Sorry but I needed to get this off my chest...

[Mitja]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Spagbol:

I did find FM07 fun, I'd probably put it in the top three CM/FM games ever in fact.

The growing issue I have is that having tried three or four smaller leagues after flawed games in Ireland and Spain I've just found another fatal bug (in Malaysia this time). I really have no idea how this game was released.

As Phil930 and others have noted playing FM is no longer entertaining, it just grinds. Another thing I miss are the days when you could get through a seaosn in five hours. A lot of us don't have time to contribute 48 hours of real life play per season as we get older. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

if I remember well many older and experinced players wanted this game to become more like simulation then "get through the season in 5 hours" game. and I believe that FM would loose it's fanbase then I surely don't want a game when I buy best players and pick them and win my games without any effort. that times have gone.

I think that SI choose this game to be as realistic as it can. and if it worked properly it would be fun.

[Pearcey the legend]

Have played every edition of CM/FM since 97/98 season so feel qualified to have an informed opinion on this.

Started in FM08 as Arsenal. My first friendly game was against Gretna and I put out a pretty much full strength starting 11.

Gretna shots - 5

Gretna shots on target - 5

Gretna goals - 2

Arsenal shots - 31

Arsenal shots on target - 19

Arsenal goals - 3

Okay, okay, I know I won. However, I couldn't recall coming across such a one-sided match in my time playing CM/FM and thought it was interesting that such a debate was happening on the forums re these types of issues.

I personally don't feel that much is wrong with this game. The 'magic' has probably gone, but the last time I felt it lingering in my loins was back in the 01/02 season. I agree with some other posters in that it would be good if the FM team could focus on ironing out the remaining quirks and annoyances. However, it will be difficult to justify this to the marketing dept. at Sega who need new features and attractions to promote the game to consumers. I think the appeal of the 97/98 and 01/02 versions (recognised classics) was that they felt really 'sorted' and the gaming experience was as nigh on good as it could be within the limits of the game version at that time.

[Mitja]

of course they need new features, but why? to attract newers to buy this game. but it's far worse if they loose their long term clients isn't it?

[Phil930]

Yes it is, and I think they currently are loosing there long term clients. I'm not sure on the demographic that buys this game, but just like in the game its a given that each year a new bunch of youth come through and buy into the FM series. They know no different from the fun loving old days. The magic is fading, its more chore like nowadays.

Maybe its all of us getting older and grumpier! What is a given is the big boss at Sega won't care about improving existing content; they will want new features to continue the evolution. If only more of them played the game. Personally, since SI split with Eidos (I believe) and paired with Sega things have only gone downhill from a gaming perspective.

[Phil930]

Yes it is, and I think they currently are loosing there long term clients. I'm not sure on the demographic that buys this game, but just like in the game its a given that each year a new bunch of youth come through and buy into the FM series. They know no different from the fun loving old days. The magic is fading, its more chore like nowadays.

Maybe its all of us getting older and grumpier! What is a given is the big boss at Sega won't care about improving existing content; they will want new features to continue the evolution. If only more of them played the game. Personally, since SI split with Eidos (I believe) and paired with Sega things have only gone downhill from a gaming perspective.

[T4RG4]

Personally - and I've no idea what goes on inside SI or the team makeup - I think they could do with getting a designer or two into the studio! The game appears to me at least, to be a classic case of group programmer design (Gets coat...)

FM07 is stable when patched, and good fun. FM08 added some really, really weak things IMO, many hyped up to be main features. I can still recall the moment of shock upon discovering what 'match-flow' actually meant feature wise At the end of the day, to release a product and not to have solved enough issues to appease people on your forum (who often put effort into explaining what the problems are) is a bad show and seems to be happening with every release so much so that its expected to happen every single year.

I'm sure there are reasons for x,y,z happening but unless people on this forum are told of all the issues (never going to happen) then the moaning will continue. However, launching with a better product in the first place and patching competently and quickly (always the aim I'm sure) would go a long, long way to reducing complaints.

FM08 is not a bad game by any stretch of the imagination. I just didn't see anything worthwhile in moving from 07, and the skin/inbox split and match-flow put me off from day one. Reading the forums I see there are many other issues that'd annoy me so I don't even view 08 as an upgrade option at the moment. FM09 will hopefully upgrade some areas left untouched for many years (I haven't time to detail now) but with the current setup at SI and recent track record, I dont think this will happen.

Having said all that - the FM series is still the best on the market!!! Awesome It will not remain so forever though (but by that time major shareholders in SI will have sailed into the sunset )

[WJ]

One of the best threads I have read in a while.

I agree with almost everything thas has been said here. I'm not going to repeat it all.

I just hope SI reads this.

[xouman]

Here we have one problem. Maybe we should do a poll: how many time would you like to spend to play a season? Some people want to play a season in a day, others prefer to go deeper and spend 10 times more time. I suppose that some features could be managed by assistant in a decent way, so people could concentrate in things that they truly enjoy (signing players, set tactics, talk with players and press...).

