk being sued for having the likenesses of players that they haven't paid a license for, or the current graphics can't support it. It's probably more likely to be 2, but as the graphics get better, they'll either need to purchase a license for players likenesses (might not even be possible in the same way that they can't release in Germany) or have them look nothing like the real players.

BUT, if they can get beyond those, and have a graphical style closer to FIFA, now that they're using motion capture I don't see any technical issue that would stop them doing what you say. Hooking it up to the current ME might cause issues though.

forget fifa graphics, this is what FM should look up to.

[video=youtube;gdmO5V_NeYc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdmO5V_NeYc

Dear SI, please add minnie me on the bench once you get to this level.

I have no desire at all to ever use 3D graphics, or press conferences features, and would prefer development costs to be more heavily weighted towards AI squad building, transfers, match engine, tactical interfaces, training and GUI. But I accept I'm not the only target audience for the game.

I have no desire at all to ever use 3D graphics, or press conferences features, and would prefer development costs to be more heavily weighted towards AI squad building, transfers, match engine, tactical interfaces, training and GUI. But I accept I'm not the only target audience for the game.

It's not a question of allocating more money or resources to those areas, there's a limit to how many people can work on each module of the game at one time in almost all areas.

Where expanding the work force can help (graphics and ME were particular areas) SI have maxed out the work force over the last 3 or 4 years due to improved sales and profits.

I'm very jealous of how optimised their design, build, and test envrionments are then, compared to the development centres I have worked with across my career!

Design and build are unquestionably top drawer, testing can only ever be as good as current resources allow and I see no way to drastically improve current methodology bearing in mind requirements such as security.

forget fifa graphics, this is what FM should look up to.

[video=youtube;gdmO5V_NeYc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdmO5V_NeYc

Dear SI, please add minnie me on the bench once you get to this level.

Is that a game video? I thought I was watching a real match!!!!!!!

You are actually incorrect, for what it's worth. Distinct teams work on the ME and graphical elements.

So? SI has no budget? I don't know how you've concluded I'm wrong here.

It's not that I 'believe' it out of blind faith. I know what I said (and what RTH says) because this is the way it is. We deal with SI on a much closer level and some have even been to the SI towers and/or worked for SI. These things aren't just made up. Just think about it for a second. You really think programmers do a little bit of ME then a week later some graphics? The junior guys, possibly, but the 'main' teams stay in their area.

No.

What I do think, and what I said, and what is factually true, is that hiring Person A leaves less resources available to hire Persons B, C and D, or to invest in endeavor X, Y or Z. This is true unless SI have infinite money or there are an infinite number of potential employees. There is no basis on which to dispute this.

For example, one thing I have asked to be in the game are more lines of text in news articles etc to immerse me into the game. This is a harder job than it first seems due to the added costs of translating all of the text into all the necessary languages. So while Kriss' elaboration about the capacity of SI's teams is a decent one, I think there are plenty of obvious situations where it doesn't apply. If SI chose not to spend the extra money on motion capture then they may have been able to hire the extra translators needed to add the lines of text. Claiming that the 'translation team' is at capacity is not a plausible explanation.

Another obvious example is that I doubt how plausible it is that a QA team could be at capacity. There is always the opportunity to increase the level of QA done on the game, and so improving ANY area of the game at any cost directly takes away from this area. The existence of separate teams and/or the sizes of those teams are irrelevant. Their wages could be spent on QA.

Therefore saying that developing one area of the game doesn't take away from any other area of the game is wrong every time.

Note that I am not making any criticism of how SI chooses to allocate its resources, neither do I think its in any way up for debate. They have all the information as well the talent and ambition that has got them into this position. To give a very personal viewpoint, since FM12 with dynamic league reputation and add/remove leagues, the bits of the game that I would have liked to be improved have not been, with the exception of the scouting changes last year. In that time (and in the run up to it) many of the additions that have sparked my interest have turned out to be "half-arsed" or "budget" changes. I do feel harsh using those terms, but to me it is reality. For instance, claims of an all new set piece creator had me interested, and then when I bought the game it turned out to be just a graphical change with less functionality than previously. A screenshot of a "team policy" screen had me interested, until it turned out to just be a relocated and renamed manager options window. The total revamp of training seemed interesting, and looked cool from the screenshots, but then I used it and again it was just a graphical change with less functionality than before. The announcement of the director of football almost made me pre-order the game, but by that time I was harshly cynical, and having played the demo I was correct in being so. The DoF was a useability enhancement which brought very little to the experience, and which had little resemblance to the role of DoFs in real life. If DoFs were going to be implemented then it had to also come with the feature that they could be brought in over your head to oversee transfers. In addition to this I am looking in and asking myself if the game really needs to be reskinned every year?

Now like I have said, I do trust SI, and I have had an ok time with FM15. However I feel that making choices about which areas of the game to improve and how to improve them are a crucial part of SI's business, and claims that improving one area of the game doesn't take away from other areas are fundamentally wrong imo. I'm more interested in what SI view as being a possible pinnacle of this era of FM in terms of the 3D engine, rather than the opportunity cost discussion which only opens SI up to potential criticisms as in the above paragraph.

TL;DR

testing can only ever be as good as current resources allow