Is Football Manager in Decline?

[jayahr]

Whilst i am hereby stating that the fault lies within the user and not the game i still do believe that SI are taking the game away from mainstream and into hardcore.

Funnily enough I have read the complete opposite complaint on here a few times very recently.

Makes me suggest that both claims are wrong.

[Saevel]

On the contrary, it's getting better and better, and the devs are doing a pretty good job on focusing on the right areas of improvement

[Ferrari312]

Just set 4-4-2. The game does all the rest. It won't help Newcastle or WBA beat Chelsea or Man City, but it will give your team the base structure to win the games they should win, and compete well in even matches.

Some people seem to want more than that - well, you can have more than that, but you need to put the effort in, to understand situations, and adapt to them, you can't download a 'super tactic' and win everything. That's the way it should be.

Is the correct answer.

I must admit I don't get the over-obsession with tactics on this forum. I've never once strayed from the default settings in the wizard, I just change the mentality and passing style options according to who I'm playing, with a standard 4-4-2, and off I go. OK that's a lie I'll sometimes set passing down the flanks if the opposition is playing a narrow formation, but that's it.

And while I don't pretend to be the best FM player in the world (or anywhere near) it's not like I've had a rubbish career either, started unemployed, picked up by a side in the Belgian 3rd Division, steadily progressed, switching to bigger teams when i got the chance and when it felt right, and now (2018 in the game) I'm managing the Swiss champions in the CL group stage (and admittedly getting tonked by Real and Juve and finishing bottom, but still progress). I'm enjoying this far more than picking a big club, downloading something off the tactics forum to plug in and winning everything.

By and large I tend to beat the teams I should and lose to the ones I should, with some random variation and the odd shock result (just like real life) thrown in of course. I've progressed in the game by buying, selling and developing players, increasing the strength of my squad and improving the team that way, much more fun than fiddling about with sliders or setting up set piece routines etc.

If you genuinely enjoy messing about with tactics down to the most minute level then go for it, but I think a lot of the people who think the game is broken, or can never win etc. are maybe trying to overcomplicate things on the tactics side and trying to be too clever. Just keep things simple and let your players do the rest.

I've loved FM10 probably the best feature being the tactics wizard. In fact I can't comment on the FM11 demo yet, the reason being I'm enjoying my FM10 career save too much to devote any time to FM11 until I can start my career save on that (i.e. Nov 5th)

[big_bob]

FM05, FM06 and FM07 were good games, FM08 and FM09 were steps in the wrong direction, but FM10 with patch 10.3 is the best version so far. Yes, I'm thinking even better than CM01 and CM02.

Actually, FM10 is the only game in the series I enjoyed regarding long-term saves. Nothing beats creating a world-class team with regens you bought when they were 16 and 17 years and you develop them into superstars. Then selling your aging players to make profit and replacing them with your wonderkids. This is what the game is about. You get attached to the players, you get really happy when they make it big. You feel like Arsene Wenger when your 21 years old now world-class striker that you signed from compensation when he was 16 and he was carefully tutored, trained and loaned to become a superstar scores 35-40 league goals per season and becomes the World Player of The Year.

So, who cares if the player interaction is not as good as should be or if the press conferences are repetitive? Will I get bored winning Champions Lreague 15 times in a row, breaking all the records in the game or getting a stadium named after me? I don't think so.

So if FM11 will be just as good or even better than FM10 things are looking good for the FM series.

[Mojby]

I enjoy the game just as much as i used too.

IMO changing your tactics to suit your oppenents is wrong. You should play to your strengths not your opponents weaknesses. A few people above have said that you need tactical consistency to allow your team to gel and get used to a certain way of playing and I totally agree with this.

In previous versions I set up my tactics the same way and stick to them home and away (I never understand why people have different tactics home or away). I tend to find I have a good first season, a average second season and then it gets better and better from then on.

I also believe that you must get good coaches and also set up some decent training schedules as these help immensely as well.

I will change tactics in game sometimes as well - nothing major just some touchline shouts - I still keep a 442 and just tweak it.

[Fabio MVP]

For me this is the best DEMO so far ever. So, I hope that FM 11.1 will be the best football managment simulation so far ever.

[Bababui]

I enjoy the game just as much as i used too.

