Official Real Time Editor - paid or free?

[forameuss]

The argument could be made that, as it's not part of the core game (which neither the RTE or even the Editor are), yes, they could well have done. It is essentially a standalone entity.

I suppose it does depend on your viewpoint, but it still falls under the FM umbrella, and I just can't see why they would charge for features because they're now developing "more". It just seems BAU to me. They have to develop new features, but any extra costs (like if they had to hire a specialist developer for the function, which I doubt they will) would be absorbed by extra profits from the feature being added.

[YKW]

I really don't get why most people are saying they have to charge because it's extra work. In that case, should they have charged for FMC? Should they charge pennies for each new feature they put in? They're running a business that provides a piece of software that evolves all the time. I fail to see how they suddenly need to charge just to cover the work on this feature.

There are other valid reasons for charging, but for me that isn't one of them.

Exactly my feelings. I'm astounded that this is being so readily accepted without the knowledge of how it has been developed. It is inexcusable that something would take man-hours from the development of the main game and then be individually charged for, and I will be hugely conflicted if this turns out to be case.

[YKW]

The argument could be made that, as it's not part of the core game (which neither the RTE or even the Editor are), yes, they could well have done. It is essentially a standalone entity.

The issue being it was created with time that could have gone on improving the main game. Not charging for it was the right decision.

[MichaelBrown]

The argument could be made that, as it's not part of the core game (which neither the RTE or even the Editor are), yes, they could well have done. It is essentially a standalone entity.

I suspect that the reason that FMC is free is down to the fact that some older players of the series thought that the game was becoming too detailed and time-consuming. So, FMC was a way to entice said players into purchasing the game.

Making them pay for the game AS WELL AS FMC would be a marketing disaster.

[Lawlore]

I worded my comment carefully- I'm by no means advocating that it's what they should have done with FMC, just that it probably came up in discussion at some point. It could have been released as a separate standalone game, rather than as a mode within FM- I doubt there are too many people who actively use both modes, and that the vast majority play one or the other. The same will also be true of the RTE- you will either use it or not use it, with very little grey area in the middle.

[themadsheep2001]

I suspect that the reason that FMC is free is down to the fact that some older players of the series thought that the game was becoming too detailed and time-consuming. So, FMC was a way to entice said players into purchasing the game.

Making them pay for the game AS WELL AS FMC would be a marketing disaster.

This.

It was something that was fundamental to a significant minority of the game base, many of whom were long time players. It was something that many people did want, for a long time. I personally had no interest, but I was very pro FMC because of those who did.

This is from the ign piece:

"We're constantly trying to grow the audience. We've been going for so long, yet FM 12 was our best-selling game to date, and FM 13 is already around 20% up year-on-year. So we're still able to grow the audience." And it seems Classic Mode may have had a say in increasing that audience. "Just under 10% of people playing the game are playing Classic Mode, which seeing as it was added last year is pretty damn phenomenal really. So we're very happy with how many people took it up. When you're growing your audience by 20%, and you've got 10% playing the new mode, you know that's having an affect."

That's a massive impact from FMC.

[MichaelBrown]

One of my main worries about the editor (I wouldn't use it, but I imagine that a lot do) is that SI will continue to focus on potentially successful add-ons rather than focusing on issues such as big clubs buying random, non-important players and the dreaded long-term squad building problem.

[themadsheep2001]

One of my main worries about the editor (I wouldn't use it, but I imagine that a lot do) is that SI will continue to focus on potentially successful add-ons rather than focusing on issues such as big clubs buying random, non-important players and the dreaded long-term squad building problem.

The editor isn't something like FMC though, if its anything like the 3rd party main RTE. It'll require maintenance that will pretty much pay for itself and much more. But when you consider one person did a fairly decent job, it's not going to be that resource extensive, but will be popular money earner. Which is why I like the paid idea, providing the price is reasonable (should undercut the current one somewhat)

[MichaelBrown]

The editor isn't something like FMC though, if its anything like the 3rd party main RTE. It'll require maintenance that will pretty much pay for itself and much more. But when you consider one person did a fairly decent job, it's not going to be that resource extensive, but will be popular money earner. Which is why I like the paid idea, providing the price is reasonable (should undercut the current one somewhat)

You missed my point, I'm saying that the major issues such as squad-building doesn't have the same financial impact as the editor or FMC did, granted for different reasons. So, I'm worried that SI will continue to create and develop add-ons which are steadily becoming a lucrative part of the game.

