Am I being unfair to SI here?

[Santa Cruz]

Trying to simulate the world of football as well as individual matches is far more difficult than simulating the handling of an aircraft or a car. SI are attempting to simulate human behaviour (of thousands of different people at once) not just the response of a machine to a given input.

You may say that when FM falls short of reality it is not a bug but a "balance isssue" but that doesn't stop everyone (including the OP) calling it a bug. The only real bug that I have come across in FM10 is the crash dumps.

I've no real problems with the bugs in FM just your rather ridiculous claim that you can't (aren't allowed) to compare FM to any other game.

[Misodoctakleidist]

I've no real problems with the bugs in FM just your rather ridiculous claim that you can't (aren't allowed) to compare FM to any other game.

Actually, I said you can't compare it to most other games - not any other game - which is obviously true. It's silly to moan about how FM has loads more bugs than GTA is you're counting things that are unrealistic as bugs for FM but not for GTA. Nobody moans about the "bug" in GTA where the police arrest you for murder and car-jacking but only confiscate your weapons and money then drop you off in another part of town.

[perpatov]

Trying to simulate the world of football as well as individual matches is far more difficult than simulating the handling of an aircraft or a car.

Hahahahahaahahahahahahaahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

No. Just no. You will not claim that FM is a more difficult product to code than a realistic flight simulator. Look at X-Plane. I mean, I know you're too gristleheaded to engage with this argument, but seriously, please, do it. Just look at the realism of that game. They aren't just sitting around writing a few algorithms to make players develop or pitch player stats against each other. They are writing something to individually analyse the constituent parts of an aircraft (how many functional pieces are in a wing, for example), and calculate the lift and drag of each section at different speeds. They're looking at air resistance on many different craft at varying speeds.

The physics engine in FM, by comparison, is looking at a bouncing ball.

I don't think anyone on the FM team would claim that what they do is in any way as difficult as simulating real-world performance for a flight simulator.

If SI's simulation was as real as the simulation of a flight sim, maybe just as NASA use flight simulators to train pilots, football teams would use FM to train their staff to become better managers.

SI are attempting to simulate human behaviour (of thousands of different people at once) not just the response of a machine to a given input.

No they aren't. Do you really think they're doing that? "Human behaviour" limited to maybe 10 different states. Do players ever go off the rails because of drug abuse, marital problems, the death of a family member? No. They have "personal problems." Or they're happy. That's about it. There are very few stages in between.

I'm not criticising SI here, I'm just trying to point out to you how stupid your argument is.

You may say that when FM falls short of reality it is not a bug but a "balance isssue" but that doesn't stop everyone (including the OP) calling it a bug. The only real bug that I have come across in FM10 is the crash dumps.

It's a colloquialism. May as well get used to it. I can see the argument from both sides.

@perpatov

GTA and Civilization are not held up to reality and berated for failing to live up to it.

Well, GTA IV was widely heralded as a highly realistic game. So that rather shoots your argument in the foot.

CIV isn't a realistic premise. That's why nobody is saying it's unrealistic.

They simple aren't intended to be realistic which is why "square borders" doesn't get called a bug.

You're getting into semantics here.

I've no real problems with the bugs in FM just your rather ridiculous claim that you can't (aren't allowed) to compare FM to any other game.

Exactly. The process of development is the same. The bug issues are the same. The problems facing SI are the same as the problems facing Rockstar North and BioWare. The difference is that SI has had a history of deficiency.

[perpatov]

Actually, I said you can't compare it to most other games - not any other game - which is obviously true. It's silly to moan about how FM has loads more bugs than GTA is you're counting things that are unrealistic as bugs for FM but not for GTA. Nobody moans about the "bug" in GTA where the police arrest you for murder and car-jacking but only confiscate your weapons and money then drop you off in another part of town.

Whoops! Because that's not a bug. That's a feature of the game. It's a suspension of disbelief that you have to accept in order for the game to be playable. Actually in the first GTA you had a buddy inside the police station who would get you out, and I think you're supposed to believe that's still the case.

People would complain about the bug where the game crashes or freezes every few hours.

They'd equally complain if you could drive through a building, or if the AI didn't take cover when being shot at. But those things don't happen.

