cynet Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 Okay with FM13 released a few months back and already nearly entering the third month of the year already eyes are on FM14. With regards to the yearly releases it's turning into a farce as some of the game is playable even with the match engine which has been a major concern for the fm fan base is it a case of limited time and testing between each yearly release? Would it be more sensible to have a two year gap and SI provide updates in the meantime for the general release over a 24 month period where they can have breathing space to develop and test better? The gap also seems short as if anyone hasn't noticed that life flies by and 12 months is not long enough in my opinion to polish a game. FM13 had 900 additions but maybe 800 were not noticed or were just so irrelevant nobody noticed the whole 900 and if anyone can post the whole 900 and know what they are talking about I would be highly amused. The game seems to be struggling in terms of direction and where the game is heading right now. Give SI their credit they have balanced the game with terms of two types what people would like to play but does that go far enough? Seems to me each yearly release is coming rather the same and nothing worthy of paying full price for a release. Will implement a poll on your views to coincide with your constructive comments. No bashing and try and be adult about the reasons why. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRL88 Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 already eyes are on FM14. Are they? Quite content to not even think about FM14 considering it isn't released until October time . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cynet Posted February 22, 2013 Author Share Posted February 22, 2013 Are they?Quite content to not even think about FM14 considering it isn't released until October time . Trust me October isn't far Kind Regards Someone who is seeing his life flash before his very eyes Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingjericho Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 As long as FM sales are high they won't stop releasing it yearly. Though a 2 year gap would be good and perhaps we could pay for the data updates. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houndd Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 To be honest, I tried to think of something to disagree but I can't really think of anything that major. Of course this would not happen though as they are going to continue to sell copies releasing it yearly thus making more money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cynet Posted February 22, 2013 Author Share Posted February 22, 2013 As long as FM sales are high they won't stop releasing it yearly. Though a 2 year gap would be good and perhaps we could pay for the data updates. Like that idea or even better SI could include a prem package which included updates. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sardinia Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 2 year game with a yearly DLC? Because right now it's turning into a "madden/fifa" esque release pattern... Minimum changes and just cashing in on people Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suzie MUFC Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 I remember when Sensible Software released a data update for Sensible World of Soccer about 2 years after it's release. All you had to do was send a self-addressed envelope, and a couple of weeks later the disks arrived. For FREE! Those were the days... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 Are they? Quite content to not even think about FM14 considering it isn't released until October time . I think he's referring to SI's eyes rather than us, might be wrong though.As for the 2 year cycle it is something that I brought up a year or two ago as I also felt that the game was getting so large that an annual cycle was potentially stunting development, right now I'm not sure whether it would help but it is a business model that I would investigate. After a quick investigation Steam user activity shows that for every user playing FM12 there are 6 playing FM13, financially it probably doesn't make sense as there is a very real risk that the lost revenue from the skipped year will not be recovered let alone exceeded in the release year. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCIAG Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 You all know what the reaction would be if we had to pay for data updates. (It would be outrage). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cynet Posted February 22, 2013 Author Share Posted February 22, 2013 2 year game with a yearly DLC? Because right now it's turning into a "madden/fifa" esque release pattern... Minimum changes and just cashing in on people Would make perfect sense, look at the time frame of the last patch which came out this month which in truth made the game playable to the expectations you really expected in November, so work out the difference in months which works out 8 months only, usually they complete a final patch by late Jan which is a 9 month gap, not a long time in truth to justify a full price release. One more thing sometimes it takes people up to 6 months to get a formation working after all the patching, time they do the next release is only round the corner. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dafuge Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 I've got no worries about value for money while I'm paying around £20 each year. I'm easily getting value for money out of it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cynet Posted February 22, 2013 Author Share Posted February 22, 2013 I've got no worries about value for money while I'm paying around £20 each year. I'm easily getting value for money out of it. So you would be happy to pay for a annual DLC then if they implemented it as your not fussed in what your paying for? My reasoning is that the gap is not long and certainly not long enough to get into the game long term. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
