I've had it with this transfer system!!!

[CSF90]

For me the game is entirely playable. The crashes I experienced were down to my PC, and not the game. It runs fine now. So, your only issue is ridiculous transfers?

That and how ridiculously hard it is to sell players again (I seem to remember this problem from FM2008 or 2009, was perfect in 2010).

[sheeshy]

That and how ridiculously hard it is to sell players again (I seem to remember this problem from FM2008 or 2009, was perfect in 2010).

It's fairly easy to sell players. I agree that some just won't go, but is that not the way it goes in real life? You can't expect to sell everyone.

[roykela]

It's fairly easy to sell players. I agree that some just won't go, but is that not the way it goes in real life? You can't expect to sell everyone.

But surely it shouldn't take 4-5 seasons to sell just one player?!

That's how it was for me on my first save.

Now i'm on my second save. 7 seasons in. The first save i played around 6 seasons.

Been with more clubs i can count...sadly i can't say the same about selling players.

In 13 seasons, on 2 different saves, i've sold around 15 players.

Seems like i have to let their contracts expire, or go for mutual termination to be able to get rid of unwanted/unneeded players.

I do, however, play LLM so i figure it is a bit harder down the ranks, but seriously....

The players i've managed to sell have only had bids because i've offered them out.

I might have had it, but i just can't remember an offer on one of my players once, without offering them out.

Even though they've been wanted by other clubs.

[grade]

It clearly that times changed regarding to games. Since a Game is anyway near a life threatning product to its consumers, it is easy to go to release a game without proper test features and seeing they working as they should, like say a onboard computer of a car or the computer of an airplane. I also somewhat anger of these features that is released and it is beta testing for several issues and some of them can't be corrected in a patch, because means more deep programming.

Imagine if the companies that produce the software of onboard computer of car, of giving the wrong mileage or your breaks don't work if you switch the lights on. Or the computer of an airplane giving the wrong information how much fuel the plane has. Of course a game being piece of software like the computer in car or plane, it hasn't that key factor of life safety, because if it had no version of FM wouldn't pass that test.

I know that many people will say it has nothing to do with that, but as buying costumer I expect the products I buy to work properly when it is on sale and not a few months later, no matter well intended that company is. The game companies should release a game that is working with little or no bugs at all, if there is one or two problems are fixed with patches (like the Spanish bug or the crashes). Not release a half finish game and in the future we fix the flaws in the game, if not it will be next version of the game, specially if that game is far too complex for the number of people that work in company.

If I managed most teams or companies that way, I would be bankrupt in a couple of years (i mean several companies did go bankrupt that way, luckily Si has fan base that is tolerant and patience, but after all these years the patience of the fanbase is ending). It is bad business in all point of view of the time. If Si want to release a yearly version, either hire more people or tone down on the features in future versions. Si stood once to have new features that work properly in the game with little bugs on release, not this EA façade with bit good after sale costumer service in first place releasing half finish product.

[sheeshy]

A game and a computer system on an aeroplane are two very different things. The game does work, and I know it is not perfect, but show me a game that comes out with 0 patches.

[low42]

A game and a computer system on an aeroplane are two very different things. The game does work, and I know it is not perfect, but show me a game that comes out with 0 patches.

Please see the 70's, 80's and most of the 90's.

[milnerpoint]

Please see the 70's, 80's and most of the 90's.

are you seriously going to compare a game that was released in the 70's to a modern day game?

The fact is, this will not change now we are in the day when patches are easily avaliable to almost anyone who plays computer games due to the avaliabiliity of the internet, we just have to accept it or move on and not play computer games, especially not ones on PC's.

[low42]

are you seriously going to compare a game that was released in the 70's to a modern day game?

The fact is, this will not change now we are in the day when patches are easily avaliable to almost anyone who plays computer games due to the avaliabiliity of the internet, we just have to accept it or move on and not play computer games, especially not ones on PC's.

Sorry for being technical.

[milnerpoint]

Sorry for being technical.

no need to apologise at all, the point stands tho, no games in the 70's or 80's had patches, they were far less complex and there was not the medium for releasing patches easily, all of which is very obvious.

[x42bn6]

are you seriously going to compare a game that was released in the 70's to a modern day game?