[Praczy]

I'm sick of every version having major bugs. Employ more people SI! Tight wads

I'm sick of whining and moaning

[Santa Cruz]

Actually, I said you can't compare it to most other games - not any other game - which is obviously true. It's silly to moan about how FM has loads more bugs than GTA is you're counting things that are unrealistic as bugs for FM but not for GTA. Nobody moans about the "bug" in GTA where the police arrest you for murder and car-jacking but only confiscate your weapons and money then drop you off in another part of town.

How many times do I have to say the bugs don't bother me that much, I was just quoting you for the perposes of my argument. Personally I never think it's silly to moan (I prefer the tearm constructively criticise) about any game that has problems, it's how they get fixed. I could argue with you all day about this but I think Perpatov has rather shot your argument down now.

[Misodoctakleidist]

@perpatov

Perhaps you should try reading my arguments before wasting so much time demolishing a straw man.

Whoops! Because that's not a bug. That's a feature of the game. It's a suspension of disbelief that you have to accept in order for the game to be playable.

That's exactly my point. Something you may have realised if you had a reading age of ten or more.

There is no suspension of disbelief in FM - it is expected to be realistic. It is idiotic to berate FM for match engine bugs while claiming there aren't many bugs in GTA. If you applied the same standard to both games you would find that FM comes off far better.

Criticise the bugs in FM if you like, but don't judge it by a double standard.

Your claim that a realistic flight simulator is more of a challenge than a realistic football management simulator is absolute nonsense. There's a reason why realistic flight simulators were some of the earliest computer games available - because they're easy to make.

When it comes to the match engine, SI has to realistically model the behaviour of 22 players, 3 match officials and the AI manager all at once. A flight simulator only has to model the behaviour of one machine.

In the general footballing world, SI has to realistically model the decisions made by thousands of footballers, staff, chairmen, and managers throughout the world.

The human mind is infinitely more complex than any aeroplane. That's why we've had planes for the last century, but nobody had yet built a machine that can pass the Turing test.

And when people say GTA IV is realistic I can only assume they are referring to the graphics and not the game play. SI could make a version of FM where the ball physics are rendered perfectly, but it would be pretty **** if it came at the expense of realistic decision making and interaction of people within the game - by far the most difficult aspect to programme.

[Santa Cruz]

@perpatov

Perhaps you should try reading my arguments before wasting so much time demolishing a straw man.

That's exactly my point. Something you may have realised if you had a reading age of ten or more.

There is no suspension of disbelief in FM - it is expected to be realistic. It is idiotic to berate FM for match engine bugs while claiming there aren't many bugs in GTA. If you applied the same standard to both games you would find that FM comes off far better.

Criticise the bugs in FM if you like, but don't judge it by a double standard.

Your claim that a realistic flight simulator is more of a challenge than a realistic football management simulator is absolute nonsense. There's a reason why realistic flight simulators were some of the earliest computer games available - because they're easy to make.

When it comes to the match engine, SI has to realistically model the behaviour of 22 players, 3 match officials and the AI manager all at once. A flight simulator only has to model the behaviour of one machine.

In the general footballing world, SI has to realistically model the decisions made by thousands of footballers, staff, chairmen, and managers throughout the world.

The human mind is infinitely more complex than any aeroplane. That's why we've had planes for the last century, but nobody had yet built a machine that can pass the Turing test.

And when people say GTA IV is realistic I can only assume they are referring to the graphics and not the game play. SI could make a version of FM where the ball physics are rendered perfectly, but it would be pretty **** if it came at the expense of realistic decision making and interaction of people within the game - by far the most difficult aspect to programme.

What utter utter nonsense!

[Misodoctakleidist]

What utter utter nonsense!

Care to elaborate?

[Santa Cruz]

Care to elaborate?

Not really thanks, I think I summed up that post perfectly

[Misodoctakleidist]

Not really thanks, I think I summed up that post perfectly

I put that through Google's Bitter Whinging to English translation tool and it came out as "I don't have any valid arguments."

[Santa Cruz]

I put that through Google's Bitter Whinging to English translation tool and it came out as "I don't have any valid arguments."

Then I think it must be broken because I don't whine. In my opinion you are wrong in every part of you're post.

[Misodoctakleidist]

Then I think it must be broken because I don't whine. In my opinion you are wrong in every part of you're post.