IMO changing your tactics to suit your oppenents is wrong. You should play to your strengths not your opponents weaknesses. A few people above have said that you need tactical consistency to allow your team to gel and get used to a certain way of playing and I totally agree with this.

In previous versions I set up my tactics the same way and stick to them home and away (I never understand why people have different tactics home or away). I tend to find I have a good first season, a average second season and then it gets better and better from then on.

I also believe that you must get good coaches and also set up some decent training schedules as these help immensely as well.

I will change tactics in game sometimes as well - nothing major just some touchline shouts - I still keep a 442 and just tweak it.

I use 442 but switch between control and counter depending whether home or away; or defensive against big teams in the cups. I believe in formation consistency while employing situational tactics within it.

[hursty2]

People need to realise that not every football team in the world is successful...

[Saevel]

IMO changing your tactics to suit your oppenents is wrong. You should play to your strengths not your opponents weaknesses. A few people above have said that you need tactical consistency to allow your team to gel and get used to a certain way of playing and I totally agree with this.

In previous versions I set up my tactics the same way and stick to them home and away (I never understand why people have different tactics home or away). I tend to find I have a good first season, a average second season and then it gets better and better from then on.

I also believe that you must get good coaches and also set up some decent training schedules as these help immensely as well.

I will change tactics in game sometimes as well - nothing major just some touchline shouts - I still keep a 442 and just tweak it.

The thing is, there's always a counter to your tactic, no matter how well suited it is to your players. You can have tactical consistency, and still adapt your team. For instance, if you're playing 4-4-2 and your opponent has an extremely strong AMC, you'd be a fool not to somehow take that into account when preparing for the match. Sure, you might win without doing it, but being a good manager is about taking all the advantages you can.

As for home vs away tactics, I think you're underestimating the psychological factors of the game. Teams will come at you in different ways when playing home vs away, and if you fail to realize this, you also fail to recognize an opportunity to gain an advantage (or prevent your opponent one).

[edgar555]

The thing is, there's always a counter to your tactic, no matter how well suited it is to your players. You can have tactical consistency, and still adapt your team. For instance, if you're playing 4-4-2 and your opponent has an extremely strong AMC, you'd be a fool not to somehow take that into account when preparing for the match. Sure, you might win without doing it, but being a good manager is about taking all the advantages you can.

As for home vs away tactics, I think you're underestimating the psychological factors of the game. Teams will come at you in different ways when playing home vs away, and if you fail to realize this, you also fail to recognize an opportunity to gain an advantage (or prevent your opponent one).

These are 2 differing ideologies. Neither is right or wrong. More and more these days RL managers are taking the tact of preparing for each opponent, but there are still some who prescribe to the 'don't care what they do, let them worry about us' mentality. Whichever way works for you is the correct one.

[MelbVictory]

People need to realise that not every football team in the world is successful...

well said.

I'd say though, most people enjoy this game if they are successful with their team. So, where does that put poor SI.

[wazza]

I dont think your going to get real results on this espescially 'Yes I dont play it now'.

I know 13 have voted, but imo the majority of people who dont play the game wont be viewing this site as they dont need to as ' they dont play the game now'. You may find that theres thousands of people like this that have stopped playing and hate the game and dont look at the site. Mad people imo as the game just gets better and better

[SmurfDude]

well said.

I'd say though, most people enjoy this game if they are successful with their team. So, where does that put poor SI.

That is part of the problem. Many people will play a game to beat it. That's been the whole premise of games for 20 years; you play a game and you have fun beating it, but FM is on-going and you can't really "beat" it as such, but you can win all competitions which is essentially the same. I think many complaints stem from people not being as good as they think they should be, or not seeing a natural progression in their results improving, as you see from other games e.g. Ninja Gaiden, you start off getting your backside whooped, but eventually learn the moves and find it easy. FM isn't really like that, so it's easy to get annoyed and blame the game without realising it's supposed to mimic football, and very few managers win trophies in real football, and even the most successful teams stop winning eventually. FM offers a different sort of gaming challenge

I can understand some people disliking FM. It's nothing like the old CM games where you could pick it up and play a season in an hour, and win the league using 1 killer tactic. I can understand how people enjoyed that simplicity. But if FM had stayed the same, I expect SI would now be out of business. Times change and games are expected to progress with the times. There will always be a minority who complain, but that doesn't mean the game is in decline, only sale figures can tell you that, and I bet FM11 is once again top of the charts.