The fact is, this will not change now we are in the day when patches are easily avaliable to almost anyone who plays computer games due to the avaliabiliity of the internet, we just have to accept it or move on and not play computer games, especially not ones on PC's.

I don't understand this attitude. Why should consumers accept patches and shrug their shoulders? While patches are inevitable, we should see patches as unacceptable and developers should strive for a game not requiring patches.

The fact that a fairly large proportion are clamouring for a patch is rather disheartening, and so is the stigma for some where Football Manager needs 2-3 patches to be "complete", and some consider the game to be "broken" out-of-the-box.

[milnerpoint]

I don't understand this attitude. Why should consumers accept patches and shrug their shoulders? While patches are inevitable, we should see patches as unacceptable and developers should strive for a game not requiring patches.

The fact that a fairly large proportion are clamouring for a patch is rather disheartening, and so is the stigma for some where Football Manager needs 2-3 patches to be "complete", and some consider the game to be "broken" out-of-the-box.

you say large proportoin, but in truth its a very very tiny proportion of people who have bought this game. The harsh reality is the very small amount of us who bother to post online and keep upto date with the forums attached to these games will never make a big enough difference. There will always be far more people happyily playing the game not coming online to read about the bugs, i have two pals i spoke to last night playing this game and completely unaware of any major issues. Sales of games speak much louder than posts on a forum and unfortunately those claiming games should come out the box perfect are fighting a completely useless battle. As much as it sounds like giving into the games companys unfortunately this is just the way it works now.

[x42bn6]

you say large proportoin, but in truth its a very very tiny proportion of people who have bought this game. The harsh reality is the very small amount of us who bother to post online and keep upto date with the forums attached to these games will never make a big enough difference. There will always be far more people happyily playing the game not coming online to read about the bugs, i have two pals i spoke to last night playing this game and completely unaware of any major issues. Sales of games speak much louder than posts on a forum and unfortunately those claiming games should come out the box perfect are fighting a completely useless battle. As much as it sounds like giving into the games companys unfortunately this is just the way it works now.

Evidence? My evidence is the number of unhappy people on these forums. I'd like to see why you think it's a very very tiny proportion.

I just see no reason to "accept" patching, as a consumer.

It's a bit like buying anything - you only want the absolute best, say, car or house - but in practice, you know it won't be perfect when you finally get it. It doesn't mean you should accept mediocrity, though.

[lancer1]

When does the new patch come out?

:thdn:

[milnerpoint]

Evidence? My evidence is the number of unhappy people on these forums. I'd like to see why you think it's a very very tiny proportion.

I just see no reason to "accept" patching, as a consumer.

It's a bit like buying anything - you only want the absolute best, say, car or house - but in practice, you know it won't be perfect when you finally get it. It doesn't mean you should accept mediocrity, though.

i would say the amount of people who post on here compared to fans is tiny, considering this game sells hundreds of thousands of copies perhaps over a million there is no where near that amount of posters on here. There are happy people on these forums, remember people enjoying this game probably wont make threads about it, whereas people unhappy will carry on and on until they think they are being giving direct answers from SI.

I actually agree we should not have to accept patching, but we already have, we have been for the past few years, we still buy the games thats the bottom line.

[x42bn6]

i would say the amount of people who post on here compared to fans is tiny, considering this game sells hundreds of thousands of copies perhaps over a million there is no where near that amount of posters on here. There are happy people on these forums, remember people enjoying this game probably wont make threads about it, whereas people unhappy will carry on and on until they think they are being giving direct answers from SI.

A survey of tens of thousands can acceptably used to justify the entire population of China in some circumstances. That's the whole point of sampling.

And the people not posting on this forum include people who have binned the game.

I actually agree we should not have to accept patching, but we already have, we have been for the past few years, we still buy the games thats the bottom line.

I would argue we need to vote with our pockets, to be honest. Issues like the transfer system should never have got past basic testing.

[sheeshy]

Please see the 70's, 80's and most of the 90's.

Was Football Manager out then? No. Things were different, systems were far less advanced. Show me a MODERN game that has 0 patches.

[milnerpoint]

A survey of tens of thousands can acceptably used to justify the entire population of China in some circumstances. That's the whole point of sampling.

And the people not posting on this forum include people who have binned the game.