themadsheep2001 Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 Isn't this entirely moot since they repeatedly stated that wouldn't be changing this for the foreseeable future? Either way I don't actually care whether its a yearly release or not anyway, its what goes into each iteration that matters to me. If I wasn't happy with it, I simply wouldn't buy it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dafuge Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 So you would be happy to pay for a annual DLC then if they implemented it as your not fussed in what your paying for?My reasoning is that the gap is not long and certainly not long enough to get into the game long term. Since FM10 I've played one save per version, so a data update would be useless for me, I'd just end up playing my save game for two years. One year is easily enough time for me to get into a save game, as you can see in the careers forum. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRL88 Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 My reasoning is that the gap is not long and certainly not long enough to get into the game long term. Sorry but I disagree with that completely. On FM12 I didn't start my long term save until December and got to 2045 or so and this year I am currently in 2025. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyzer Soze Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 I'm against the two year gap. In truth i don't find any advantage changing the release method. In the current situation, and i usually start playing my "main save" when i think the ME is stable enough for my taste, i always have time to make a long save (30+ seasons). For me is more than enough. After that, i'm ready to start exploring the new features that every year are released. If they start releasing the game every 2 years, with a data update in between, that only means that: a) make my main save longer b) start a new save with the new database In any case, i don't see any advantage from the current system that allows me to: a) keep going with my current save in the current FM, delaying my play time with the new FM b) change to the new FM, with new features, and the new database that is released every year. So, like i said in the beggining... for me i dont see any advantage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Soutar loyal Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 Sorry but I disagree with that completely. On FM12 I didn't start my long term save until December and got to 2045 or so and this year I am currently in 2025.wow!! you get a lot of game time, lucky you! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRL88 Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 wow!! you get a lot of game time, lucky you! I take advantage of the game time I have. I have a family, work full time as well as training to be a teacher. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houndd Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 2 year game with a yearly DLC? Because right now it's turning into a "madden/fifa" esque release pattern... Minimum changes and just cashing in on people Not as bad as fifa though, Fifa has had the same bugs in it for 5-6 years straight. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AjaxNo1 Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 I like the idea of a whole DB realease when they would normally realease the game and a whole new game every two years Or even an option for a DB update on a previous year going along side the normal game realease would of paid to be able to have this years teams on last years game Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scuff Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 This might not be popular, but I would support a new game every 2 years at a slightly higher price (I don't think FM has ever hit console game prices, at least not here in North America) with a paid data update at the start of the season on the off years, priced significantly less than the game but amounting to the same price over two years that we pay now over two years (if that makes sense). We get a polished game for a far longer period, SI get a much longer development cycle and the game doesn't become dated. Not perfect I know, but if we are dreaming........ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spikey Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 If you have half the number of releases, you also have half as much income. This means the budget for developing the game would be half what it is now. The incremental step over two years would therefore be no different. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sussex Hammer Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 This might not be popular, but I would support a new game every 2 years at a slightly higher price (I don't think FM has ever hit console game prices, at least not here in North America) with a paid data update at the start of the season on the off years, priced significantly less than the game but amounting to the same price over two years that we pay now over two years (if that makes sense). We get a polished game for a far longer period, SI get a much longer development cycle and the game doesn't become dated. Not perfect I know, but if we are dreaming........ I'd go with that. I probably start a game each time a new patch comes out and will start one when the data update comes out. If the game was top notch out of the box I would probably play a game until the data update in March, (I'm looking perfect world here!) As it is FM14 will probably be the first time I won't buy it on release day. I'll probably get it cheap in February/March after the last patch/update. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