[Kriss]

One of my main worries about the editor (I wouldn't use it, but I imagine that a lot do) is that SI will continue to focus on potentially successful add-ons rather than focusing on issues such as big clubs buying random, non-important players and the dreaded long-term squad building problem.

That won't be an issue, SI have teams for each module of the game rather than a general duties work force, it has to be that way because you can't have loads of people coding one module at the same time.

[MichaelBrown]

That won't be an issue, SI have teams for each module of the game rather than a general duties work force, it has to be that way because you can't have loads of people coding one module at the same time.

Fair enough, I will cross my fingers that it's actually been resolved this year.

[Kazza]

So as "SI have teams for each module of the game rather than a general duties work force", it looks unlikely to impact on the main game. We can therefore agree that this should be a free feature as a reward for loyalty.

[Kriss]

Nope it should be premium price with all proceeds going to Moderators

[basqueliverpool]

ive never used a real time editor. does it slow game down? and can you make players to add to the game via it?

[Kriss]

It shouldn't affect game speed at all, we've no idea what it'll let you do yet though I'd be surprised if you could introduce new players on the fly, would more expect that you could change an existing player.

[Dagenham_Dave]

Real Time Editors are a forum bragger's best friend. I've never used one, and wouldn't shed any tears if they ever ceased to exist.

[alienpalee]

Well, this year, the issues of "fairness" make tons of FMers including me pay a lot more.. and as a result, without a doubt, SI revenues would be dramatically improved from something so called "fairness"..

FM13 was already announced to be the best selling version to date .. I'm very happy to hear that.. SI is a good company producing a very good game, of course, I'd like them to grow a lot more.. But in order to grow, SI's should try to get more money form having more customers.. and dont trying to squeezing more money from each customer.. it would only cause more and more (currently-loyal) customers unhappiness..

Ok, back to the topic, talking about "fairness", I dont want FMC, data editor, and also RTE.. Should i pay less than the 49.99$ face value? and For people who bought the game last year and only played FMC because they dont have enough time for the full version, is it fair to them paying the full price? The issue is that people would think SI will only raise the fairness reason when it results in more money.. So when "fairness" gonna take you money, I'd like to see SI's come out and say what you going to do to make it fair to each of your customer. ie:Customer can now buy only FMC at a lot cheaper price if they got no time for the full detailed version.

So paid or free, any of them is fine.. but I need a good standard, which is fair to everyone.. ie. if i need to pay for some adds on in the future, i also dont wanna pay for FMC and data editor either..

Sorry for my bad English.

[SpillBlood]

Right now on amazon FM14 is £39.99. That's very expensive and for them to be charging even more for this editor is terrible i think. I'm not happy about it one bit

I don't get this post. The editor is hypothetical and there's posts on this very page about getting FM14 for a cheaper price through GMG.

[Spart]

Paid 100%. It's not core gameplay, SI need to make money and game prices don't track with inflation, let alone the costs of making games.

[podunkboy]

I believe I saw a "add-on RTE as a downloadable-for-fee" option listed today on one of the sites listing the daily "new features" (FM Scout, perhaps?)

yep:

Official Real Time Editor will be available as a paid download - 19 August

[Wiltoni]

I really don't get why most people are saying they have to charge because it's extra work. In that case, should they have charged for FMC? Should they charge pennies for each new feature they put in? They're running a business that provides a piece of software that evolves all the time. I fail to see how they suddenly need to charge just to cover the work on this feature.

There are other valid reasons for charging, but for me that isn't one of them.

Considering that SI has begun implementing micro-transactions and plan to charge for this RTE, I fear it may well become a reality sometime in the long future. I predict that the next time, we will need to pay for an official editor, need to pay to play FMC, need to pay to activate some other leagues, and worse still, need to pay to obtain new patches. Not to mean any disrespect to SI, but I'll definitely stop buying FM in the future if that somehow happens:thdn:

[HUNT3R]

I don't really care about any of the editors, but what about adding the RTE for free as a pre-order bonus? After that, SI can charge for it.

[dsch]

Free. The reason unofficial editors take a lot of work is because they essentially have to reverse-engineer the data structures used by the game. An SI dev who has the code should be able to knock up an editor in a couple of hours and have it tested in an afternoon. They don't even have to make it a separate editor with a separate GUI: just have a button that lets you edit the values in the game screen itself. Not exactly rocket science.

[Althaz]

Free. The reason unofficial editors take a lot of work is because they essentially have to reverse-engineer the data structures used by the game. An SI dev who has the code should be able to knock up an editor in a couple of hours and have it tested in an afternoon. They don't even have to make it a separate editor with a separate GUI: just have a button that lets you edit the values in the game screen itself. Not exactly rocket science.