[Saevel]

These are 2 differing ideologies. Neither is right or wrong. More and more these days RL managers are taking the tact of preparing for each opponent, but there are still some who prescribe to the 'don't care what they do, let them worry about us' mentality. Whichever way works for you is the correct one.

Well aware of that, and I agree. I was just explaining the advantages, as he didn't seem to be aware of them.

[Guest]

FM gets better and better for every edition. Well I think so any ways.

[Alalzia]

It isn't only about tactics , first of all it gets slower and all new modules are forced in your face , there is no real way you can get rid of the press, or of assman reports , or of scouting reports , there is the whole pre-match thing and in general thousands of clicks i wish i never had to do .

I didn't like 06 , loved 07 , get bored by 08 , didn't bought 09 due to DRM and decided to buy 10 just because of non stupid DRM , i was lured in because of the editor and the possibility of adding new divisions to previously neglected championships but the truth is that if i could do an xml to expand that in 07 i would have never touch 10 after first week of play.

FM series are moving toward realism forgetting that this is meant to be a game , adding complex stuff and thousands of more clicks of course it moves the series towards realism but they also make it less of a game . I 'll give an example : I play in the Greek league with 4 divisions and all , after 10 years many clubs including mine have "state of art youth facilities + youth academy" yes on all those years there is one player with PA +170 and other two with PA +160 , best players are generated in some Croatian clubs , or in Brazil or (LOL) in ...England , this kills the whole academy thing , yes the game will have good regens but NOT for your team , come on even laughable games like EA's Fifa club manager or whatever it is called have master this , investing in youth gives you better talent . To whoever i have talk about this i always get 2 answers :

1.There was never good players in Greece

2.It is realistic not getting a Messi per year

Of course both statements are true but i am playing a game and i expect actions and results to be consequent like having a bad terrain will help my strong lumberjacks win games against technical teams or big pitch will help my wide play , or mark the stupid striker means that this striker will never be alone inside me penalty area. OK realism works but it screws gameplay because realism means randomness (you know life is a bitch). In game human decisions giving a big variety of random inconsequential results

is highly demotivating ; in many games you know that when doing A sucks you are wrong and have to do B , in latest FM series releases there is no clue, A may be right sometimes but sometimes it is totally wrong.

IMHO Fm series are in decline because they have stop be fun , sure they are more hands on giving a variety of choices like box to box or ball winning midfielders but in the bottom line the variables behind all those mechanics are too blurry and AI coaches will hive against you anyway , "you found something that works punk? we will all use the same tactics against you for a month and rotate them until we start beating you, then you will have to find something else" .

Also new games require more clicking than fraking Diablo , i mean come on i wanna do 1 click and see match play, no freaking submit team, no teamtalk , no assman advise no nothing , also no stop at halftime .

[Saevel]

Also new games require more clicking than fraking Diablo , i mean come on i wanna do 1 click and see match play, no freaking submit team, no teamtalk , no assman advise no nothing , also no stop at halftime .

As Miles usually suggests, maybe you should try the handheld version of FM. It's more simple, you don't have to think or click as much.

You disagree with the general direction FM is taking, which is realism and simulation. There may be an alternative out there for you in the handheld version.

[Bababui]

As Miles usually suggests, maybe you should try the handheld version of FM. It's more simple, you don't have to think or click as much.

You disagree with the general direction FM is taking, which is realism and simulation. There may be an alternative out there for you in the handheld version.

FM. Realism??? Not so much.

FM is a fun game but it isnt very realistic at all. As the above poster wrote "...best players are generated in some Croatian clubs , or in Brazil or (LOL) in ...England." about regens. the way the game progresses forward isnt realistic at all. Where is African football? Where is New World football? As we saw this past World Cup, the talent gap amongst countries is quickly shrinking.

The economics of the game arent realistic. Part of this is due to the fact that making a realistic worldwide economic model would be quite difficult (yet could be fascinating for a long career game) and part is due to the fact that only the clubs themselves actually know the reality of their economic situations.