Making the game easier, with less tactic features would help new players, but experienced managers won't like it. I'm not saying that reducing sliders is bad, but using default tactics is not the correct way for many users, only an option.

[George Graham]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mitja:

of course they need new features, but why? to attract newers to buy this game. but it's far worse if they loose their long term clients isn't it? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It is but this series needs an injection of something fresh.

For so long FM has stood head and shoulders above its competitors, not so much in terms of features but because it just did things better and in a more realistic way.

Now looking at what the CM guys are doing I see a lot more effort on their parts to innovate, whereas SI seem to be steeped in the days of CM3 where we would get excited about a little touch here or there, or a new option.

I know we get told that SI have a relatively small team, but I wish that rather than small changes that are spread pretty thin over the whole of FM, that SI would focus on really transforming in a big way one area of the game.

I know that to make an impressive list of new features for the game is important, but really the sum of these new features isnt to the extent that you feel your playing anything other than slightly updated or tweaked version. Theres just nothing that ever takes this game forward in anything other than teeny-tiny steps.

I appreciate that there is plenty going on under the bonnet as such- but with FMs competitors (well CM anyway) gaining ground but adding more exciting and interesting features than SI are coming up with then there will be a risk that people will jump ship.

This player bought CM08 (my first CM since SI left) as something to play before the patch, and I was pleasantly surprised. Its not perfect and just as infuriating as FM at times but nowhere near the trainwreck of CM5.

SI beware- your competitors have fresher ideas than your currently giving us.

[George Graham]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xouman:

Here we have one problem. Maybe we should do a poll: how many time would you like to spend to play a season? Some people want to play a season in a day, others prefer to go deeper and spend 10 times more time. I suppose that some features could be managed by assistant in a decent way, so people could concentrate in things that they truly enjoy (signing players, set tactics, talk with players and press...).

Making the game easier, with less tactic features would help new players, but experienced managers won't like it. I'm not saying that reducing sliders is bad, but using default tactics is not the correct way for many users, only an option. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Its not about making the game easier in terms of the challenge, its about making the tactical side more intuitive and more akin to real life- whereas currently its all about beating FM, not beating real life tactical situations.

FM is currently challenging for all the wrong reasons.

[Guest]

First post, thought I'd just add that I agree with the topic starter. And imo this series has gotten far too complicated and intricate. It's taken all the fun out of it.

The last FM game release I "enjoyed" was FM2006...but to be honest I still prefer CM 03/04 to any of the newer releases.

[UELLfan]

Pleasantly pleased of how long discussion has been going over here without degenerating into inane rambling. Big thumbs up to every contributor here.

As for what's right and wrong in the game, I must agree that the main problem right now is that the MCs really don't perform that well defensively in a 442. A 451 improves it a bit, but it creates other issues.

However, the main problem with 08 is not the goal/shot ratio but rather the 'too many chances created'.

Really. It all goes down to the fact that too many chances are created. If those chances were cut before the oposition got into a position to make a shot, the game would improve a lot.

I'm also of those who take what is being shown in 2D with a pinch of salt, because I really do think that the engine sometimes can't represent what is happening behind the scenes (thus the clear cut chances missed, or the defenders making a step forward before starting to trail back after a long ball by the oposition). I'd also like to see the commentary inmatch improved. It's shocking how poor the game reads nowadays if you actually try to only use the commentary.

That being said, the game's got potential. Lots of it. Sort the excessive chances, sort the confidence module, sort the transfer module (the way the Artifitial Inteligence treats negotiation is beyond a joke)and you have a winner.

Heck, I've already put 11 seasons in it with all those niggling issues, imagine what I'll do when it gets sorted.

[Mitja]

http://community.sigames.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/1519717/m/8312051573

this is a thread on similar metter. mostly about tactical problems and match engine problems. it's in T&TT forum couse mods closed it here. I think it's interesting discussion and it should be in GQ forum. this my last reply from there:

Mitja

Amateur

Location: moan or not to moan?

Registered: 20 June 2004

Posted 22 January 2008 22:39 Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post

quote:

Originally posted by Arnoldzhu:

Yeah! If just put it simple, we need a better and much simpler way to give instructions. And some other 2 things:

1. The instructions for each player including the subs should be pre-set and we don't need to change the tactics everytime we bring a subsitute player onto the pitch. In a word, an efficient way to give multiple but clear tasks to your players.

2. Second thing is you should not be able to make drastic changes in your tactic. I mean, you cannot just pause the game if you're losing, and then go on the internet, download some weird winning tactic, and go back to the game to deploy the new tactic and then your team just play differently. It's not real. Players cannot play some unknown tactics if it is not tained through daily sessions. So after match begins managers should not be able to change tacitc drastically, they only can tweak something here and there.

3. The captain should play more influence on other players.

4. Irl you can see manager call some player to come close and tell him something. I don't think again manager can make too instructions at a time. Maybe he is just adding and modifying some duties of this player.