strictlyt Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 I am getting fed up of the yearly release date of FM - I have been playing since 1996 and to be honest I still play it in the exact same way as I used to back then, all the improvements seem like gimics to me, I just buy players and build a couple of tactics and smash the seasons out. Don't get me wrong I still enjoy it but all I really need is an updated database. I have decided to limit myself to buying it every 2 years now. The only thing that would get me to bother buying FM 2014 is if they let you play FMC with lots of leagues active and a large database Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevereay Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 A release every 2 years is never going to happen. There are fundamental issues with a new release every year which are unlikely to ever be resolved. The game is released around oct/nov every year and as has been pointed out testing misses bugs and only by a huge volume of gamers playing the game do these get spotted and eventually fixed. These often are not sorted until Jan then there is the transfer window update which comes after that in early march. So assuming the next release hits in Oct again that is 6 months of the game in its final complete stage. Now some gamers don't care about the transfer update and me personally if the game was playable out of the box I wouldn't be bothered about it. Now some of us wait for a final patch to start a long term game and by that stage we may as well wait for the transfer update. It is clear that the model for a 12 monthly release is far from perfect but while the game is being purchased its not going to change. If you want a perfect game then the only way to do that is to vote with your purchase of it. Personally I will never again be buying the game at release and I have bought every single version of the game on release day in the past. I'll buy it when its final patch is out and then only if it is good enough. That way I get my 12 months between release. The whole process of FM13 has soured my appreciation for SI. Yes they eventually get it right. But it takes a long time and the feedback from SI during this ME update process has been poor. The company line of it will be ready when its ready has put my back up. This is the main game I play offline and online and I love it when its working well. It's never going to be perfect but it can be pretty close so that's when I'll buy it. The new features are always great but as they say you don't miss what you never had. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott MUFC Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 i do not see why it isn't better for us, as customers to release ONE GAME, and instead of a new game every season, get a ME, stick to it, tinker with it, and sell the updated DB every season as DLC. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
interesti88 Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 i do not see why it isn't better for us, as customers to release ONE GAME, and instead of a new game every season, get a ME, stick to it, tinker with it, and sell the updated DB every season as DLC. I have to agree with Scott, as a consumer that would be ideal and instead of buying a completely new game every year(especially this year's version) I wouldn't mind splashing some cash on DLC. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WizbaII Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 If you have half the number of releases, you also have half as much income. This means the budget for developing the game would be half what it is now. The incremental step over two years would therefore be no different. This is not true if you adopt scuff's idea to charge the same price over time, with the full two-year game being more expensive than usual and the data update on the off-year being less expensive than usual (For example, charge 60 and 20 instead of 40 and 40). I'm in favor of this if it gives SI more room for development between game releases while raking in the same amount of profit. I'd be willing to bet that people who currently don't like to buy the game every year (and we know they are out there) would be willing to buy data updates every year along with the full game every two years. Thus, potentially, SI's revenues could actually increase slightly. You tell me what's not good about this business model. As someone who is still playing FM 12 (even though I bought FM 13 and played through a season), I indeed am looking to FM 14 to rise to some of the standards I've become accustomed to in FM 12 (even though its ME is not as sophisticated) and that I don't expect will exist in FM 13 due to the short timeframe that SI have to work with on patches versus working on FM 14 instead (one just has to spend five minutes in the feedback threads to realize that systematic progress is slow in coming despite what I assume to be a dedicated ME team). In the meantime, it's unfortunate that I can't get a data update for FM 12 (under the current business model) considering that I don't want to play FM 13! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chochip Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 I don't mind the yearly update if the ME was only updated every 2 years. Every time the ME changes, it feels like a whole different game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matej Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 best games need 2 to 3 years to be really great and something new. books even more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scouser_efc Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 dont care i havent even bought fm 13 yet i am waiting for the data update so the squads are all up to date then i will be starting, i never play the game until all the patches or most are out and most bugs have been fixed because thats when its a full game Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rich_barnes Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 It should be every 2 years, then we we get more time playing a fully patched game instead of one that has a crap ME and bugs. SI should know this make sense but it is down to SEGA at the end of the day and they don't give a **** about FM's quality as long as they sell it every year and make money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackter Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 Will never happen, pointless discussion, pointless thread - one that's also been done to death and always descends into bickering - and closed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.