Let's be honest, if you actually had any counter-arguments you'd have used them. Stop using personal abuse to hide the fact that you're wrong and you know it.

[Santa Cruz]

Let's be honest, if you actually had any counter-arguments you'd have used them. Stop using personal abuse to hide the fact that you're wrong and you know it.

If you look back in the thread then you will see Perpatov completely shoot down you're argument therefore saving me the trouble. I will say it again one last time THE BUGS DON'T BOTHER ME!!! Therefore I don't need to engage in the argument you are losing to Perpatov. With regards to personal abuse, I think you're post was nonsense elaboration is unnecessary.

[Misodoctakleidist]

If you look back in the thread then you will see Perpatov completely shoot down you're argument therefore saving me the trouble. I will say it again one last time THE BUGS DON'T BOTHER ME!!! Therefore I don't need to engage in the argument you are losing to Perpatov. With regards to personal abuse, I think you're post was nonsense elaboration is unnecessary.

You mean the post where Perpatov made an extremely poor argument which I have since refuted with ease?

I'm going to give you some advice. When you're losing a debate on the internet and you don't want to concede defeat gracefully, just slink away and pretend you didn't see the post containing an unanswerable argument. Nobody will know any different, and it makes you look a lot less petty and immature.

[nev147]

Technically guys not sure you can really win an arguement - two different opinions - each thinking they are both right - a bit subjective. Maybe agree to disagree?

Then again its got nothing to do with me!

[Santa Cruz]

You mean the post where Perpatov made an extremely poor argument which I have since refuted with ease?

I'm going to give you some advice. When you're losing a debate on the internet and you don't want to concede defeat gracefully, just slink away and pretend you didn't see the post containing an unanswerable argument. Nobody will know any different, and it makes you look a lot less petty and immature.

I'm not debating with you, I picked you up on two posts where I thought (and still do) that you were wrong, go back and check if you want. You're argument about bugs in the game is spilling over into this one, which makes me think you're just lashing out now.

Look back over the thread, my gripes are with the direction the game is taking these days, I think they are valid. Apart from the two points I pick you up on, you're argument is with other people and you have lost it despite you're bravado.

Lastly after you're performance in this thread please don't give me any advice about debating because you're posts are far from unanswerable arguments.

I think Nev147 is right, this will probably have to end in agreeing to disagree.

[Zico10]

"Passion for the game is passion for the game".

Difficult or not to make, we all love this game.

But after 17 years of history, and half dozen years of 3D matches, there's one thing SI have to call upon and that is experience.

We are all keen to help make this game better by uploading PKM's, but it is really necessary? I mean have you ever play this game? Yes, you at SI.

So can't you notice all this "bugs" or "unbalance" as some call them? With the bugs fixed, this game can go into another level, and that is to satisfy well over 90% of your loyal fans. The bugs complaint are common in every single forum we go. You just have to play it for 5, 6 games to notice straight away, players yellow carded for just standing in front of another player, behaviour of players don't follow instructions, % long shots-goals ridiculous high and amazingly players with 6 for long-shots scoring hat-tricks of 35 yards shots, change of tactics from one game to another is guaranteed a goal flooding in first 20 minutes (my Wolves game [10.1] changed tactic before a Sunderland game conceded 3 goals in first 52 seconds!!! yes, 52 seconds, final score 10-2) strikers going 1 v 1 against Keeper and instead of shooting run to corner flag, after set-pieces your players going to original position leaves your defense empty for a counter attack, and the bug that really gets to me, and this bug has been here for 15 years, is as soon a player gets a knock, you concede a goal, sometimes without the chance to make a substitution. I deleted the save, started new one, half season played and 80% of games have to make 2 subs before 1st half, because of this.

What else is there to do? upload the game? yes, no problem, but the criticism has to be there and is only fair, as some game testers pointed out a few errors, and the final version came out with those errors. And that leaves SI in the cross-hair for hard criticism from loyal fans.

Take care

[Misodoctakleidist]

I'm not debating with you, I picked you up on two posts where I thought (and still do) that you were wrong, go back and check if you want. You're argument about bugs in the game is spilling over into this one, which makes me think you're just lashing out now.

Look back over the thread, my gripes are with the direction the game is taking these days, I think they are valid. Apart from the two points I pick you up on, you're argument is with other people and you have lost it despite you're bravado.

