themavsman Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeyt: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jakobx: I dont understand why some people are so against the idea of having an option that only other people would use. What is wrong with you? It doesnt affect you in any way it only helps someone else. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Technically, it's cheating. Oh and by the way, there isn't anything wrong with us </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Why do you care so much about how others play THEIR game? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyt Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by themavsman: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeyt: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jakobx: I dont understand why some people are so against the idea of having an option that only other people would use. What is wrong with you? It doesnt affect you in any way it only helps someone else. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Technically, it's cheating. Oh and by the way, there isn't anything wrong with us </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Why do you care so much about how others play THEIR game? </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Because they come on these forums and start bragging about how they haven't been sacked when other gamers are struggling. Bad idea Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
themavsman Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Because they come on these forums and start bragging about how they haven't been sacked when other gamers are struggling. Bad idea </div></BLOCKQUOTE> What about the others that don't brag about cheating? I am sorry but I don't see your reasoning. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyt Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">What about the others that don't brag about cheating? </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Well lets not take the risk of braggers and don't have an "unsackable option" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ncfcgee Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 I don't see the problem with this idea at all, i wouldn't use it personally but i can fully understand why some would and it wouldn't affect my game so it's no problem at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
theboydonegood Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 transfers, tactics, player interaction, contract negotiations, match engine, training, transfer market. all of the above are not realistic, so I dont think arguing against a new feature on realism grounds is worthwhile tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyt Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">transfers, tactics, player interaction, contract negotiations, match engine, training, transfer market. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> I think you'll find that transfers do happen in the real world as well Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bongo-Bongo Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ncfcgee: I don't see the problem with this idea at all, i wouldn't use it personally but i can fully understand why some would and it wouldn't affect my game so it's no problem at all. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Thats exactly my thought. If you want to use it, use it, if you don't then you don't have to. As long as the implementation of such a feature didn't hinder the development of more important features of the game, I really don't see what the problem is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen of the Stevenage Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 I see no reason why you could not have it as a option when you take up a new contract with a new club. Like when you could stipulate you wanted better training facilites etc, etc. You should be able to request 'unsackable for a year' Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jakobx Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeyt: I think you'll find that transfers do happen in the real world as well </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Sure they do, but they dont work this way and most certainly its not the manager that does them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
anagain Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 Don't see a problem. It's nothing I would consider using but each to their own. The only condition I would name is that it is turned off by default and players wishing to be unsackable must turn it on. I would be mightily annoyed if I started a new game only to realise that I was unsackable three years in. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovingthegreen Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 In my opinion, cheating is doing something unethical and/or against the rules to help you win games - this has no bearing whatsoever on your ability to win games. Include it in 09! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
turn it upto 11 Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 i do see why those who wouldnt use it dont mind it being in the game, why does it affect you how someone plays the game at home. does it make any difference to your game at all. theres an editor thats there, which makes it possible to crete your own team, move players around and give yourself 1billion pound transfer budget but your not crying about that, your just not using it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilb242 Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 If all the board confidence problems were fixed, then this option wouldn't be necessary. Personally I'd like the challenge of being in danger of a sacking, then turning things around and making my club sucessful. But each to their own. If its an option, then turn it on if you want it on, off if you don't. Its that simple. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ridley99 Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 this option is available on FMH 08 as an unlockable so i cant see why they cant implement it into pc version Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnerfan Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jakobx: I dont understand why some people are so against the idea of having an option that only other people would use. What is wrong with you? It doesnt affect you in any way it only helps someone else. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> I'm against anything that takes up code without adding anything to the game. I'm also against anything that takes away development time and effort from things that would genuinely improve the game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnerfan Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 I don't see it as cheating, btw. I'm a firm believer in "you pay your money, you play it however you like". My objection is that it is totally superfluous - you can essentially have a non-sackable option now, just by retiring and re-entering the game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bermybhoy Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ridley99: this option is available on FMH 08 as an unlockable so i cant see why they cant implement it into pc version </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Maybe they could have it as a 'lockable' feature? ie once your experience reaches a certain level it automatically turns off, so it's not indefinite. To counter my own argument, this wouldn't help much those playing long career games who are unreasonably sacked. Agree with a previous point, that there would need to be penalties for using it, such as blocking access to the hall of fame if it was selected at the outset. Struggling for ideas of anything else, but I think that penalising the player in some way is the key to implementing it. I was dead against this idea, but am warming to it. When I started out the game was prety easy, but I can appreciate only picking it up now, who has not progressed WITH the game over the years like many of us, would find it overwhelming. If it helps people (kids especially, I would guess) get into the game who might otherwise give up with frustration, surely that's a good thing? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Masquerade Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 I'd like to voice my approval of this idea. Gunnerfan makes good points however, I wonder how difficult it actually would be to implement. I mean if it was simply as it is now, except when they'd normally sack you/allow you contract to expire then nothing would occur other than a drop in board approval in the confidence screen until you achieved what they desired then this would in no way detract from development time. Indeed, it would probably be as easy to implement in to the game as checking the box itself for a player. My grievance against the idea is linked to some of the previous poster's support for it. While I do believe it has merit I also am strongly against it being a placeholder for improving the current atrocious state of the board confidence engine. I'd far rather see the board confidence get a serious overhaul than having an unsackable option to avoid it's failings Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJdeMarco Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 Another good reason (for me personally) would be that my prettier half might start playing again. She got really into FM05 and we had a decent network game stretching many seasons. She wasn't brilliant at the game but did okay. Since FM07 she won't play anymore as she spent more time getting sacked than playing matches. An unsackable option would make it fun for her again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PMLF Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by gunnerfan: I don't see it as cheating, btw. I'm a firm believer in "you pay your money, you play it however you like". My objection is that it is totally superfluous - you can essentially have a non-sackable option now, just by retiring and re-entering the game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> You lose your match record and all other similar info in this case. Maybe a punishment for those who use the unsackable option could be that they shouldn't be allowed to get any Hall of Fame points or something. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
follow the blind Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">quote: What about the others that don't brag about cheating? Well lets not take the risk of braggers and don't have an "unsackable option" </div></BLOCKQUOTE> i agree joey, forget terrorism, lets try and stamp out these "evil" braggers.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
x42bn6 Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 I don't see a problem with it. Not everyone plays the game properly and we shouldn't all try and force everyone to. Though to be honest I can imagine how stupid it would look: Would you like to be unsackable? [ ] Yes [X] No (recommended for realism) You can change this option later if you wish, in <instructions>. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnerfan Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PMLF: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by gunnerfan: I don't see it as cheating, btw. I'm a firm believer in "you pay your money, you play it however you like". My objection is that it is totally superfluous - you can essentially have a non-sackable option now, just by retiring and re-entering the game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> You lose your match record and all other similar info in this case. Maybe a punishment for those who use the unsackable option could be that they shouldn't be allowed to get any Hall of Fame points or something. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Isn't losing the match record an appropriate "punishment"? Works for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
B. Stinson Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Gunnerfan makes good points however, I wonder how difficult it actually would be to implement. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Not difficult at all. But if the FM team finds it to be difficult, perhaps they could ask the approximately 2 people that successfully added it to EHM... while also adding a full 2D match engine. <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Isn't losing the match record an appropriate "punishment"? </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Punishment for what... Wanting something that would allow them to fully enjoy their game? Excellent idea. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alurny Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 Can't see the problem with adding it in personally. Will help people adapt to the game, especially if they are new to the series. The only issue would be with relegation from the playable leagues, but I'm sure a solution to that problem would be possible. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSCCG Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 Isn't just adding yourself back as a new manager the same as not being sacked? I only ever sign 1 year contracts though so I've never tried it before. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJdeMarco Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Alurny: The only issue would be with relegation from the playable leagues, but I'm sure a solution to that problem would be possible. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> I would suggest that if a player does go that low then they "leave by mutual consent" rather than being sacked. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJdeMarco Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MSCCG: Isn't just adding yourself back as a new manager the same as not being sacked? </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Not really. By adding another manager and retiring the old one, you have to start again with setting up the training, tactics, shortlists, scouting, manager preferences etc if they have failed to be saved. Your relationships with players/staff would have to be re-built also. I suggested doing the retire/add manager thing to my partner and she said it was too much hassle to do it because "it took too long to gat back to playing matches". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ncfcgee Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by gunnerfan: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jakobx: I dont understand why some people are so against the idea of having an option that only other people would use. What is wrong with you? It doesnt affect you in any way it only helps someone else. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> I'm against anything that takes up code without adding anything to the game. I'm also against anything that takes away development time and effort from things that would genuinely improve the game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> I don't see how that would make any difference whatsoever, the code would be so tiny compared to the rest of the in game code as to be barely noticeable and i also highly doubt it would take up much development time if any, as mentioned above, they already have it it FHM so they know the code and how to implement it already. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