You know how I can tell you aren't a software developer? This post, lol .

You couldn't even test it in a day, let alone build it (how long it would take to build would depend on a lot of factors so it might only take a couple of days, or it might take more like three months).

[forameuss]

An SI dev who has the code should be able to knock up an editor in a couple of hours and have it tested in an afternoon. They don't even have to make it a separate editor with a separate GUI: just have a button that lets you edit the values in the game screen itself. Not exactly rocket science.

This comment deserves to be kept for posterity. Do you really believe that? Like truly? Deary me...

[Lawlore]

As off the mark as that post may be, it would surprise me if the devs didn't already use some kind of in-house RTE to specifically test and edit parts of the code. I'm no dev, but it strikes me as an "if not, why not" kind of point. It seems a fair assumption that any public-release RTE may not be starting completely from scratch in terms of being coded, although obviously it would need to be modified significantly for public release to prevent people continually breaking their games. It's not so much the RTE itself that's interesting, but the support that is gonna need to come with it from SI once released, paid or not.

[Kriss]

It's not so much the RTE itself that's interesting, but the support that is gonna need to come with it from SI once released, paid or not.

If you knew how many hours SI have wasted because people used RTE's but didn't admit it you'd consider this move very productive

[forameuss]

As off the mark as that post may be, it would surprise me if the devs didn't already use some kind of in-house RTE to specifically test and edit parts of the code. I'm no dev, but it strikes me as an "if not, why not" kind of point. It seems a fair assumption that any public-release RTE may not be starting completely from scratch in terms of being coded, although obviously it would need to be modified significantly for public release to prevent people continually breaking their games. It's not so much the RTE itself that's interesting, but the support that is gonna need to come with it from SI once released, paid or not.

You're probably right, although the question would be whether or not that was "public-ready". Personally, if I'm coding something for my use, it's usually enough for it to work, no matter how rickety. You've covered that though, so agree.

My reaction to the comment I replied to was more the "have it tested in an afternoon" part. I don't think I'm reaching hyperbole by saying that that is the most ridiculous and misguided thing I've seen on these forums in months.

If you knew how many hours SI have wasted because people used RTE's but didn't admit it you'd consider this move very productive

This is also a very good point - one I hadn't thought of.

[Lawlore]

If you knew how many hours SI have wasted because people used RTE's but didn't admit it you'd consider this move very productive

Hah, I'm sure that's true, though a "not official, not supported" line would be perfectly fair in my books- I highly doubt SI get enough thanks for fixing problems caused by third party software. That obviously changes with an SIRTE- as with the Editor (although not the Advanced panel), it's an official product being released by SI for public use, so any issues it does cause become legitimately SI's responsibility to remedy.

[Nik_Dut]

I really want to bet a cup of coffee.

SI claimed that using the RTE will be stable.

Well, I'll bookmark my own post and waiting patiently till complaints about RTE-caused error posts grow like mushrooms in the rainy season..

[Keyzer Soze]

I really want to bet a cup of coffee.

SI claimed that using the RTE will be stable.

Well, I'll bookmark my own post and waiting patiently till complaints about RTE-caused error posts grow like mushrooms in the rainy season..

I don't see the logic in your comment. The editor that is released every year is stable... and yet it can cause problems in the game... if people use it wrong.

The same will happen with the RTE... in fact the same happens with every piece of software: It could be stable... but is not 100% safe against the humankind "genius"

[forameuss]

I don't see the logic in your comment. The editor that is released every year is stable... and yet it can cause problems in the game... if people use it wrong.

The same will happen with the RTE... in fact the same happens with every piece of software: It could be stable... but is not 100% safe against the humankind "genius"

But how old is the editor? How was it the first time it came out? The pre-game editor is also inherently more stable in that it is far easier to test than a save-game editor (and still pretty tough to test anyway). There's nothing to say it won't be a buggy mess - you say it might not be "100% safe against the humankind genius" but given the number of possible inputs, like FM, it may not even be 100% safe against some sensible inputs. That's the worry for something this new and potentially complex.

[psycho1970]

I don't see the logic in your comment. The editor that is released every year is stable... and yet it can cause problems in the game... if people use it wrong.

The same will happen with the RTE... in fact the same happens with every piece of software: It could be stable... but is not 100% safe against the humankind "genius"

you misguided fool The FM13 editor still had bugs remaining from the last two versions, with the major bugs for the Fm13 version being basic promotion/relegation play-offs not working as it should.