Lastly after you're performance in this thread please don't give me any advice about debating because you're posts are far from unanswerable arguments.

I think Nev147 is right, this will probably have to end in agreeing to disagree.

If you look back you'll find that I didn't involve you in those other arguments, but you chose to quote my reply to Perpatov and and call it "nonsense" with no further argument given. When I asked why - supposing that you wished to enter the debate - you called me stupid and ignorant in a post which you have now edited so that no one can tell. That bit of pettiness was entirely uncalled for, and I struggle to understand what you thought you had to gain by it.

[Santa Cruz]

If you look back you'll find that I didn't involve you in those other arguments, but you chose to quote my reply to Perpatov and and call it "nonsense" with no further argument given. When I asked why - supposing that you wished to enter the debate - you called me stupid and ignorant in a post which you have now edited so that no one can tell. That bit of pettiness was entirely uncalled for, and I struggle to understand what you thought you had to gain by it.

You really do need to go futher back in the thread.

With regards to editing, I actually went back to change some spelling mistakes and as I wasn't writing the second one angry like the first one I decided not to get dragged into trading insults as you appear to be intent on instead of resonable argument (suppose it hasn't go you anywhere so far)

[Misodoctakleidist]

Santa Cruz,

I think you'll find the insults have all been flung from one side. Let's draw a line under this now though since you have succeeded in your goal of changing the subject.

[Jack Rudd]

With regards to editing, I actually went back to change some spelling mistakes

Ah. In that case, you might want to know that you missed one: a your/you're confusion.

[Santa Cruz]

Ah. In that case, you might want to know that you missed one: a your/you're confusion.

Bugger! done that on another thread somewhere as well.

thanks for exposing my terrible English.

[m@rk]

Ok, I feel suitably guilty for my petty criticism now, but it genuinley is out of a love for this game. However in my opinion previous versions were pretty close to a perfect computer game and in recent times it seems we are maybe moving away from that.

I can actually live with minor bugs, it's the increasing complexity of tactics these days that are making me feel stupid and I don't need a game to do that when I can get that for free:)

so you want an easy game or one that is realistic?

[Aytumious]

Let's start a petition. Has anyone ever thought of doing that before?

[Santa Cruz]

so you want an easy game or one that is realistic?

Don't think anyone wants a game that's too easy but would love the tactics to be easier to understand. I realise this would make it easier for people to crack, just feel like I'm being made to suffer because people have cheated in the past.

Cheers for a more sensible post on this thread at last.

[m@rk]

Don't think anyone wants a game that's too easy but would love the tactics to be easier to understand. I realise this would make it easier for people to crack, just feel like I'm being made to suffer because people have cheated in the past.

Cheers for a more sensible post on this thread at last.

i do honestly think tactics are understandable - in real life you dont know what a team will do even though you have the general idea of formation, i do think that the ai changes more often than in real life though!

its a hard line to divide, make it harder for the so called cheaters or make it slightly more difficult for others.

i personally like this version - i'm everton and fifth so think it works ok

[Santa Cruz]

i do honestly think tactics are understandable - in real life you dont know what a team will do even though you have the general idea of formation, i do think that the ai changes more often than in real life though!

its a hard line to divide, make it harder for the so called cheaters or make it slightly more difficult for others.

i personally like this version - i'm everton and fifth so think it works ok

I think that's the problem now, the game has split it's fans down the middle, people like you who have managed to find a way to win and people like me who are still really struggling. Personally I haven't managed to find a decent tactic (homemade or downloaded) for several years.

[m@rk]

I think that's the problem now, the game has split it's fans down the middle, people like you who have managed to find a way to win and people like me who are still really struggling. Personally I haven't managed to find a decent tactic (homemade or downloaded) for several years.

i can see what you mean, i think the divide is - those who want a game to be easy and those who want reality, whilst i can see that some people want a game they can beat i can appreciate that there are those who want a game that stretches them a bit.

it took me a while to come up with a decent tactic - defeats of 6-1 against liverpool (my god did the fans moan) i managed to turn it round and beat man utd 4-0 away

[Santa Cruz]

Santa Cruz,

I think you'll find the insults have all been flung from one side. Let's draw a line under this now though since you have succeeded in your goal of changing the subject.