Also, how realistic is it for Bath City or even Leeds to win the Champions league?

SI should try to balance a desire to be as realistic as possible with making the game fun and malleable. For example, people playing out their third season in FM 2007 wouldnt have the ability to add a 25 man squad limit. But, if SI allowed us to customize our FM experience (at the same time that we set pitch dimensions, named captains, etc); it would make the game more fun and realistic.

Overall most of the game is still quite a bit of fun. But there is still quite a bit of work SI can do to balance the game and make it better reflect the larger footballing world.

[Neil Brock]

I think for a lot of people (not everyone mind) as they grow up they get less and less time to play the game, plus everything when you're experiencing it for the first time generally is better. I'll never forget winning the European Championships for the very first time with France on one of the earlier CM's.

Likewise when I took Oxford to the UEFA Cup final in FM05. Just brilliant memories. However I'm lucky in a respect that I still get a fair bit of time to play the game, and already playing FM11 this year I've had some great memorable matches (beating Champions Man Utd twice in one season!)

I'd agree it maybe does take longer to get through a season, but I enjoy taking my time - I've never been a person just to constantly click continue to get to the next match. On some FM's I've even taken to taking over my reserves and U18s to play matches. The game, in my opinion and not just the 'company line', is the best version of FM I've ever played.

[Saevel]

FM. Realism??? Not so much.

FM is a fun game but it isnt very realistic at all. As the above poster wrote "...best players are generated in some Croatian clubs , or in Brazil or (LOL) in ...England." about regens. the way the game progresses forward isnt realistic at all. Where is African football? Where is New World football? As we saw this past World Cup, the talent gap amongst countries is quickly shrinking.

The economics of the game arent realistic. Part of this is due to the fact that making a realistic worldwide economic model would be quite difficult (yet could be fascinating for a long career game) and part is due to the fact that only the clubs themselves actually know the reality of their economic situations.

Also, how realistic is it for Bath City or even Leeds to win the Champions league?

SI should try to balance a desire to be as realistic as possible with making the game fun and malleable. For example, people playing out their third season in FM 2007 wouldnt have the ability to add a 25 man squad limit. But, if SI allowed us to customize our FM experience (at the same time that we set pitch dimensions, named captains, etc); it would make the game more fun and realistic.

Overall most of the game is still quite a bit of fun. But there is still quite a bit of work SI can do to balance the game and make it better reflect the larger footballing world.

I'm not really sure what you're trying to argue against here. The guy complains FM is too in-depth, with too much micromanagement. I'm saying that's the direction they're going for, which is realism and simulation. It's what they aim to achieve.

I'm not saying FM is a perfect representation of reality, that would be foolish to suggest.

[Lord Rowell]

I think a lot of people have, over time, lost some interest in the game, myself included, although I have ordered FM2011 and will play it. The reasons are, to some extent, getting older, changes in life circumstances, and also fatigue with having played what must be about 10-15 different releases of the game. When you've been playing it since the mid 1990's, as I and many others have, its inevitable that some fatigue will set in.

But, in terms of the product itself, SI are doing their best to innovate year on year. The quality of the product is way ahead of what it was in previous years. It has lost the "clickability" feel but, while some of us older folk miss that (generational issues as well as the one about time?), its obvious many of the younger players relish the depth.

If people think its in decline, here's something to try - get an old version of the game. Play it. At first, its a great nostalgia trip. From personal experience, after a while, I got bored out of my skull, because the depth and level of control were lacking in comparison to modern releases.

I think these feelings are more about US as long-term players, rather than any decline of the game itself. Face it folks, we're becoming old fuddy-duddies

[Mojby]

Well aware of that, and I agree. I was just explaining the advantages, as he didn't seem to be aware of them.

I am well aware of the pro's and con's but I was stating my opionion and what works (very succesfully) for my teams and the types of players I buy.

The thing is though if you concentrate on trying to nullify the effect of lets say a strong AMC, then you leave yourself open elsewhere on the pitch. Then all you are doing is being re-active to your oppenents in game. IMO I set a gameplan and stick to it. Sometimes it does not work but the vast majority of time it does.

I do see and understand what others are saying about my tactics - but it works for me so i will never change this. Just passing on my hugh experience of playing this game and the wisdom of age!!