I don't know if i'm right but hope as long as everything is improving the game will be better and better with more and more realism.

your absoultly right. especiall about your point number 2. I mean it took years for Man utd to play the way they play, training and practising it in matches. all players are familiar with their roles and they don't change just like that. imagine what would happen if Cristiano should man mark opponent or not allowed to drible. to put this roles all together into one efficient machine isn't so simple. it's easy to play wider or at a little higher tempo and stuff like that. but you can't change a team of nobodys to play like Barca if you know what I mean.

[gonzo7]

This is supposed to be a constructive post, but, well here goes. Not sure this is the best place for this so sorry if its wrong.

Firstly, I have seen the problems that you are talking about and have at times been extremely frustrated with my strikers or their goalkeeper, depending on who's fault I deem the miss/save to be.

However, whilst I definetly do not want a 3d a match engine I feel the 2d engine does little to dispel the myths regarding the shots on goal/supergoally scenario. Perhaps its only me, but I find it particular hard to visualize what the strikers/goalkeepers are doing when the one on ones arise. Only a 3d engine would show this ie whether the striker is on balance on their favoured foot or whether the defender hounding the striker down is challenging for the ball at the moment the shot is taken. The 2d engine just shows players, shooting and goalkeepers, invariably saving shots, without the bigger background.

Perhaps with this, and, football being football, where on any given day any side can beat another. Besides many strikers into todays Premiership are not the greatest of finishers one on one, and goalkeepers are getting better. However, all this theorising doesn't prove/disprove whether this is a bug. Only those who code the game will know whether what I have mentioned affects one on ones or not.

[Mitja]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by gonzo7:

This is supposed to be a constructive post, but, well here goes. Not sure this is the best place for this so sorry if its wrong.

Firstly, I have seen the problems that you are talking about and have at times been extremely frustrated with my strikers or their goalkeeper, depending on who's fault I deem the miss/save to be.

However, whilst I definetly do not want a 3d a match engine I feel the 2d engine does little to dispel the myths regarding the shots on goal/supergoally scenario. Perhaps its only me, but I find it particular hard to visualize what the strikers/goalkeepers are doing when the one on ones arise. Only a 3d engine would show this ie whether the striker is on balance on their favoured foot or whether the defender hounding the striker down is challenging for the ball at the moment the shot is taken. The 2d engine just shows players, shooting and goalkeepers, invariably saving shots, without the bigger background.

Perhaps with this, and, football being football, where on any given day any side can beat another. Besides many strikers into todays Premiership are not the greatest of finishers one on one, and goalkeepers are getting better. However, all this theorising doesn't prove/disprove whether this is a bug. Only those who code the game will know whether what I have mentioned affects one on ones or not. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

hmmmm.... you don't think 30+ shot per game and game after game isn't a problem/unrealistic/bug?

thanks god they don't score much becouse then we would have hockey scores all the time (7-5, 14-1...)

[gonzo7]

I never said there wasn't a bug or was a bug I just want to know whether or not the things that can't be seen on the 2D pitch are affecting the chances created. If they are then the problem is proportional far less.

[Mitja]

maybe you were defending ME becouse we can't actually see how good is the chance. I agree we can't, commentary should tell us more.

but there shouldn't be so many chanes in the 1st place.

[Mitja]

maybe you were defending ME becouse we can't actually see how good is the chance. I agree we can't, commentary should tell us more.

but there shouldn't be so many chanes in the 1st place.

[fergusdacat7]

To create 30+ chances numerous times in a season is a bit mad and if you think of it as chances in another sport then that's 90 pts if your 100% successful in basketball from 3pt range. Totally different sports but hopefully you'll ctach my drift.

[Mitja]

FORMATION;DEFENSIVE SHAPE AND MOVEMENT

defensive and attacking shapes of formations could actually be different. sometimes it's hard to say what formation the team is playing, IRE. due to free roles, unpredictable movements, tactical discipline, human factor and def/att shapes of formation.

as it is now, FM formation aspect is very old and will need to change. some other games are way ahead on this metter. (as I read, becouse I didn't play them, only PES). I think in FIFA you can choose defensive and attacking formation (4-5-1, 4-3-3; 4-4-2, 2-4-4). good solution but not perfect.

I think when defending, team is suposed to know it's formation. also it is important to stay in it and hold it. on the other hand when attacking the team needs to be unpredictable. it means that attacking shape isn't so defined, due to constant movement of players. of couse there are teams who play with more tactical discipline, more in shape so they can return easily to defensive formation/shape. but more dangerous it wants to be, more movement and risk is needed. both positioning and movement is maybe my biggest resentment to FM for years.

managers devote great attention to this metter. quick transformation from narrow and compact defensive shape to attacking positions. it's all about movement.

DEFENSIVE FORMATION/SHAPE

WHAT IS IT?

it's just the shape taken by players to defend when the ball isn't in posession.

4-4-2, 5-3-2, 4-1-4-1. any known formation.

important things are marking systems, defensive line, width, presing styles...