Sorry mate haven't changed the subject just got talking to someone else. silly and nonsense are not insults in my opinion and are perfectly valid criticisms of you're posts, I'm sorry if that offends you but the truth hurts.

I would imagine that a flight simulator IS more complex than FM to the standard that they design them now and on the whole the buyers of those games seem happier with them out of the box. You can disagree with that all you want but it won't change my view.

For future reference people on here are going to pick you up on you're posts sometimes and they might use words like nonsense.

[Misodoctakleidist]

Sorry mate haven't changed the subject just got talking to someone else. silly and nonsense are not insults in my opinion and are perfectly valid criticisms of you're posts, I'm sorry if that offends you but the truth hurts.

I would imagine that a flight simulator IS more complex than FM to the standard that they design them now and on the whole the buyers of those games seem happier with them out of the box. You can disagree with that all you want but it won't change my view.

For future reference people on here are going to pick you up on you're posts sometimes and they might use words like nonsense.

I was thinking more of the words "stupid" and "ignorant" which clearly are insults. Also quoting an entire post and writing only the word nonsense beneath it is not constructive criticism - it's a childish attempt to insult someone so don't pretend that I just took it the wrong way.

Can I take it from your second paragraph that you now do wish to debate the very subject you have repeatedly claimed not to be interested in debating (even though you are interested enough to tell me my posts on the matter are nonsense)?

If you seriously think that it is harder to accurately simulate the behaviour of a man-made machine than it is to simulate the on-pitch behaviour of Zidane I'd be interested to know how you arrive at that conclusion.

[Elfs_Master]

Your claim that a realistic flight simulator is more of a challenge than a realistic football management simulator is absolute nonsense. There's a reason why realistic flight simulators were some of the earliest computer games available - because they're easy to make.

Well, you probably won't know this but football managerial games were very popular in the early DOS engine and many of them even included 2D match engines, they aren't that complicated to make. Though they weren't as complex as FM, just like the early flight simulators, they weren't buggy at all and they weren't patched a few times every release.

When it comes to the match engine, SI has to realistically model the behaviour of 22 players, 3 match officials and the AI manager all at once. A flight simulator only has to model the behaviour of one machine.

In the general footballing world, SI has to realistically model the decisions made by thousands of footballers, staff, chairmen, and managers throughout the world.

The human mind is infinitely more complex than any aeroplane. That's why we've had planes for the last century, but nobody had yet built a machine that can pass the Turing test.

I'm really curious about how the FM AI would do in the Turing test since they emulate so well the human mind... SI is nowhere near emulating human mind...

What the engine does is to get data and put them in an algorithm. The name they give to this data means nothing to the engine, I.E. the engine doesn't know it's calculating whether a player will or not accept a contract, it simply puts numbers and makes some calculation, resulting in true or false. Then the engine takes this result and puts the name of the player in a text. The same for all the other kind of reaction from the AI. Just the number of calculations is infinitely smaller than that of a flight simulator.

As previously stated, if FM could reallistically model the behaviour of all it's players and manager, it would be used to train professional club staff.

And when people say GTA IV is realistic I can only assume they are referring to the graphics and not the game play. SI could make a version of FM where the ball physics are rendered perfectly, but it would be pretty **** if it came at the expense of realistic decision making and interaction of people within the game - by far the most difficult aspect to programme.

Actually, the interaction of people within the game is easy to programme. I know 'cos i've made a Formula One manager game and though it only had a very very small database since it was a project made for "Computer Programming II" and not a comercial game, the same kind of interactions were all there and not buggy. You could say "well, look at the size of the database FM has" but, well, if there were only 22 players in the database the same balance problems would happen during the matches.

I also made a stock control program (that one after graduated, for comercial purposes) and it can handle huge databases. I've tested it with 20 kinds of products (extensively) and the same bugs it had with those it had with 25k products. Once corrected and not happening with 20 products, they didn't happen anymore with any size of database.

[Misodoctakleidist]

@Elfs_Master

I think you may have misunderstood a couple of my arguments. The early football management games you mention were nowhere near as realistic as the early flight simulators. This is my point. I am not saying that making any old football management game is more difficult than making any old flight simulator, but that achieving a similar level of realism is much more difficult in a football management game.