theboywonder Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 i think its an excellent idea. if you dont want to use it you dont have to so i dont see what the problem is. It would make the game a lot more playable for the casual gamers/newbies/younger players. For the record i'm a casual gamer and probably wouldnt use it but certainly think it would be good for a lot of players. I'm sure there could be several things implemented along these lines as well that could help the casual gamer, and again if you dont like it dont use. as someone said earlier, as long as the default settings are the "realistic" settings then you wouldnt even notice it and it doesnt hurt anyone. If it really annoys you that much that someone hundered of miles away is playing the game differently to you, in an unrealistc way and is in your eyes cheating then that is just very sad. I suggest you take this moment to log off fm08 for a moment, shut down the computer (click start in the bottom left of your screen, then select turn off computer in case you've forgotten), walk outside and reintroduce yourself to civilisation and remember that what you are playing is in fact a game, it is not real however much you may want it to be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh.banter Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 I don't see any problem with the suggested option really. It makes the game more newbie friendly or for whatever reason they want to use that option. But if you're talking about realism, then where's that damn check I'm supposed to get monthly?? I'll be insanely rich by now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubierta Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 IMO unsackable option is unnecessary....as long as Board confidence works properly, adjusts the expectations when you draw Arsenal in FA cup with a League 1 team and so on.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millie Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 @ gunnerfan Totally see where you're coming from, mate. Unsackable managers, when things start going badly, are going to have the fans against them (low attendances, pressure on players), the board antagonistic (no money, pressure on players), low morale, terrible reputation and buying players, keeping players and playing well is going to get virtually impossible. We all know how quickly bad results can snowball in this version (and in real life, to be fair). OK, you're still Manchester United manager three years in the Championship, but it would become nigh-on impossible to get anything done as most players wouldn't play (well) for you. At which point you're going to have to restart/add new manager anyway. No objections from me (how you play it is your business), but it's not the quick fix some are making it out to be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginger Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 Check out The Bootroom - Issue 3 We have a great article which has discussions both for and against the unsackable argument! http://community.sigames.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/521102691/m/1332081683 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gaffovski Posted March 16, 2008 Author Share Posted March 16, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Millie: OK, you're still Manchester United manager three years in the Championship, but it would become nigh-on impossible to get anything done as most players wouldn't play (well) for you. At which point you're going to have to restart/add new manager anyway. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> And at which point, you miss the point... which is that a newbie will have had 3 years of uninterrupted learning experience, without the hassle of setting up his backroom staff, contracts for players, re-setting squad status for players, appointing training, scouting regions etc etc, all over again each time he re-enters as a new manager. I haven't gotten sacked in 2 or 3 versions of the game now, and I was not thinking of me at all in backing this idea, but I will tell you that I spend 2 to 3 hours setting up my club properly, before a ball is even kicked in a competitive match. Now put yourself in a newbie's shoes, taking into account how the game has evolved into a not-so-simple-one-anymore, and tell me they wouldn't find repeating this process every time they get sacked rather quickly, extremely frustrating. <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Millie: @ gunnerfan Totally see where you're coming from, mate. Unsackable managers, when things start going badly, are going to have the fans against them (low attendances, pressure on players), the board antagonistic (no money, pressure on players), low morale, terrible reputation and buying players, keeping players and playing well is going to get virtually impossible. We all know how quickly bad results can snowball in this version (and in real life, to be fair). </div></BLOCKQUOTE> I can think of a club somewhere in north-east England that more or less fits that description. And the funny thing is, they've had loads of managers, who have achieved probably the same results had just one manager kept his job all along. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antonin Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DJdeMarco: I think an unsackable "option" would be a great idea. It could be beneficial to many people including those who only play the game to manage their favoured club and the beginner who would like time to play with a club to get a feel for the game. Having a tickbox to toggle this option would then enable them to enter "the real (game) world" when they feel they are ready. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> This is a great idea. For years I have been proposing this, only to be shouted down. I have no idea why people bitterly and rudely oppose an option that would in no way impact THEIR gameplay or enjoyment of FM, an option they could simply choose NOT TO USE. As it is, FM is frustrating and unrealistic, and often seems more like work than a fun way for me to spend what little free time I have. I don't even attempt to play FM08 any more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aenariel Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Antonin: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DJdeMarco: I think an unsackable "option" would be a great idea. It could be beneficial to many people including those who only play the game to manage their favoured club and the beginner who would like time to play with a club to get a feel for the game. Having a tickbox to toggle this option would then enable them to enter "the real (game) world" when they feel they are ready. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> This is a great idea. For years I have been proposing this, only to be shouted down. I have no idea why people bitterly and rudely oppose an option that would in no way impact THEIR gameplay or enjoyment of FM, an option they could simply choose NOT TO USE. As it is, FM is frustrating and unrealistic, and often seems more like work than a fun way for me to spend what little free time I have. I don't even attempt to play FM08 any more. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> I wasn't even going to comment on this thread, but I have to say I agree 100% with you. Your comment = my thoughts exactly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnerfan Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ncfcgee: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by gunnerfan: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jakobx: I dont understand why some people are so against the idea of having an option that only other people would use. What is wrong with you? It doesnt affect you in any way it only helps someone else. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> I'm against anything that takes up code without adding anything to the game. I'm also against anything that takes away development time and effort from things that would genuinely improve the game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> I don't see how that would make any difference whatsoever, the code would be so tiny compared to the rest of the in game code as to be barely noticeable . </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Really? And how many commercially successful computer games have you programmed? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marky Mark! Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 I personally would love this option. Not for the usual reasons though (thankfully I manage to have decent sucess with most of my FM games), I would love to lead Chelsea to 5 or 6 straight relegations without getting sacked, then resign to get a propper job! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tieio Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Great idea for an option, I loved it in NHL:EHM. No pressure to do anything but kick back and have FUN playing the game. I really know very little about football, and I suck at this game, so not being fired would make it more enjoyable. What's the point in buying the game at all when you have to make a new profile (or job) in the game every 2 or 3 seasons because you keep getting fired? I don't give a damn if in MY game I ruin a good team, at least I am enjoying MY game and having FUN. How can anyone argue with that? If you are against people buying a game and enjoying it, then why are you even here? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jakobx Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by gunnerfan: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ncfcgee: I don't see how that would make any difference whatsoever, the code would be so tiny compared to the rest of the in game code as to be barely noticeable . </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Really? And how many commercially successful computer games have you programmed? </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Unless FMs code is the worst code in the world by a wide margin i dont think it should take them more than 4EH to implement. Adding a check box to an application that basically just disables some functionally is usually a completely trivial task. Development time is a pretty lame excuse for not implementing this feature. I think you are not worried about the "wasted" time but are more worried that someone else would be able to enjoy the game in a different way than you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJdeMarco Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jakobx: Unless FMs code is the worst code in the world by a wide margin i dont think it should take them more than 4EH to implement. Adding a check box to an application that basically just disables some functionally is usually a completely trivial task. Development time is a pretty lame excuse for not implementing this feature. I think you are not worried about the "wasted" time but are more worried that someone else would be able to enjoy the game in a different way than you. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> The thing is that it wouldn't just be a simple checkbox. Other interactions would also have to be amended/removed, for example the media aspect. It wouldn't make sense if the media were speculating about the managers future when he is unsackable. Then there is the board interaction. You would need to make the ultimatum item unclickable as it would have no realistic use. There are many other areas that are intrinsically linked so it wouldn't be a "simple" fix as Gunnerfan rightly says. Might I also say that your riposte to Gunnerfan was not necessary. Although I am in favour of this idea (as I feel it would help many people enjoy the game more), I also agree with Gunnerfan that there are far more important areas to work on than this and if adding this meant that other areas weren't improved (i.e. board confidence/transfer market/player interaction) then I would rather it was ignored. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ncfcgee Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by gunnerfan: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ncfcgee: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by gunnerfan: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jakobx: I dont understand why some people are so against the idea of having an option that only other people would use. What is wrong with you? It doesnt affect you in any way it only helps someone else. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> I'm against anything that takes up code without adding anything to the game. I'm also against anything that takes away development time and effort from things that would genuinely improve the game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> I don't see how that would make any difference whatsoever, the code would be so tiny compared to the rest of the in game code as to be barely noticeable . </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Really? And how many commercially successful computer games have you programmed? </div></BLOCKQUOTE> I would guess the same amount as you which is probably none although apologies if i'm wrong but it's common sense that it would be tiny in ratio to the game as a whole and it would be complete stupidity to think otherwise. Oh, an nicely quoted, missing out my key point that they already have it on FHM which kind of proves my point that it both works and is implementable (if that's even a word). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest louisrroque Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 I Imagine Boro' would have this "unsackable" box ticked by default? Gibbo, Gibbo! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trekman Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 In a way the option to be 'unsackable' is already in the game. All you do is when you are eventually sacked simply retire then re-add yourself back as manager of the team you were sacked from. I have done this numerous times and it works perfectly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jakobx Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by trekman: In a way the option to be 'unsackable' is already in the game. All you do is when you are eventually sacked simply retire then re-add yourself back as manager of the team you were sacked from. I have done this numerous times and it works perfectly. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> And this is gonna preserve all the tactics, training, shortlists, reputation, relationships, history, etc how exactly? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trekman Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> And this is gonna preserve all the tactics, training, shortlists, reputation, relationships, history, etc how exactly? </div></BLOCKQUOTE> While you will probably loose your reputation,relationships and history things like tactics,shortlists and training are saveable to this shouldn't be a problem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomshaw Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 gaffovski, you're completely missing the point of football manager. it is supposed to be realistic, it says so on the box! it would be a complete novelty and i wouldn't take the game seriously anymore. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hufton Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 Personally I don't have a problem with it in principle. For those who want to cheat its their own choice, the game is already open to abuse through the editor, modifier and genie scout that one more option wouldn't really make a great deal of difference. What I do have a problem with is that this seems to be another area that could create problems in the programming. After the experience of this year I think its time SI went back to basics rather than adding more options that complicate matters further. Once they've got their house in order then they can add whatever they like to help out people who can't be successful the traditional way, but until the game has got back to its former standards its best forgotten. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.