Football Manager:

when the formation is choosen you set both att/def shapes of it. this needs to be separated. in my opinoum you should be able to choose your defensive formation. attacking formation should be based on mentality, tactical discipline (how much you want your players to leave their postitions, given individualy) and movement of players.

my proof is that there are not 2 teams who play flat 4-4-2 exatcly the same. their defensive shapes are pretty much the same but attacking shapes are different. it would be much easier to me if I could draw, but I'll put it in numbers.

so 4-4-2 is defensive formation. attacking formation could be anything from 4-4-2, 2-4-4, 2-2-2-2-2, 2-4-2-2 any combination even 3-3-4 if you want. all this is a tendency depending on many factors (mentality, movement...)

ATTACKING TRANSORMATION

this is where things should change the most. I know we have arrows and barrows and sarrows. problem is that this kind of movement is too strict and not suficient. anyone who played old CMs remebers you could choose def/att positioning of your players in all 3 (was it even 5?) of the pitch (own area, centre and opponent area).

and that could be very interesting solution to the movement of players. so it's movement instead of only positioning as it was back then. you should be able to define your player's movement for each part of the field. with arrows. not just 1 arrow. it's smth like those arrows on PES, but for every part of the pitch. it's important becouse you might want your players to move diffrently in thier own half or near opponent goal. of course players shouldn't follow your movement instructions to blindly. so again it should be understanded more like tendency.

in this way we should be able to play our pacey right winger on the flank, triyng to cross or come into box. much like wingers play now on FM. let's say arrow(s) in the final third of the pitch would look like this:

l

l

l

M R

l

l

l

this should meen his mein movement is down the line. he should be allowed to come deeper for the ball or go forward. team mentality should define how often he should go forward.

I would like my right footed left winger to act like one. so I should be able to define his movement with arrows like this:

M L -->

l

l

l

this means that his movement should be oriented toward more central positions (cutting inside) and that I want him to come deep more often. of course it doesn't meen that's he shouldn't get forward when apropriate.

mentality is very important factor. team mentality should define how much/ how often you want your players to go forward. tactical discipline (maybe better expression would be how much free role you give to a player, so free role slider) should define how often player leaves his defoult position and moves around.

[hammersjj]

For me the biggest thing missing in tactics is not being able to specify different formations for when you have the ball and when you don't. A 4-3-3 becomes 4-5-1 when your team doesn't have the ball sort of thing.

Again this is probably due to the way the game calculates in advance, if it had to recalculate the game on every possession change it would be a nightmare. But still it would be nice to have.

[Patrick.Bateman]

Originally posted by tmolvik:

I am sure this post could have been posted as a response to any of the soon hundreds of shot/goal-ratio articles, ....QUOTE]

CM was not always better as the other football managers.

I can bust that myth, CM01 is today receiving a high cult value but it was not better than "Premier League Manager" or "The Manager".

There is not something as an AI that's cracking your tactic. That's a myth too.

IRL, Manchester United often play games with tones of changes and no goals.

And believe me it is as frustrating for their IRL players and manager as it is frustrating for you in FM.

Else Manchester would win every game with 3 or 4 goals. Sorry they don't.

Probably there are some bugs in FM or the match engine. Hey it's software! Software comes always with bugs, doesn't matter how much you test. Unless you write a BASIC program like:

10 PRINT "OFF MY CHEST"

20 GOTO 10

But that's not FM is looking like.

I played with different teams in different leagues and I win titles and championships. The matches feel realistic most of the time and sometimes I think "This is a very weird match".

But I have that feeling in reality as well.

So yes, there’s something with your tactic. Btw, I use a very simple standard tactics, nothing fancy at all.

[Powermonger]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Its not about making the game easier in terms of the challenge, its about making the tactical side more intuitive and more akin to real life- whereas currently its all about beating FM, not beating real life tactical situations.

FM is currently challenging for all the wrong reasons. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's precisely the problem, the whole tactics/match engine is as far from intuitive as you can get and completely unfriendly to new users. FM is at the stage where there is too much reliance on past knowledge of the series, where it feels like the only way to succeed or come to understanding the tactical/match side of the game is to sink hours up hours of watching full matches and reading through a few years worth of tactical discussions. I don't find this fun or enjoyable.

Due to the direction the game is heading, with the preference for more complexity but the bullheaded reluctance to make tactics and the relationship with the match engine more easier to understand, I just keep feeling the series is going nowhere fast.

[Jase1982]

I just read this post and loved it!

Pretty much said what I was thinking....really bored of having something like 20 shots on target, to the oppositions 4, and losing 2-1...then their GK gets 10 and man of the match....reminds me of the old Championship Manager Euro leagues where the GK played such a pivitol part in whether your team win or loses.

FM08 was a massive waste of money as the changes incorporated don't represent value for money...I think for FM09 I'll wait to see what the feedback is prior to making a purchase.

One thing I would like them do is to remove the far too technical tactics setting for mentality, passing...etc etc...settings of 1 - 20 do not represent reality, as a setting of 6 or 7 probably determines whether you win the game or not...?! For passing it is especially nonsensical, move the cursor to short, or direct, but you can then have a different setting for short....thats like saying, we're playing short passing, but not quite as short as we could...to my mind, you play short passing....you play short passing...

