Jump to content

So, it's the second week of March...


Recommended Posts

I understand what you say, but take this example.

Let say you are the manager of Barcelona, and you play with xavi on your team... then, you buy one of those regen (those special FM regens with 18yo and stats out of this world)... that play in xavi position? What do you do? all of the sudden xavi that IRL will problably be a first ream regular for more 4/5 years in Barcelona, will go to the bench in your game in about 1 or 2 years. And that you will think it's normal, because you are the manager.

At least I think it's normal! Another example... i usually play with Benfica. IRL Franco Jara his a substitute in Benfica this year... and Salvio a first team player! But in my game, while managing Benfica Jara is my first choice and Salvio his in the bench. Its a decision, an odd one that i make... and its a decision that IRL it's a wrong one... but in FM "life" it's the right one.

Same happen with AI teams. Sometimes the right FM decision it's not the same as IRL.

We all know that FM it's a simulation of football... but common... it can be 100% real! Because if it was... I would never win 3 CL in 4 years with Benfica, or that club from 4º england division would became the best club in the world after 15 years! :D

i totally understand what your saying, and to be honest i was using Wilshire purely because he has been the talk of several threads, my point was that the attributes have to be balanced when compared to each other, and have to be tested to show such, nothing to do with the players or attributes themselves really. Everyone makes their own decisions in this game and from the second you load the game it stops following real life and goes into its own FM generated world, but that doesnt stop us all from relating it to current football. My only real point on this was, its not just a case of saying ok his passing is 15 and xavi's is also 15, its a case of asking WHY wilshires passing should mimic Xavi's and again thats just an example i cant remember what their attributes are in game. The attributes have to be balanced when compared to other players, so if Xavi has passing of 15 and we for the best part class him as one of the worlds best passers then you have to think that Wilshire who is yet to prove himself fully will have it lower at the moment, do we think he is capable of matching Xavi at the moment? Again ill say in terms of realism you would not expect Barca to replace Xavi with Wilshire first season, however if he is rated wrongly or too highly this could happen, and again ill say you see the forums at the moment, they are crazy, can you imagine multiple examples of the Xavi/Wilshire thing happening because SI did not balance the attributes correctly?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 271
  • Created
  • Last Reply

You have let us down again this year.

We are waiting for a January data update.

If a patch has to be included because you failed to get it right first time, sorry second time, the deadline should have been the end of January so that you could incorporate it with the data update immediately and test it.

Neil Brock, "The patch will be ready when it's ready." Has never been an acceptable answer. It is evasive and condescending.

Complacency is rife at SI because you know there is no adequate alternative in the market. Start listening to you customers please, don't end up like Konami.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Given this issue is singular rather than plural, and given Miles stated in his update that it was incredibly rare and therefore difficult to track down would it not have made more sense to release the patch as-is, with the caveat that a minority could be affected by the memory issue. You could have then worked on a hot-fix to eradicate the memory corruption issue and release at a later date, without the pressure of everyone demanding to know when the patch will be available.

That way, the 99% of your userbase that are waiting on the patch get what they want, albeit with a caveat and then it's entirely up to them whether they take the risk that they aren't affected and patch up & play. Those that find they are unfortuanate enough to be affected can wait for the hot-fix happy in the knowledge you are working on it and since it's only a single issue it would be available soon.

Just a thought ...

so release a half finished patch knowing it could cause issues for customers? You have no way of knowing what percentage of users would be affected by the bug, would you have been happy if your game worked, then they released the patch and suddenly you couldnt play until they fix this obscure bug?

honestly guys think about it more, that really doesnt make any sense at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have let us down again this year.

We are waiting for a January data update.

If a patch has to be included because you failed to get it right first time, sorry second time, the deadline should have been the end of January so that you could incorporate it with the data update immediately and test it.

Neil Brock, "The patch will be ready when it's ready." Has never been an acceptable answer. It is evasive and condescending.

Complacency is rife at SI because you know there is no adequate alternative in the market. Start listening to you customers please, don't end up like Konami.

lol, just lol

I'm gonna paste my own post from earlier in: The blogs said final patch in feb or march. I won't start bitching til April 1st cos then they've failed to deliver what they promised. Of course I don't expect many to share this particularly reasonable stance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have let us down again this year.

We are waiting for a January data update.

If a patch has to be included because you failed to get it right first time, sorry second time, the deadline should have been the end of January so that you could incorporate it with the data update immediately and test it.

Neil Brock, "The patch will be ready when it's ready." Has never been an acceptable answer. It is evasive and condescending.

Complacency is rife at SI because you know there is no adequate alternative in the market. Start listening to you customers please, don't end up like Konami.

I really hope this is a joke !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Think you're missing the point, Duro. No one knows when its going to be released. It's currently in a phase of being tested, and then repairs being made where needed. People are going off their nut because its not ready yet, when they'd be doing their nut even more if it was released full of bugs.

As far as I'm aware they expect to release it this week, but then that will depend solely on if they manage to eradicate all the bugs.

Thank you Slawbawn for the reply! I saw Mile´s post past week (he said that probably it would be released this week). I was trying to know if they could narrow the date...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because SI said so doesn't make it right.

No it doesn't. However those blogs were released prior to game launch and therefore anyone who reallly wanted the info had it. As consumers we all knew the deal. Thats all I'm saying. I cba to get into the right and wrong of it cos someone is bound to disagree, abuse me and then I'll end up with another infraction.

But my point stands, when they give an estimate of feb/march it gives them a 9 week window and like I say its only when we are still waiting in April will I get the arse. Cos thats when they have failed to deliver. Anyone moaning now is unreasonable at best. And this really is my last post in this thread/forum ever. I'm done.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if the last few years have taught us anything it's that SI can't release a relatively unbugged version 1 game for toffee and therefore we aren't getting the unbugged, full quality version of these games until the next year in march (or whenever they decide to release the patch because it's looking more like may this time round). I think we should all therefore in future only buy the game in march or after the final patch when it is 1. almost a third of the original price (I think) and 2. fully useable and unbugged and therefore noone would complain.

SI is primarily a business and this would force them to either produce a better quality initial product in the future as otherwise they'd be losing a hell of a lot of income if fans only buy the game in march for £15 rather than £30 to £40 (or whatever) on the realease date or it would force them to be more efficient with their patching "strategy".

I plan to do either this next year or simply borrow the game from a friend...a friend who's surname is torrent :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

If every individual or business could sell a product in october that does not work, and fail to release a fix for that product until march ( still may not even work ) then we would all be very rich

to me SI have rushed the game out to sell it and take everyones money asap, then spend 6-7 months slowly trying to fix it

pathetic

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...