I would argue we need to vote with our pockets, to be honest. Issues like the transfer system should never have got past basic testing.

i dont agree at all, taking a tiny propotion like that and claiming it to be the opinion of the majoirty is a very blinded way to go about things, i have never agreed with it in any other format and definately not in this case.

Yes people who havent posted on here may of binned the game, but at the same time i can promise there will be hundreds of thousands at home enjoying this game. If we are to use crazy statistics, i know 5 people including me playing FM11, out of us only i have had an issue with the game so far (crash dump that will be sorted in the patch) now that says to me that almost everyone is happy with the game, of course thats complete nonsense but you can see how these things can be misleading.

The transfer system has not been an issue for me so i can easliy see how it got past testing.

[daylight]

you say large proportoin, but in truth its a very very tiny proportion of people who have bought this game. The harsh reality is the very small amount of us who bother to post online and keep upto date with the forums attached to these games will never make a big enough difference. There will always be far more people happyily playing the game not coming online to read about the bugs, i have two pals i spoke to last night playing this game and completely unaware of any major issues. Sales of games speak much louder than posts on a forum and unfortunately those claiming games should come out the box perfect are fighting a completely useless battle. As much as it sounds like giving into the games companys unfortunately this is just the way it works now.

So you are the spokesperson for every player that has bought the game because you spoke to 2 pals?

I can use your reason against you and say that a lot of the people that bought the game have since put it in the attic as they are unaware that patch's are added at a later stage to fix the bugs that are in the game and that is the reason they are not on the forums.

There are many,many games that release today that only patch to add extra content,I could list them all but that would take all weekend...and then some,I play PC games and Xbox360 games and with the exception of mmo titles this game is the 1 that every year needs to patch to sort out glaring bugs.

There is a problem at beta testing,there is also a problem with SI feeling the need to rush the release.

I am sure you and your 2 pals are not alone in saying the game is fine,though I would not be to quick to type for the rest of the player base.

[milnerpoint]

So you are the spokesperson for every player that has bought the game because you spoke to 2 pals?

I can use your reason against you and say that a lot of the people that bought the game have since put it in the attic as they are unaware that patch's are added at a later stage to fix the bugs that are in the game and that is the reason they are not on the forums.

There are many,many games that release today that only patch to add extra content,I could list them all but that would take all weekend...and then some,I play PC games and Xbox360 games and with the exception of mmo titles this game is the 1 that every year needs to patch to sort out glaring bugs.

There is a problem at beta testing,there is also a problem with SI feeling the need to rush the release.

I am sure you and your 2 pals are not alone in saying the game is fine,though I would not be to quick to type for the rest of the player base.

no no thats not what i ment at all, see my post above, it would be very foolish to think because my two friends enjoy the game that everyone who has bought this is in the same boat. My only point with that is not everyone thinks this game is broken, and if you are not reading about the issues then looking for them, they are not as glarinly obvious as some people are making out.

[x42bn6]

i dont agree at all, taking a tiny propotion like that and claiming it to be the opinion of the majoirty is a very blinded way to go about things, i have never agreed with it in any other format and definately not in this case.

Yes people who havent posted on here may of binned the game, but at the same time i can promise there will be hundreds of thousands at home enjoying this game. If we are to use crazy statistics, i know 5 people including me playing FM11, out of us only i have had an issue with the game so far (crash dump that will be sorted in the patch) now that says to me that almost everyone is happy with the game, of course thats complete nonsense but you can see how these things can be misleading.

The transfer system has not been an issue for me so i can easliy see how it got past testing.

Well, yes, except that there are a lot more than 5 unhappy people on this forum.

There was also another thread where users rated the game out of 10 - and the average is around 6.93. But more importantly, it is clear from this poll that a lot of people are unhappy. In addition, this is a large sample size = 621 - much larger than your 5 friends.

[milnerpoint]

what would class as unhappy in that pole, anything below 5 or 6? out of the 622 who have voted, 197 are below 6, the rest above, i would say thats a pretty good figure. It would suggest a lot of people who chose to vote are happy enough with the game.

[x42bn6]

what would class as unhappy in that pole, anything below 5 or 6? out of the 622 who have voted, 197 are below 6, the rest above, i would say thats a pretty good figure. It would suggest a lot of people who chose to vote are happy enough with the game.