I'm sure it's all been said before, and I hope SI really pull their finger out for the latest offering.

[Patrick.Bateman]

There are 2 kinds of people:

• They who win matches in FM

• They who do not win matches in FM

The first group likes the game, however they are not blind for the shortcomings.

The second group does not like the game and can’t see the virtues of FM. Instead they moan on the forums.

[Mitja]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Patrick.Bateman:

There are 2 kinds of people:

• They who win matches in FM

• They who do not win matches in FM

The first group likes the game, however they are not blind for the shortcomings.

The second group does not like the game and can’t see the virtues of FM. Instead they moan on the forums. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

lol, I believe there is a 3rd group of them also. those who don't watch their matches.

[gonzo7]

I reckon that theres 3 other types of FM players. One type who micro manage nearly every setting and the other type who macro manage by only doing the basic tactics. The third is those who fit somewhere in the middle.

I think I'm in the middle but over the years I've been moving more and more towards micro. I can no longer win by doing what I used to so I've had to change with the times.

[Maccie]

The game isn't terrible and I certainly believe that its something of an extreme reaction to discontinue playing the game because of the shots-to-goal ratio however the original post does make a lot of sense.

It is incredibly difficult to actually read the matches as you play them and therefore adjusting tactics is very also difficult. However if you have a decentish tactic, you can perform better by using more effective team talks. Check out out Wolfsongs post on Team Talks in the Tactics section - it helps!

[Patrick.Bateman]

What do people expect ?

A football manager with one single binary slider “Defending – Attacking†?

When you select “Attacking†you’ll win with 3 – 0 minimum.

When selecting “Defending†you’ll win with 1 – 0.

What a great game!

[Patrick.Bateman]

Yesterday, I couldn’t avoid degradation.

And it felt good, ‘cause I knew I had the worse team of the league.

[reidisnuts]

I've played the CM/FM series since the Amiga days and owned every single version, and I've always been of the opinion that the fun factor of the game has gradually been eroded over the years and sacrificed at the altar of 'realism'.

I first started to get peeved about it when the 'show interested players only' option was removed from the player search facility, and I've only really bought the last couple out of versions out of habbit and a longing for the old days, but FM2008 will definitely be the last version I buy, the balance towards 'realism' has gone too far. Football Manager, like footbal, should be a simple game, but its far from that now, and its no longer enjoyable.

The changes have been made in the name of realism (although frankly I'm not sure they are realistic - good teams don't change their tactics this much), but I don't want realism (or at least not too much) when I get home from work and turn on a computer game. My club (Sunderland) are drab and always will be in real life, so if I can't engage in a bit of Sunderland fantasy on FM, its lost its purpose for me.

[Patrick.Bateman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by reidisnuts:

I've played the CM/FM series since the Amiga days and owned every single version, and I've always been of the opinion that the fun factor of the game has gradually been eroded over the years and sacrificed at the altar of 'realism'.

I first started to get peeved about it when the 'show interested players only' option was removed from the player search facility, and I've only really bought the last couple out of versions out of habbit and a longing for the old days, but FM2008 will definitely be the last version I buy, the balance towards 'realism' has gone too far. Football Manager, like footbal, should be a simple game, but its far from that now, and its no longer enjoyable.

The changes have been made in the name of realism (although frankly I'm not sure they are realistic - good teams don't change their tactics this much), but I don't want realism (or at least not too much) when I get home from work and turn on a computer game. My club (Sunderland) are drab and always will be in real life, so if I can't engage in a bit of Sunderland fantasy on FM, its lost its purpose for me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree that sometimes, some things are over the top, in the name of the ‘realism religion’.

They should carefully look at what is fun for us gamers and what not.

Sometimes you don’t have to follow reality else the game could not be enjoyable anymore as well.

And in some circumstances some smart modifications on the GUI and the flow of the game could do wonders, while they still maintain their level of realism.

I will never forget that one German football manager of 20 years ago, where you had to enter dozen invoices, do your taxes and VAT papers, inventory schemes and so on…

VERY realistic, but it felt like working and not gaming. No wonder that almost no one noticed the game

[T4RG4]

I think there are a load of things SI could add to progress the game without requiring every more micro-management on the players part.

For example - more text for special events (i.e. 'Is this his last game for X?' Differening pitch/edge of stadiums types so that playing against a big team in a CL final didnt look as though it was played at Halifax Towns ground, decent audio effects blah blah).

We get Matchflow, split inbox and hope for another patch. Nice one Okay, so I'm being overly harsh to highlight my point that SI are perhaps mucking about with features that are far from appealing to many people. FM06, for me at least, was amazing fun if a little easy. I'd love to see more detail in terms of game feedback and special events (to increase atmosphere) and to go slightly easier on the tactical tinkering, especially as it sounds as though that area is still borked.

Amen.