[crouchaldinho]

Good post by Lord Rowell. I think that sums it up for me, at least partially.

[David Ashworth]

I don't have the same amount of time that I had in my youth and it appears the core features that I am bothered about the text based match engine, tactics, training, player progression and regen modules have been neglected in favour of gimicy type things like face in the game, social network your goals and all that rubbish.

It is probably just my age and the kids may prefer these sort of things.

[edgar555]

I don't have the same amount of time that I had in my youth and it appears the core features that I am bothered about the text based match engine, tactics, training, player progression and regen modules have been neglected in favour of gimicy type things like face in the game, social network your goals and all that rubbish.

It is probably just my age and the kids may prefer these sort of things.

I too would prefer they dump all the social me stuff and focus on the core game, however I'm sure that you are right and the kids want this nonsense.

[Bababui]

I'm not really sure what you're trying to argue against here. The guy complains FM is too in-depth, with too much micromanagement. I'm saying that's the direction they're going for, which is realism and simulation. It's what they aim to achieve.

I'm not saying FM is a perfect representation of reality, that would be foolish to suggest.

Apologies Saevel. I think he was arguing at the same time that the game isnt realistic enough. While it would be great if SI could reduce the clicking, I dont think the game should be simpler. For example, it would be cool if on a single page we could assign tight marking, show onto foot, closing down etc. Simply list the opposing lineup on the left hand side of the page and then have these things in columns. Less clicking and easier to organize.

[andysafc]

I don't think that the poll threw up any surprises. 4% of people you voted say they no longer play the game. For some reason people on here can't understand why people who don't buy the game now yet still come to these forums. Is that a surprise to you? I have many many fond memories of Football Manager and whenever a new version comes out i will try it to see if i can rediscover the old magic. If i can't then i just leave it be. Of course though there will be other people who no longer come on here now so we'll never know the true figure.

However around 25% of people are saying that they still play it but don't enjoy it like they used to. Hopefully that will filter through to SI. As the game aims for more realism is it worth it and the cost of fun?

Kick out the style bring back the Jam!!

Thanks for everyone who voted and give their opinions, there are some very good points made within this thread and it's upto the powers that be whether they wish to take them on board or not.

[NVS_Gooner4life]

It's not in decline but it has gotten a lot more complicated and that takes some of the fun away.

[englandmanager]

it's as fun and creative as ever

[Lord Rowell]

I don't think that the poll threw up any surprises. 4% of people you voted say they no longer play the game. For some reason people on here can't understand why people who don't buy the game now yet still come to these forums. Is that a surprise to you? I have many many fond memories of Football Manager and whenever a new version comes out i will try it to see if i can rediscover the old magic. If i can't then i just leave it be. Of course though there will be other people who no longer come on here now so we'll never know the true figure.

However around 25% of people are saying that they still play it but don't enjoy it like they used to. Hopefully that will filter through to SI. As the game aims for more realism is it worth it and the cost of fun?

Kick out the style bring back the Jam!!

Thanks for everyone who voted and give their opinions, there are some very good points made within this thread and it's upto the powers that be whether they wish to take them on board or not.

At the end of the day Andy, you & me conquered the footballing world with Sunderland, that's all that matters ;-)

[ArranoBeltza]

I don't think FM is in decline, but, keep in mind, I have only been playing since FM09.

I liked FM09, but found it too hard. With the advent of the new tactical system last year (i.e. no sliders) I really enjoyed it and, from this year's demo, the game looks as good as ever.

I believe people view the game as "in decline" because they find one version they love, and have a save they really get into. While on FM09 I never had any long-term saves, I took Athletic Club to 2024 in my FM10 save. So, since I really got into last year's version, I may find it harder to get into this year (I don't think so, though). Also, when people played from, say, FM05 up to now, maybe something like FM08 was, to them, the most innovative or the version with the best new features. This, combined with a game that the player really gets into, gives them the impression that the subsequent versions aren't as good.

[stevie_G_32201]

ive been playing since it was known as championship manager, followed SI through the change and i still enjoy it today. granted im not as good as i would like to be but thats the challenge of it.

[grade]

I'm not really sure what you're trying to argue against here. The guy complains FM is too in-depth, with too much micromanagement. I'm saying that's the direction they're going for, which is realism and simulation. It's what they aim to achieve.