I'm not sure having a third of your customers being unhappy is a good figure.

[milnerpoint]

I'm not sure having a third of your customers being unhappy is a good figure.

as i say what do you class as unhappy?

A poll of 1 to 10 doesnt really give you the overall picture, some people could vote really low because they do not like a certain feature, not always because of bugs. I think the fact this game has outsold most of the major titles in recent weeks says more than a poll of 600 odd on these forums, to be honest that poll kinda shows how few people who buy this game come to the forums which kinda backs up my earlier point.

[x42bn6]

as i say what do you class as unhappy?

A poll of 1 to 10 doesnt really give you the overall picture, some people could vote really low because they do not like a certain feature, not always because of bugs. I think the fact this game has outsold most of the major titles in recent weeks says more than a poll of 600 odd on these forums, to be honest that poll kinda shows how few people who buy this game come to the forums which kinda backs up my earlier point.

Like I said, a sample size doesn't have to be that large to draw conclusions from it.

Whether people vote high or low based on their own reasons is immaterial - they still rated the game.

A sample size of 600 is quite a large value either way - when you consider the fact that a lot of election polls sample thousands at the very most, but hundreds most likely - and these are trusted.

[milnerpoint]

Like I said, a sample size doesn't have to be that large to draw conclusions from it.

Whether people vote high or low based on their own reasons is immaterial - they still rated the game.

A sample size of 600 is quite a large value either way - when you consider the fact that a lot of election polls sample thousands at the very most, but hundreds most likely - and these are trusted.

this is a completely different situation to an election poll, this is a rating out of 1 to 10, again you have not answered what would be classed as unhappy and agan ill make the point that the majority of people dont come on here, especially not those happy with the game they will not see the point, if they are happy they will be playing the game not posting on the forums and giving ratings.

[x42bn6]

this is a completely different situation to an election poll, this is a rating out of 1 to 10, again you have not answered what would be classed as unhappy and agan ill make the point that the majority of people dont come on here, especially not those happy with the game they will not see the point, if they are happy they will be playing the game not posting on the forums and giving ratings.

1) Most video games are rated from 1-10 where anything below 7 is considered "poor".

2) It doesn't matter what type of poll it is

3) You cannot simply say that everyone who bought the game and didn't post on the forums is happy with the game - like I said, what about people who are so annoyed with the game they chucked it in the bin?

[daylight]

as i say what do you class as unhappy?

A poll of 1 to 10 doesnt really give you the overall picture, some people could vote really low because they do not like a certain feature, not always because of bugs. I think the fact this game has outsold most of the major titles in recent weeks says more than a poll of 600 odd on these forums, to be honest that poll kinda shows how few people who buy this game come to the forums which kinda backs up my earlier point.

Again to use your own text against you,

What major titles have released in the last few weeks?

FM11 is rated as 13th on Steam behind such titles as Civ 5,CoD and fallout new vegas,in other words behind every other AAA+ title that released,so you are really making no point here,is it that football manager sims get fewer people?I have no idea but your numbers do not back up anything.

Brings us back to the fact that not every if even the majority of people check this site and know that updates will arrive,also to the fact that FM releases in a bugged state which it should not if proper testing was done and the game not rushed before the Christmas market.

We could go in circles all night but I think you also know that the game should be tested and released when fully ready,players should not have to pay to beta test a game...which in truth is what has been happening with FM for a few years now.

[milnerpoint]

1) Most video games are rated from 1-10 where anything below 7 is considered "poor".

2) It doesn't matter what type of poll it is

3) You cannot simply say that everyone who bought the game and didn't post on the forums is happy with the game - like I said, what about people who are so annoyed with the game they chucked it in the bin?

1 - based on what? All that poll really says it people think the game can be improved, i think every single person on here would agree, but people are very rarely happy with what they buy, they would always look for ways to improve what they have.

2 - it really does matter, you are talking about people deciding to vote for x, y or z whereas here people are rating a product, very different situation

3 - I never said that, what i said was the majority of people who have bought this game have not posted on these forums, the sales number compared to posters on here tell that fact right away. Yes people may have chucked it in the bin, although i would speculate in the modern world these people would have sought out these forums to vent their anger and not just throw it in the bin to forget about it, most who had bought the game would still want to play it and would want to be updated with any future changes which may convince them to give it another go. No one likes to spend money on something they will never get any use out of.