[Chandaman]

I can't add anything to this thread that I haven't said elsewhere, or has been already said in here. So, I agree.

On a personal note, I find it a little sad that SI seems to have become the Microsoft of sports simulations (if there's such a thing) in the sense that the common wisdom about their products is to "wait for the patch". It's a safe bet that many (if not most) of all new features added on each yearly iteration inevitably require a later patch to be fine-tuned, tuned or even work acceptably at all.

I'm honestly hard pressed to remember since CM4 (and possibly earlier, but my memory is not what it used to be) any new feature introduced that didn't require to be patched later on to be brought to more or less acceptable levels of functioning or performance. Makes me wonder (as a customer) just what development methodologies have been at play all these years for each yearly iteration to constantly fall short of expectations at launch. It's not my place to criticize, but I find it odd; while I'm not expecting for every single minute feature added to be working perfectly and never require further attention, that's a far cry from patches that apparently introduce fixes into everything because nothing was up to snuff.

I did not buy FM08 because I was disappointed, overall, with FM07. I wanted to wait and see. Get a feel for the reactions, here in this forum and elsewhere. I feel I made the correct decision, since the new features are largely cosmetic and borderline irrelevant, while deeply-seated, core problems with the franchise still remain without being addressed.

At this point I'm wishing SI would simply skip FM09, if it's going to be more and more of the same, and concentrate on a radical new redesign of FM; one that addresses the root problems and injects a lot more common sense into it, once and for all. But, the yearly iterations are probably a business decision that may or may not even be on SI's hand.

As a customer, I still retain the option of skipping FM09 myself, and looks like I probably will.

[George Graham]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Patrick.Bateman:

There are 2 kinds of people:

• They who win matches in FM

• They who do not win matches in FM

The first group likes the game, however they are not blind for the shortcomings.

The second group does not like the game and can’t see the virtues of FM. Instead they moan on the forums. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Rubbish- when will people understand that seeing faults in the game is not necessarily linked to success or lack of?

From this players experience the shot ratio issue doesnt hinder success- it just means watching a match is very tedious, as even on key highlights you get to watch both human and AI teams miss chance after chance after chance.

[djwilko6]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Patrick.Bateman:

There are 2 kinds of people:

• They who win matches in FM

• They who do not win matches in FM

The first group likes the game, however they are not blind for the shortcomings.

The second group does not like the game and can’t see the virtues of FM. Instead they moan on the forums. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Congratulations on being the first to flame/troll in this thread.

[Powermonger]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Patrick.Bateman:

There are 2 kinds of people:

• They who win matches in FM

• They who do not win matches in FM

The first group likes the game, however they are not blind for the shortcomings.

The second group does not like the game and can’t see the virtues of FM. Instead they moan on the forums. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's rubbish, we complain because we want to enjoy the game but each release it is making it increasingly difficult to do so.

As JReacher mentioned in another thread in T&TT, FM has gotten to the point where we almost feel like we have to be real life football managers, especially in terms of understanding the complex tactical system. This is suppose to be a game but tactically it feels more like work.

I understand there are a select few people who have the intuition to understand tactics and the match engine, but the majority of us don't so why FM has to keep catering for a small minority is beyond me.

[magnoliadave]

where have the days gone were you could adjust your tatics pick the team and sit back and enjoy the match. these days i need 14 diffrent tatics witch i need to change every five minutes before i have the correct one which never allows me to actually enjoy the match what so ever.

personally a larger pitch so the stg ratio is fixed. this enables the game to be played in the middle of the pitch insted of the six yard box i think that would sort loads of problems out and make the game much more enjoyable thats all it needs.

then theres the transfer sarga. your telling me that you make a bid offer the default wages then he accepts hes now your player is in any way realistic come on si stop thinking like a fan and be the manager

magnolia

[Kriss]

Although for obvious reasons SI will want to release each new FM with new features as marketing points, I have to agree that a period of consolidation, perfection and improvement of the existing features would be a shrewd move at this stage.

There's nothing more irritating than a feature which could work properly but doesn't.

With the release of FML and the attendant publicity there probably couldn't be a better time than now to quietly add some polish to the existing FM functionality.

[xouman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Patrick.Bateman:

There are 2 kinds of people:

• They who win matches in FM

• They who do not win matches in FM

The first group likes the game, however they are not blind for the shortcomings.

The second group does not like the game and can’t see the virtues of FM. Instead they moan on the forums. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm performing quite well despite having a poor team, and I'm not moaning but admit that fm2008 has some problems with tactics. I adapted my tactics to the game, but those are not the tactics I would use IRL.

The game is the same if I won or if I lose, I know that if I lose is because my tactics are not well adapted to the game. Often is hard to know if my tactics are working well or could be highly improved, I'm quite useless reading matches in 2D and only know that I'm doing well because I'm winning with a bunch of useless players.

We are trying to give ideas and feedback to SI, although few people are blaming for their fustrations.

[tieio]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Patrick.Bateman:

There are 2 kinds of people:

• They who win matches in FM

• They who do not win matches in FM

The first group likes the game, however they are not blind for the shortcomings.