I'm not saying FM is a perfect representation of reality, that would be foolish to suggest.

The reason why I personally don't like it (I can't for others), is not the depth of the game, but the game being far beyond complicated and frustrating.

I think a lot of people have, over time, lost some interest in the game, myself included, although I have ordered FM2011 and will play it. The reasons are, to some extent, getting older, changes in life circumstances, and also fatigue with having played what must be about 10-15 different releases of the game. When you've been playing it since the mid 1990's, as I and many others have, its inevitable that some fatigue will set in.

But, in terms of the product itself, SI are doing their best to innovate year on year. The quality of the product is way ahead of what it was in previous years. It has lost the "clickability" feel but, while some of us older folk miss that (generational issues as well as the one about time?), its obvious many of the younger players relish the depth.

If people think its in decline, here's something to try - get an old version of the game. Play it. At first, its a great nostalgia trip. From personal experience, after a while, I got bored out of my skull, because the depth and level of control were lacking in comparison to modern releases.

I think these feelings are more about US as long-term players, rather than any decline of the game itself. Face it folks, we're becoming old fuddy-duddies

In all honesty the depends on the people. yes I don't deny some get fatigated and all of that. However my sensation when playing these last games and then going to FM07 is sign of relief. The game feel much more balance, all featured work as they suppose to be and it is much more interesting, challenging and fun then last versions by long miles. I prefer this game then the too- in-deph or the new features of the last versions.

I for feel I have much more control on my subs. About you? Have a last minute change of mind due to something happen on match engine? Oh, you couldn't d theo change on the subs? Too bad, though luck!

the game has gone from good to better every year, well more or less. i'm sure in 30 years you'll be able to see the match in "holodeck" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodeck ) and it wil still have bugs and people will complain but it will be light years better than it is today. just like fm11 is light years ahead of first CM i played. nevertheless, i had great time with all versions as it's basically still the same game, just gets more deep every year.

and for people who don't like it, well too bad. it's the way it is and unfortunatelly for them, it won't change for a while. for those who don't like it this way SI makes this hand held versions, which i hadn't tried, but i believe are similar as first managers, just more flashy.

and yes i really don't get this social media stuff... these kids nowadays...

Unfortunately for SI, I see from the my group of friends abandoned the FM series after FM08, due to be too time consuming and no longer be fun, because you have to micromanage the game.

Me and my friends among ourselves decided to account of whom played the CM/FM before FM08 and who are among intention to buy FM11 until release of FM12. In our group of friends, 25 of them started to play CM/FM before FM08, some started in FM05 other are from the old CM series. Now out of the 25 only 2 are considering buying FM11 and even them the demo failed to impress, for different reasons, but the common is that "too many focus on bull shi*t, less focus on Core Features" as one of my friends so well putted. Oh and 3D look resembles a game for the Sega Saturn is agree by all, despite some seeing the potential of the 3D.

Of course this is not resembles the rest of FMers out there, but I noticed from my group of friends there was buzz when a new CM/FM was out and tell about our conquests and what players should we buy, all around the year. Now is: "how, another FM is out, nice", moving along.

[Fidel_lfc]

Since the first Football Manager game, every year the game improved, but FM10 was horrible in my opinion.

I was concerned that FM11 would be like FM10, but so far FM11 is amazing, i'm very happy and think this will be the best FM version.

[Ackter]

Apologies Ackter but I have to disagree with you in the strongest possible terms.

You don't need to apologise mate

To me, the match engine was so frustrating that I could only enjoy the game on commentary only.

[SCIAG]

I loved FM07, that was my favourite FM. The Match Engine was unbelievably good, too. I thought FM08 was a massive drop off, and each FM since then has made some of the ground up, so no, I don't think it's in decline. I'd compare FM now to Leeds- pretty good not so long ago, massive drop off, and now slowly climbing back to the heights, unsure whether it will ever be quite as good again.

I'm genuinely amazed by some of the posts saying how bad FM11 is (fortunately not this one). IMO it's much better than people are making it out to be.