Ill back out of this now, i think we are both at different ends of the spectrum here and we could go on all night disagreeing with each other and throwing useless stats around. I still believe the majority of folk are reasonably happy with the game but thats just my opinion. Good for getting a good debate going tho!!

[low42]

Was Football Manager out then? No. Things were different, systems were far less advanced. Show me a MODERN game that has 0 patches.

Well, duh, lol.

Now see, had you said "modern" to begin with I wouldn't have commented.

[daylight]

Well, duh, lol.

Now see, had you said "modern" to begin with I wouldn't have commented.

Why is that?

CM97/98 released well enough without the need for game saving patch's,if we move it forward AAA+ titles like Badlands and AC2 released without game saving patch's.

Sorry I am not grasping the fact that is being thrown around here that this is a normal thing,yes there are maybe games that release that require patching to sort BIG problems but outside of FM I have yet to see a game that releases every year with such glaring problems,I would go as far to say that a game releasing for the 1st year would not encounter the problems that FM beta "testers" miss.

[richib]

Was Football Manager out then? No. Things were different, systems were far less advanced. Show me a MODERN game that has 0 patches.

Don't mean to be rude, but when it comes to programming, coders/programmers had it alot HARDER back then.

If you know anything about programming(?) then you would understand the "Advancement" High level language (C/C+/C++) has evolved to make life alot easier for those that deal with language and OOP. S.I have made it complex, not the reverse. Comparing a game back then to now and ask which would be harder, i'd very much say that back then would be alot more difficult then now. Granted, C sharp wouldn't be able to develop a game at this magnitude, hence why OOP was introduced but if it were able to deal with the demand of today, haha good luck on that one. You see, developers across the board don't realise how easy they have it today, and yet they get away with poor efforts like this. Christ, when I used to code for UNIX (Way way way back many a time ago, no im not 28^^) you wouldn't get away with what we see today.

Don't get me wrong, i'm not saying the task today is a simple one in any comparison, as I wouldn't like to do the debug phase for a product like FM, but when people don't understand the behind scenes and SOP's of a company, how can one defend such crap?

[marioni211]

I was able to get Corluka, Jenas and Joe Hart for free before they were even 30 years old for Sheff Weds in the Championship!

Signed Mario Gomez, Vincent Kompany, Sergio Busquets, on free transfers for Vitesse.

[SiN8]

Milnerpoint, I'm curious as to what standards you use to judge a game like FM. FM, at the core, is a simulation game that's supposed to reflect the real world footballing business. In FM11, just after one season of playing, many players including myself have presented evidence on how far from reality the transfer market is. What is the point of a playing a simulation game if it can't get the core component correct? It's akin to playing a flight sim and finding out that the planes are programmed to fly sideways.

[richib]

Haha, for some reason I chuckled there, mate.

Could you imagine it? Or to find out the landing gear doesn't exist? Some people only see as far as their own tolerance. Sure FM reaches a certain criteria of playbility but the general purpose of the game isn't met.

(Reply to; SiN8).

[roykela]

Was Football Manager out then? No. Things were different, systems were far less advanced. Show me a MODERN game that has 0 patches.

I was playing Football Manager 2, on my old Atari 520ST in the early 90s.

So in one way, yes it was

[tingting]

I think the fact this game has outsold most of the major titles in recent weeks says more than a poll of 600 odd on these forums, to be honest that poll kinda shows how few people who buy this game come to the forums which kinda backs up my earlier point.

So the opinion of 600 odd people with more than 30% of people not liking the game does not present an accurate picture of the state of FM but talking to 2 or 5 pals, most of whom agree the game is great is right? Spiderman 3 earned nearly a billion dollars worldwide, but it is regarded as the worst of the three movies. As it has been said here time and again, do not decide on the end result by looking at the stats.

based on what?

Games are rated on their graphics and audio ability (which FM sucks at (not complaining coz i find the present system very cute )) Games are rated on how bug free they are (again FM sucks here as well) Games are rated on their lasting appeal (some people are finding it difficult to get a job even after winning league titles which clearly kills off the "career" game. SI have said that they are looking in the issue in the bugs forum, so it is not a fantasy from some of the gamers) Games are rated on whether their core concepts work (again FM sucks here and i am not talking just about the transfer bug).