I also didn't claim that FM could pass the Turing test or that it's a perfect simulation of the human mind. My point is that what FM is attempting to simulate is human behaviour, and that human behaviour is much more complex than the behaviour of an aircraft. This is why flight simulators are able to achieve a higher level of realism, and why it is fallacious to use this as evidence that SI should be making a better match engine.

(By the way, you don't need to explain to me how the game works. I have made a football management game of my own - an extremely poor simulation of reality - so I have an idea of how it is done).

I am not sure why you are talking about database size in the last section of your post because I was talking about the way players interact on the pitch which is unrelated to database size. You surely can't be suggesting that programming the player (and manager) interactions within the match engine is anything other than extremely difficult - and more so than programming the ball physics.

[JRD7a]

i can see what you mean, i think the divide is - those who want a game to be easy and those who want reality, whilst i can see that some people want a game they can beat i can appreciate that there are those who want a game that stretches them a bit.

it took me a while to come up with a decent tactic - defeats of 6-1 against liverpool (my god did the fans moan) i managed to turn it round and beat man utd 4-0 away

This is the common myth that I see spewed across these boards time and again. I'm in my mid thirties, with a homelife and a family of my own. I've owned every incarnation of this game since CM1 and I used to love trying different tactical experiments tweaking settings for hours on end, but then when I was happy with a tactic, I cold just let it play out and rack up a fair few games of an evening.

This approach is now extinct. People like me are not the future of this game, it's the "young uns" buying their first, second and third versions and these are the people that this game is now catered to. I always hoped I'd be keeping a game of CM/FM going till I'm worm food, but this game has moved away into territory that I just can't compete with. I don't want to spend 15-30 minutes on each match, watching the AI change tactics 3 times in 3 minutes is frustrating.

IF SI are so concerned with realism then give us Wibble/Wobble back then.

This game is just far too complex these days.

THe real split is between new gamers and old men like me, who want to get throough a chunk of a season while the mrs watches the soaps. I just don't have the time that this game requires. I've re-installed FM 08, and with the Croat tactic, I feel as though I'm getting through the season at a decent speed again.

It's not about difficulty levels, it's about the time that different people have to give.

[Santa Cruz]

I was thinking more of the words "stupid" and "ignorant" which clearly are insults. Also quoting an entire post and writing only the word nonsense beneath it is not constructive criticism - it's a childish attempt to insult someone so don't pretend that I just took it the wrong way.

Can I take it from your second paragraph that you now do wish to debate the very subject you have repeatedly claimed not to be interested in debating (even though you are interested enough to tell me my posts on the matter are nonsense)?

If you seriously think that it is harder to accurately simulate the behaviour of a man-made machine than it is to simulate the on-pitch behaviour of Zidane I'd be interested to know how you arrive at that conclusion.

Listen I really don't care how you take anything. Please get this through your imeasureably dense crainium

1. Our views on FM differ and thats allowed

2. If you write rubbish someone might say so judging by your attitude I'd be prepared for others to do exactly that

3. I never attempted to call you ignorant, uninformed is the word I was going to use

4. If I think your post is nonsense I will say so and I don't have to justify myself to you

5. For someone who had used actual insults earlier in the thread you seem far too easily offended

6. You aren't just arguing against me, everybody else in this thread thinks you are wrong. if you can't accept we have a point or can't deal with "nonsense" then leave

[Peachy Bum]

I can't play FM2010 because of the bugs and wasn't able to play FM2009 until the 3rd patch. For me this isn't good enough!

I don't expect the game to be 'bug free', far from it. But it's the nature of some of the bugs that i don't accept. I myself am a software testing consultant and have been for 15 years and knowing testing as i do i really can't see how some of the problems aren't found in testing. I mean a new 'subscriptions' features was added for FM2010. Now any new features should have the b*ll*cks tested out of it but for some reason the fact player subscriptions(a major part of the new feature) are lost was missed during testing. Add to that we're talking about football so we all know what realistically can happen(and there are a mountain of stats from opta etc) in terms of long shots, number of goals scored by strikers, numbers of tackles made by defenders during matches etc etc. It should be better than it is.