[matthiele]

while i agree with your point that the english players are overated it is the strength of the premier league that keeps many of them there rather than an inability to play in other leagues. rooney, terry, lampard and numerous others have been chased by foreign teams but they give up when they realize they cannot compete with the wages offered in the premier league and the lack of desire of the players to leave.

[Dave9ffc]

Having team talks decide how well the team plays and consequently the results, annoys me no end. If I've done everything right tactically it should matter rather than which one of five fairly cack options I chose

[Sampa]

Another option should say "Yes, now shut up crying and complaining about nothing."

I looked for that but couldn't find it - so I voted for the top one in the end.

[Rich2086]

Trouble is with this thread most people who have stopped playing wont be in this forum anymore and wont vote.

BTW i voted No i dont play anymore

FM for me is to fussy now i cba to put the time into it id rather play something else online or something (not FML either). I just dont find it fun anymore answering the same media questions is boring the layout is to fussy and theres so much going on when playing a match theres just to many things to read and see and press. Also 3D sucks it just wasnt needed yet imo.

My fav was 2006. 2011 will be the first i havnt bought since before CM3

[SirFuzzyDunlop]

I have played them al since CM2 and have played less and less since FM08. I really enjoyed FM07, hated 08, 09, but FM10 almost got it right, at least for me. if FM10 had a more balanced match engine, better patching and offered a challenge after 10-15 seasons then it would be one of the best SI have done.

A lot of people always believe the newest version is always the best, which is far from true, but you get a lot of those people saying FM10 is the best one. Each patch had major ME flaws, which totally killed the game for me. Don't get me wrong, it must be one of the hardest things to program in any game, but it was still very frustrating.

FM11 looks to have a very good ME and if it can give me a challenging game after 15 seasons then it will probably be one of the best versions yet.

[J.T]

Personally I think its getting better and better...

[englandmanager]

I loved FM07, that was my favourite FM. The Match Engine was unbelievably good, too. I thought FM08 was a massive drop off, and each FM since then has made some of the ground up, so no, I don't think it's in decline. I'd compare FM now to Leeds- pretty good not so long ago, massive drop off, and now slowly climbing back to the heights, unsure whether it will ever be quite as good again.

I'm genuinely amazed by some of the posts saying how bad FM11 is (fortunately not this one). IMO it's much better than people are making it out to be.

i'd compare it more to manchester utd (this coming froma leeds fan lol , i could be shot)

pretty good most of the time! ouch i now hurt (except january 3rd 2010, ok now i feel slightly better )

[Shake Appeal]

Also English teams in the game are far superior than their European counterparts which makes the English national side one of the best in the game, again totally unrealistic. There is not one player in the England team who can play abroad, none do and the only one who still carries weight internationally is David Beckham, who is in his 30s. I fail to see why SI seem frightened to reduce the level of superiority in-game of English teams and pay a bit more attention to the small details abroad.

This has always been a problem, and always will be, and I can understand why and don't really blame SI. They will obviously have their own biases and preferences, and they're living and working in England, which I felt having lived there is surprisingly insular about its football, and fervently believes its own hype (never more obvious than at major international tournaments). But most of that hype is justified: there's little doubting the Premiership's big four (and a few others teams now on the cusp) have been monumental not just domestically but in Europe over the past decade, whatever about the strength and depth of the clubs below them. The Premiership also has all the money, all the TV revenue. I would imagine a majority of the FM playerbase is from the UK, and I imagine an even larger majority plumps for an English team to play with more often than not, so its unsurprising that England and its leagues get more focus and attention. That's where the interest (and money) is, that's where the interest and investment goes. At least dynamic league reputation may allow us to counteract the inherent favour shown to England and English clubs.

Otherwise, I think FM has been steadily getting better over the years, and I welcome all of the increased complexity. The revamp of tactics in recent years has been a joy, and I've actually got better at the game now that I can respond quicker and smarter to things without having to adjust twenty sliders; for the first time, I feel like my knowledge of football is helping me, rather than my knowledge of the game's systems. I do think they would be better served releasing one game every two years and really working on it as a full-blooded release with all its new features polished, releasing a hefty (paid?) data update in the meantime. As it is, features oftem seem to get introduced one year and actually fixed to work as intended the next.

I also think the 'human' aspects (psychology, team talks, press conferences, the media, and now conversations), could use some serious, serious work. I mostly grasp them, I mostly use them to my advantage, but they are repetitive and mostly shallow.