All the games are rated from 1-10. Some sites prefer the "percentage" system and rate it 1-100 but there is no difference between the two. Maybe you might have, but i have never seen a major review site rating a game from say 1-35

[grade]

Milnerpoint, i know that games today are far complex then the games from 70's, 80's and 90's, but that is no excuse for releasing half finish product. Whis seems to be the tendencies of today, but it is still a wrong business approach that who ends loosing is the consumer.

[Deep Lying Playmaker]

the majority of people dont come on here, especially not those happy with the game they will not see the point, if they are happy they will be playing the game not posting on the forums and giving ratings.

Far too simplistic a statement. Many FM players won't know about this forum, many who do will choose to use another forum instead, and many who use this forum will just read without posting. You can't use any single thread as a definitive guide to people's happiness with the game one way or the other. You can however look in different bug forums and get a good idea of how many problems are affecting the game,of which FM has many.

I don't think the fact FM11 has problems is what's really annoying people. I think it's the fact people are starting to believe SI aren't testing the game well enough pre-release, and are using us all as beta testers post-release, as the problems seem to be getting worse every year. Whether this is the truth or not we'll probably never know, but there is a growing dissatisfaction with FM and with SI, this is not a trend seen across gaming as a whole so maybe some need to concede that there is a problem somewhere in how this particular game is designed/marketed/sold.

[milnerpoint]

Milnerpoint, i know that games today are far complex then the games from 70's, 80's and 90's, but that is no excuse for releasing half finish product. Whis seems to be the tendencies of today, but it is still a wrong business approach that who ends loosing is the consumer.

what would be your solution to the problem then?

As far as i am concerned this is the first FM that has had any real noticable issues, i played FM10 for the past year without noticing any problems but then i didnt read these forums, and thats my point, unless you read about these "bugs" they are no where near as apparent as people make out, i personally think SI will have looked at whats happened this year and will have measures in place for the next installment, probably not rushing out a patch on the day of release being one of the biggest mistakes they have made it appears to have caused issues they did not intend.

[SiN8]

what would be your solution to the problem then?

As far as i am concerned this is the first FM that has had any real noticable issues, i played FM10 for the past year without noticing any problems but then i didnt read these forums, and thats my point, unless you read about these "bugs" they are no where near as apparent as people make out, i personally think SI will have looked at whats happened this year and will have measures in place for the next installment, probably not rushing out a patch on the day of release being one of the biggest mistakes they have made it appears to have caused issues they did not intend.

I think SI should rethink about releasing a public beta for the wider community to play and test. Also, make it easier to report bugs and transmit necessary data. Uploading a 100MB savegame takes a lot of time and effort especially for those who aren't savvy using FTP. Perhaps there could be some debug log that could be uploaded to SI ingame much like their youtube/twitter mechanism. As for as SI's criticism about players getting a free play on the beta, why not restrict it to those who have bought the previous version and use the old player database in the beta? I'm sure the testers would purchase the game again to get the updated database with all the additional features. In addition, push up the public beta timeline so SI has more time to fix any found issues. If some issue can't be fixed, drop the offending feature instead of releasing a broken game. Quite frankly, I would be happier to play FM11 without the new player interaction or agent module if the transfer system was back to FM10.

[themadsheep2001]

I think SI should rethink about releasing a public beta for the wider community to play and test. Also, make it easier to report bugs and transmit necessary data. Uploading a 100MB savegame takes a lot of time and effort especially for those who aren't savvy using FTP. Perhaps there could be some debug log that could be uploaded to SI ingame much like their youtube/twitter mechanism. As for as SI's criticism about players getting a free play on the beta, why not restrict it to those who have bought the previous version and use the old player database in the beta? I'm sure the testers would purchase the game again to get the updated database with all the additional features. In addition, push up the public beta timeline so SI has more time to fix any found issues. If some issue can't be fixed, drop the offending feature instead of releasing a broken game. Quite frankly, I would be happier to play FM11 without the new player interaction or agent module if the transfer system was back to FM10.

as i said before that will only work if the community are much better this time round with the feedback. Last time they got back very poor, or no feedback, from many people and the beta got leaked

[milnerpoint]