For me is would be brilliant to be able to play a new FM game out of the box(accepting a few minor bugs of course) for a whole 12 months until the next one. I would really love for SI to skip a year in terms of development of new features and for FM2011 to just be tuning, data updates and bug fixes and nothing else and i'd be happy to pay full price for it. But of course this will never happen and i'll just have to put up with playing in the window after the 3rd patch and the new game being released.

Oh and i also think it should be ALOT more difficult!!! The fact i can pick anybody in the prem(Burnley, Wolves etc) and win the league within 8 years without getting billions from some arab or american is pants. Realistically even with Sir Alex or Jose in charge it would take these teams 20+ years of improvement to progress to that level.

[Scoham]

I know it is, and I was being slightly flippant, but the point I was making was that, and again correct me if I am wrong, FM 2010 is not in the scheme of things technically one of the most complex games on the market?

I am quite happy to be wrong. I'm not getting at SI, but I do think it would be beneficial to the market place though to have some competition. I think in any industry an incredibly loyal fan base and lack of real competition isn't good in the long run.

I'd say FM is very complex. There are a huge number of possibilities, so many ways people play the game, so many combinations (PC specs, leagues loaded, preferences, use of the editor, database set up etc). The match engine alone goes into a lot of detail, even though it looks like it might be quite simple.

So many things can have an effect on each other in football, so they do in FM. Changes in one area can effect other areas of the game. Change how AI managers handle their squad size, it could effect how young players develop, which might effect transfers, which could effect finances etc. In the match engine, change how effective crosses are, defending might need to be improved, which might cause a bug somewhere else in the match engine.

Obviously it's not complex in certain areas (such as the 3D graphics) when compared to other types of games, but it's still a very complex game in a lot of other areas.

[Santa Cruz]

I'd say FM is very complex. There are a huge number of possibilities, so many ways people play the game, so many combinations (PC specs, leagues loaded, preferences, use of the editor, database set up etc). The match engine alone goes into a lot of detail, even though it looks like it might be quite simple.

So many things can have an effect on each other in football, so they do in FM. Changes in one area can effect other areas of the game. Change how AI managers handle their squad size, it could effect how young players develop, which might effect transfers, which could effect finances etc. In the match engine, change how effective crosses are, defending might need to be improved, which might cause a bug somewhere else in the match engine.

Obviously it's not complex in certain areas (such as the 3D graphics) when compared to other types of games, but it's still a very complex game in a lot of other areas.

Yes it it a complex game in lots of ways but for misodoctakleidist to say we can't compare FM to other games that have fewer faults is idiotic and a crude attempt to marginalise people's genuine concerns. The truth is, as game developers on this thread have commented, FM does have a relatively large number of faults/balance issues/bugs compared to other games in this genre type and other comparable ones outside it.

[bigdunk]

FM does have a relatively large number of faults/balance issues/bugs compared to other games in this genre type

Care to back that up with some evidence? The reviews and forums for both CM10 and FIFA Manager 2010 both seem to suggest they both have far more bugs and far more balance issues than FM does.

[Misodoctakleidist]

Listen I really don't care how you take anything. Please get this through your imeasureably dense crainium

1. Our views on FM differ and thats allowed

2. If you write rubbish someone might say so judging by your attitude I'd be prepared for others to do exactly that

3. I never attempted to call you ignorant, uninformed is the word I was going to use

4. If I think your post is nonsense I will say so and I don't have to justify myself to you

5. For someone who had used actual insults earlier in the thread you seem far too easily offended

6. You aren't just arguing against me, everybody else in this thread thinks you are wrong. if you can't accept we have a point or can't deal with "nonsense" then leave

More insults? Do you think it is acceptable to be abusive to people who disagree with you?

If you think my arguments are rubbish then please enlighten me, but if you don't want to back up your claims then stop making them in such an antagonistic fashion.

I tend to find that when people respond to arguments with abuse and sneering it is because they know they're wrong, but don't have the honesty or humility to admit it.

Either learn some manners or get some arguments.

[Misodoctakleidist]

Care to back that up with some evidence? The reviews and forums for both CM10 and FIFA Manager 2010 both seem to suggest they both have far more bugs and far more balance issues than FM does.

Don't question his unsupported assertions. When I did it he started hurling unprovoked abuse at me.

[Santa Cruz]

Care to back that up with some evidence? The reviews and forums for both CM10 and FIFA Manager 2010 both seem to suggest they both have far more bugs and far more balance issues than FM does.