The second group does not like the game and can’t see the virtues of FM. Instead they moan on the forums. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What an odd statement? Do you really enjoy winning 2-1 after outshooting a team 20-3 in almost every match? I win a lot and complain very little, but really, this is a valid bug, the most valid one I have seen in years.

[Mitja]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Powermonger:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Patrick.Bateman:

There are 2 kinds of people:

• They who win matches in FM

• They who do not win matches in FM

The first group likes the game, however they are not blind for the shortcomings.

The second group does not like the game and can’t see the virtues of FM. Instead they moan on the forums. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's rubbish, we complain because we want to enjoy the game but each release it is making it increasingly difficult to do so.

As JReacher mentioned in another thread in T&TT, FM has gotten to the point where we almost feel like we have to be real life football managers, especially in terms of understanding the complex tactical system. This is suppose to be a game but tactically it feels more like work.

I understand there are a select few people who have the intuition to understand tactics and the match engine, but the majority of us don't so why FM has to keep catering for a small minority is beyond me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm not sure if even real life managers know so much about tactics as we FM players do.

tactical part if the game could so easily be simplfied. by doing that ME would also work more properly (if I understand those thing corectlly). just a example; which are the things that influence players moving forward now:

-team mentality

-player metality

-forward runs slider

-preffered moves (if player's got one)

-Creative freedom???

-off the ball, decision, work rate atribute

-stamina

probaly I forgot smth. all this ME has to calculate. don't tell me it couldn't be simplified.

[Patrick.Bateman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by tieio:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Patrick.Bateman:

There are 2 kinds of people:

• They who win matches in FM

• They who do not win matches in FM

The first group likes the game, however they are not blind for the shortcomings.

The second group does not like the game and can’t see the virtues of FM. Instead they moan on the forums. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What an odd statement? Do you really enjoy winning 2-1 after outshooting a team 20-3 in almost every match? I win a lot and complain very little, but really, this is a valid bug, the most valid one I have seen in years. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, I would not like it. But I don’t have such situations as well.

Oh, I admit sometimes I have these 20 chances and 0 goals situations.

It is happening 2 or 3 matches a year.

But sometimes I see such games IRL as well…

I don’t play with any fancy tactic.

Here’s my tactic:

http://members.lycos.nl/fm2008/Files/442.JPG

99% of the time I play like this. No player instructions.

And occasionally I change a little the team instructions:

• Playing wide, when the other team received a red card.

• Playing on counter when I’m the visitor and the other team is really good

• Time winning on high when I have to protect a small win

• Pressing on high, when the other team is short passing

• Tackling hard when the referee is a nice man.

This tactic works everywhere: Barcelona, Chelsea, Solihull Moors, AA Ghent, Napoli, LA Galaxy…

[olrion]

I thought I was the only one but it seems there are many people experiencing the same problems as me. I am close to turning FM2008 off for good.

I only have so much patience to watch my Spurs or Man Utd team batter a team for 90 minutes and lose to more clinical finishing. FM2008 has made me realise that actually Robert Earnshaw is more clinical than Tevez, Rooney and Ronaldo put together!

I agree with many peoples comments about tactics, there is too much of a focus on this. Sure you should have to tinker with your tactics a little or what's the point in the game but I kept the exact tactic for 10 games in a row and I got mullered everytime! That would never happen to a top flight team in real life. It's about the players more than the tactic, if you have world class players then they will play well no matter what tactics you play....

Hopefully FM2009 will iron out these problems!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Saxo:

I also stopped playing FM. Too many silly little bugs both in the match engine and in the overall AI. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

[gonzo7]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by olrion:

I thought I was the only one but it seems there are many people experiencing the same problems as me. I am close to turning FM2008 off for good.

I only have so much patience to watch my Spurs or Man Utd team batter a team for 90 minutes and lose to more clinical finishing. FM2008 has made me realise that actually Robert Earnshaw is more clinical than Tevez, Rooney and Ronaldo put together!

I agree with many peoples comments about tactics, there is too much of a focus on this. Sure you should have to tinker with your tactics a little or what's the point in the game but I kept the exact tactic for 10 games in a row and I got mullered everytime! That would never happen to a top flight team in real life. It's about the players more than the tactic, if you have world class players then they will play well no matter what tactics you play.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think theres a balance. Teams that lose 10 games in a row do not have world class players. If a team is underperforming its the managers job to put it right either through tactics or through personnal or both. As Portsmouth I didn't win for 6 games on the bounce, but following a minor tweak with my formation, which happened to be a player run, I won my next 8 matches. This included dispatching a Prem team in the League Cup, despite being a play-off hopeful in the Championship, with no world class players.

[SiDolman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Rubbish- when will people understand that seeing faults in the game is not necessarily linked to success or lack of?