On the whole, each year is better than the last, but it's a bumpy climb. That said, my Pro Vercelli game in FM10.3 was probably the most fun I've ever had with the game since first playing CM97/98, and I'm very excited about using Palermo this year, though I'm likely going to spend a few hours in the editor before I actually get underway.

[Nad]

I feel sorry for the younger people on here who've only grown up with FM and never got to play CM01/02.

That was 99% the perfect game. The balance between gameplay, speed, difficulty and realism was perfect. So perfect in fact that I had one save which I played on and off over 5 years, eventually getting to 2034.

All SI had to do for the version after that was just take what they had, give it a wee little polish, and send it out. Sadly, not one of the FMs has even come close to CM01/02. If CM01/02 was 99% the perfect game, most FMs are around the 65% mark.

If you're reading this and you've never played 01/02, all I can say is try it. I think it's now free to download so you have nothing to lose and arguably the best game of all time to discover. And it's still supported unofficially, so you can use a database of players updated to now rather than 2001 squads.

[redstar1]

I would have agreed before 10.3 last year. Excellent version and from what I've seen of the demo FM2011 looks like carrying that on. I do want a 'Club Director' addon so I can do more on the financial/stadium side though. Maybe next year;)

[wwfan]

However around 25% of people are saying that they still play it but don't enjoy it like they used to. Hopefully that will filter through to SI. As the game aims for more realism is it worth it and the cost of fun?

Unfortunately, that stat is meaningless without you having posed the question 'Are you enjoying FM more than you used to?' If slightly over 1/3 of the people who answered they still enjoy it stated they are enjoying it more, then just as many people would think it is getting better than those thinking it is getting worse.

You also have the bias of your original statement /threat title to consider, which will automatically attract people wanting to moan about the game.

[crouchaldinho]

I feel sorry for the younger people on here who've only grown up with FM and never got to play CM01/02.

That was 99% the perfect game. The balance between gameplay, speed, difficulty and realism was perfect. So perfect in fact that I had one save which I played on and off over 5 years, eventually getting to 2034.

All SI had to do for the version after that was just take what they had, give it a wee little polish, and send it out. Sadly, not one of the FMs has even come close to CM01/02. If CM01/02 was 99% the perfect game, most FMs are around the 65% mark.

If you're reading this and you've never played 01/02, all I can say is try it. I think it's now free to download so you have nothing to lose and arguably the best game of all time to discover. And it's still supported unofficially, so you can use a database of players updated to now rather than 2001 squads.

I'm amazed you think CM01/02 is better than any of the FMs!

I thought it was all right at the time, I suppose, but the match engine was ridiculously easy to exploit with the with ball/without ball screens, and mucking about with them in the first place wasn't exactly my idea of a fun time!

Looking back, I think it would be really boring to go back to that now, especially with no 2D engine and a match engine/tactical system that is way too easy to exploit without even trying.

[numbas2]

For every one of us who moves away from FM, they'll be a little guy new to the gaming world picking up a copy and immersing him or herself into it deeper than we could ever have dreamed (or wanted).

[Nad]

I'm amazed you think CM01/02 is better than any of the FMs!

I thought it was all right at the time, I suppose, but the match engine was ridiculously easy to exploit with the with ball/without ball screens, and mucking about with them in the first place wasn't exactly my idea of a fun time!

Looking back, I think it would be really boring to go back to that now, especially with no 2D engine and a match engine/tactical system that is way too easy to exploit without even trying.

The match engine was exploitable if you went out of your way to exploit it. Just like with diablo and the corners in FM10, right?

That said, if you didn't do any of the weird positionings (like striker marking keeper) that the engine couldn't cope with, the tactical side with the WBL/WOBL was superb, you could position your players exactly as you wanted them. So if I wanted a wide midfielder who played on the wing when we didn't have the ball and gave me width in our own half but then came into the centre in the attacking third, I could set that up very easily as I wanted it, rather than how SI / Ray Houghton / a hundred and one tactical sliders interpret it.

And if the 01/02 engine hadn't been ditched, it would now have had another 10 years of development, so I'd imagine most of the flaws would have been fixed. And you could have that in 2d / 3d as you liked