Can't comment on FIFA Manager 2010 to be honest because I haven't seen that forum. CM on the other hand I have seen and I don't know if you're looking at the same part as me but the technical issues I've seen are fewer in both number and severity to those of FM. The main issues with that game seem to be with the new feature's and how they fit in the game. As you'll see further up the thread I compared FM to flight simulators as a benchmark and by all accounts they seem to be shipped with far fewer issues out of the box. However this was not my origional point which was a simple observation that they are better at simulating "real life" than FM in my opinion. The bugs/balance problems were a side issue.

[Santa Cruz]

More insults? Do you think it is acceptable to be abusive to people who disagree with you?

If you think my arguments are rubbish then please enlighten me, but if you don't want to back up your claims then stop making them in such an antagonistic fashion.

I tend to find that when people respond to arguments with abuse and sneering it is because they know they're wrong, but don't have the honesty or humility to admit it.

Either learn some manners or get some arguments.

Listen! I don't care about your sensativites, most of the posts on this thread totally dissagree with you and they word their arguments much better than I could.

If you want to abuse people who are too timid to argue back, go find another forum, or at least another thread! you lost the the argument to other posters way back, now you're just trying to bait people out of spite.

[Misodoctakleidist]

Listen! I don't care about your sensativites, most of the posts on this thread totally dissagree with you and they word their arguments much better than I could.

If you want to abuse people who are too timid to argue back, go find another forum, or at least another thread! you lost the the argument to other posters way back, now you're just trying to bait people out of spite.

If you "don't care" then you have a strange way of showing it.

Stop trying to justify your childish behaviour. If you're going to act like a d*ck don't be shocked when people criticise you for it.

[Pangaea]

Generally, I don't think we appreciate how incredibly difficult it is to emulate real-life football. Just looking at the match engine, how on earth are you going to emulate 22 blobs on a pitch kicking another blob around in a realistic fashion? There are so many factors to consider and balance out. To be honest, SI has gotten it very close to the real thing. But given the extreme complexity of the task at hand, it naturally takes some iterations to perfect the match engine. And when comparing to other games in the same genre, I'd say they're doing a mighty fine job too

That's not to say there are not bugs, there most certainly are. But being a little bit in the loop, I know they are doing a lot to rectify things. There's only so much that can be done with whatever staff and time they have at their disposal so issues must naturally be prioritised.

If you have a scratch on your arm and blood spewing out of your leg, you'll probably have a look at the leg first

[Santa Cruz]

Generally, I don't think we appreciate how incredibly difficult it is to emulate real-life football. Just looking at the match engine, how on earth are you going to emulate 22 blobs on a pitch kicking another blob around in a realistic fashion? There are so many factors to consider and balance out. To be honest, SI has gotten it very close to the real thing. But given the extreme complexity of the task at hand, it naturally takes some iterations to perfect the match engine. And when comparing to other games in the same genre, I'd say they're doing a mighty fine job too

That's not to say there are not bugs, there most certainly are. But being a little bit in the loop, I know they are doing a lot to rectify things. There's only so much that can be done with whatever staff and time they have at their disposal so issues must naturally be prioritised.

If you have a scratch on your arm and blood spewing out of your leg, you'll probably have a look at the leg first

Actually I agree with you about the ME, and I quite like it as a natural progression of the game.

Don't know if you were addressing me in particular but if you were I think our opinions are probably fairly close on this.

[Matt ex SEGA]

This thread is one more insult away from being closed - I'd really like to read posts on the topic, not posts insulting or calling other users posting styles into question.

Cheers

Matt

[Santa Cruz]

If you "don't care" then you have a strange way of showing it.

Stop trying to justify your childish behaviour. If you're going to act like a d*ck don't be shocked when people criticise you for it.

As I've already said, I don't wish nor have I any need to justify myself to you.

Take half an hour to read the whole thread, the arguments are there to see, when you've finished please leave. Nobody wants you in this thread anymore, all you're doing is spamming it.

[Santa Cruz]

This thread is one more insult away from being closed - I'd really like to read posts on the topic, not posts insulting or calling other users posting styles into question.

Cheers

Matt

Thank god!

[HunkOfJunk]

Can i throw in a random insult to get the thread closed?