I think SI should rethink about releasing a public beta for the wider community to play and test. Also, make it easier to report bugs and transmit necessary data. Uploading a 100MB savegame takes a lot of time and effort especially for those who aren't savvy using FTP. Perhaps there could be some debug log that could be uploaded to SI ingame much like their youtube/twitter mechanism. As for as SI's criticism about players getting a free play on the beta, why not restrict it to those who have bought the previous version and use the old player database in the beta? I'm sure the testers would purchase the game again to get the updated database with all the additional features. In addition, push up the public beta timeline so SI has more time to fix any found issues. If some issue can't be fixed, drop the offending feature instead of releasing a broken game. Quite frankly, I would be happier to play FM11 without the new player interaction or agent module if the transfer system was back to FM10.

all good ideas but they stopped the public beta testing as they were getting such poor feedback it became pointless, it really was just people getting a free copy of the game to play before it came out, it would be very hard to control, you cannot force people to give enough good feedback. I really do agree its not a perfect system they have used, but i struggle to see a better way around it, as i said i really think this is the first year there have been glaring problems, and this could be due to the fact they rushed out a patch which caused a few issues they didnt count on. It is completely possible that the issues some people have had with the transfer system were caused by the small changes they made in the first patch and these are not always obvious in the first couple of seasons, there are many posters who have not had a big issue with the transfers so i dont think its always as simple as saying the testers are not doing a good enough job. It also is maybe not that easy just to drop a new feature, there could be a lot of things tied into said feature which might not work when not combined with it.

[Deep Lying Playmaker]

As far as i am concerned this is the first FM that has had any real noticable issues,

I don't want to sound like I'm having a go, you are entitled to your opinion, but if you really believe this then I would bring into question your credibility to comment on ANY bugs in FM. No offence intended.

[kevin3]

Just bought Tom Huddlestone for 5 million after a ridicilous transfer saga!!. The worst thing about it was I had been putting in bids of up to 18 million for him and I thought that would get him as I had declared interest and he was considering his options. Spurs rejected the bids and he signed a new 5 year contract. I then got him as he had a minimium fee release clause set to 5 mil in his new contract. I really wanted to get him in but it has put me off now as it seems too unrealistic. Maybe I could look at it and say because he was extremely interested in joining me, him and his agent were very crafty in signinng a 5 year deal and slipping in a min fee release clause as they also know about the flawed tranfer system!!!!!

[milnerpoint]

i think the harsh reality of it all is we live in a world where people are very happy to complain but very unlikely to get involved in the process of finding these issues in beta testing, its a horrilbe thing, very boring and time consuming, i was involved beta testing not the last GTA but the one before and i would never get involved in it again, took up a lot of my free time out of work and it was tedious at best, SI have a budget for their testing team and thats all they are allowed to spend, perhaps if the community was more willing then they would go down this route again but i highly doubt we will see public beta testing again.

[milnerpoint]

I don't want to sound like I'm having a go, you are entitled to your opinion, but if you really believe this then I would bring into question your credibility to comment on ANY bugs in FM. No offence intended.

each to their own opinion i guess

[Deep Lying Playmaker]

So the implication of recent posts is; the issues aren't that big, the transfer bug isn't affecting the game as much as people are making out, and if the public were as good at beta testing there own game as they were at whining about it there wouldn't be a problem at all.

Super, I don't feel offended at all!:o

[milnerpoint]

So the implication of recent posts is; the issues aren't that big, the transfer bug isn't affecting the game as much as people are making out, and if the public were as good at beta testing there own game as they were at whining about it there wouldn't be a problem at all.

Super, I don't feel offended at all!:o

good to hear it, i never ment any offence to anyone, simple fact is tho public beta testing failed on this game because people couldnt be bothered using it properly, otherwise SI would still be doing it.

[Deep Lying Playmaker]

good to hear it, i never ment any offence to anyone, simple fact is tho public beta testing failed on this game because people couldnt be bothered using it properly, otherwise SI would still be doing it.

Quite a head in the sand view to take while the game is in it's current state imo.

[milnerpoint]

Quite a head in the sand view to take while the game is in it's current state imo.

so your saying the public beta testing they tried worked very well? It didnt work SI have said they got little or no proper feedback that was helpful and people chose to leak the game rather than help them like they should have been. Your comment is a little confusing to be honest.