From this players experience the shot ratio issue doesnt hinder success- it just means watching a match is very tedious, as even on key highlights you get to watch both human and AI teams miss chance after chance after chance. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here here - in my opinion the game is too easy (for me anyway) but that doesn't mean i dont see countless faults which i spend too much time writing about on here

[Chandaman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">As Portsmouth I didn't win for 6 games on the bounce, but following a minor tweak with my formation, which happened to be a player run, I won my next 8 matches. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is just terrible. Don't get me wrong, gonzo, I'm not berating you or anything. It's good that you found where the tweak in your tactic was. I'm saying it's terrible because if one player run is the difference between losing six and winning eight, that has as much to do with real life football as a pineapple pizza.

That's another thing many people are rightly dissatisfied with; the huge disconnect there can be many times between real, observable football and the match engine + tactics module. If to this disconnect we add the counter-intuitiveness of many of the tactical options, plus the excessive granularity of the sliders it's no wonder a lot of people are having problems.

The more time passes and the more I think of it, the more I'm convinced FM needs to be reset and rewritten at some point soon.

[xouman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by gonzo7:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by olrion:

I thought I was the only one but it seems there are many people experiencing the same problems as me. I am close to turning FM2008 off for good.

I only have so much patience to watch my Spurs or Man Utd team batter a team for 90 minutes and lose to more clinical finishing. FM2008 has made me realise that actually Robert Earnshaw is more clinical than Tevez, Rooney and Ronaldo put together!

I agree with many peoples comments about tactics, there is too much of a focus on this. Sure you should have to tinker with your tactics a little or what's the point in the game but I kept the exact tactic for 10 games in a row and I got mullered everytime! That would never happen to a top flight team in real life. It's about the players more than the tactic, if you have world class players then they will play well no matter what tactics you play.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think theres a balance. Teams that lose 10 games in a row do not have world class players. If a team is underperforming its the managers job to put it right either through tactics or through personnal or both. As Portsmouth I didn't win for 6 games on the bounce, but following a minor tweak with my formation, which happened to be a player run, I won my next 8 matches. This included dispatching a Prem team in the League Cup, despite being a play-off hopeful in the Championship, with no world class players. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What about teams overperforming? I've promoted a team from under BSS, and brought it to EPL only with welsh players. I have most of the best welsh players in the world, but I still have lots of positions with players not good enough for EPL. Only 2 are stars for EPL, about 5 standard EPL, 3 decent EPL players and lots of championship quality players. For example I'm playing with a decent championship keeper, good championship LB and AMC. But still finished 3rd last season and board wants me to finish season in european places and challenge for title in 2 years.

I was in 18th position after 10 weeks, out of League Cup, lost charity, finished last in CL group stage 1. But after 12 weeks I'm already 7th (only have lost 1 and drawn 3 of my last 12 matches), and going ahead in welsh cup and FA cup. And it's just what board and fans expect from me despite having a bunch of uncapable boys.

I'm not a good tactician, neither I have best players, but play and train with coherence. Is this enough to success or ME is flawed?

[Jase1982]

bottom line is, which I can see has been forgotten, is that this is supposed to be a computer game....

I don't want to spend hours working on a tactic, which logically should work, only to have to switch that tactic around several times during the game....one of the tips from SI is to not change your tactic around too much, keeping it consistant, but I can't see how you can do that...for me it seems you need to change your tactic and formation every game you play...realism, but boring....I'm not a football manager, I understand the game, but I don't care for spending days researching my opponents only to be beaten by better finishing.

I just want to buy players, choose a tactic, stick a team out and watch a game of football as it proceeds...

CM03/04 used to be the best in that respect, I had 2 or 3 formations, which worked...a defensive formation, where the players would actually perform well in, an attacking formation and the formation I perfected against Newcastle, who always use 4-3-3...I counteracted that formation by using 5-3-2, but now it takes me an hour before I even play a league game.

Having said all that, it did take me several months to get the hang of Championship Manager, although I was young at the time...so I understand that patience is the key with this game and will endeavour to master it.

In quickening up the speed of the actual game, which used to be a massive gripe, I feel they have slowed the actual progression of the game itself by clogging it up with too much to do, in their search for "reality"...whatever that is?

[Mitja]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chandaman:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">As Portsmouth I didn't win for 6 games on the bounce, but following a minor tweak with my formation, which happened to be a player run, I won my next 8 matches. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is just terrible. Don't get me wrong, gonzo, I'm not berating you or anything. It's good that you found where the tweak in your tactic was. I'm saying it's terrible because if one player run is the difference between losing six and winning eight, that has as much to do with real life football as a pineapple pizza.

That's another thing many people are rightly dissatisfied with; the huge disconnect there can be many times between real, observable football and the match engine + tactics module. If to this disconnect we add the counter-intuitiveness of many of the tactical options, plus the excessive granularity of the sliders it's no wonder a lot of people are having problems.

The more time passes and the more I think of it, the more I'm convinced FM needs to be reset and rewritten at some point soon. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I totally agree with. or those who are saying we must use defoult formations and tactics (defensive with no farrows normal with small and att with long) for better resoults. I mean, OK, but am I missing some basic football knowledge or what...