The main editor needs rebuilding (has done since FM11) to fit in with the current game. I would have been happy if when the RTE was announced they had said the main editor had undergone a revamp and due to this is was now a chargeable feature with the RTE thrown in, but once again I fear the main editor has been neglected.

Personally as long as any feature is as advertised and has full technical support I don't mind paying for extra's.

[dsch]

This comment deserves to be kept for posterity. Do you really believe that? Like truly? Deary me...

Do you really believe they don't already have debug tools that do more or less what an RTE does? Do you think every time they want to test a bug, they play the game for days to reproduce the values?

Hold on ... that would explain a lot ...

[Spart]

Do you really believe they don't already have debug tools that do more or less what an RTE does? Do you think every time they want to test a bug, they play the game for days to reproduce the values?

Hold on ... that would explain a lot ...

Do you really think it's in any fit state for public release or regular, general use?

Studio de-bug tools are a world away from a user friendly and stable real time editor for gaming use.

[forameuss]

Do you really believe they don't already have debug tools that do more or less what an RTE does? Do you think every time they want to test a bug, they play the game for days to reproduce the values?

Hold on ... that would explain a lot ...

I direct you to here...

Do you really think it's in any fit state for public release or regular, general use?

Studio de-bug tools are a world away from a user friendly and stable real time editor for gaming use.

So your rebuttal?

And actually, this part "Do you think every time they want to test a bug, they play the game for days to reproduce the values?" deserves expanded on more. Yes, I believe in some cases, although not all, they will. What would be the point in just fixing things in the database to reproduce a reported problem? Unless you're very lucky, this won't truly reproduce it. A lot of the time they'll go down the exact path a user would - click this, click that etc etc. Otherwise it wouldn't be representative. In a lot of cases, they will fix values, we can agree on that, but then it's back to the main reason that Spart put much better than I could.

[dsch]

I direct you to here...

So your rebuttal?

And actually, this part "Do you think every time they want to test a bug, they play the game for days to reproduce the values?" deserves expanded on more. Yes, I believe in some cases, although not all, they will. What would be the point in just fixing things in the database to reproduce a reported problem? Unless you're very lucky, this won't truly reproduce it. A lot of the time they'll go down the exact path a user would - click this, click that etc etc. Otherwise it wouldn't be representative. In a lot of cases, they will fix values, we can agree on that, but then it's back to the main reason that Spart put much better than I could.

(Ah, reasoned discourse instead of mockery. We're making progress.)

The RTE takes values from memory (whether that's in RAM or cached) and manipulates them. I can't imagine that there wouldn't be devtools that do just that. We're not talking about the kind of bugs in the front end that seemed to be suggested in your example (click this, etc.).

As for public release, just think about FMRTE. All it does is change numerical values, you only need to check the input to make sure it's in the correct range and logic (limit CA to between 0 and 200, etc.). FMRTE has always been a use-at-own-risk utility, and it's pretty robust (because it's really not rocket science). Besides, do we imagine that the devs, having worked on FM for a decade, won't have stable and (to a sufficient degree) user-friendly devtools? If the RTE is free, then people will be perfectly happy using it with the same conditions as FMRTE, i.e., cautiously. Dressing it up as a massive task for the devs is a bit of an obvious money-grab. It would also give SI a much strong case against FMRTE if they can say it tries to reproduce an official tool, and we know that SI have never been shy about how they dislike community work that are paid-for (cf. the row over tactics guides a couple years back).

[Spart]

(Ah, reasoned discourse instead of mockery. We're making progress.)

The RTE takes values from memory (whether that's in RAM or cached) and manipulates them. I can't imagine that there wouldn't be devtools that do just that. We're not talking about the kind of bugs in the front end that seemed to be suggested in your example (click this, etc.).

As for public release, just think about FMRTE. All it does is change numerical values, you only need to check the input to make sure it's in the correct range and logic (limit CA to between 0 and 200, etc.). FMRTE has always been a use-at-own-risk utility, and it's pretty robust (because it's really not rocket science). Besides, do we imagine that the devs, having worked on FM for a decade, won't have stable and (to a sufficient degree) user-friendly devtools? If the RTE is free, then people will be perfectly happy using it with the same conditions as FMRTE, i.e., cautiously. Dressing it up as a massive task for the devs is a bit of an obvious money-grab. It would also give SI a much strong case against FMRTE if they can say it tries to reproduce an official tool, and we know that SI have never been shy about how they dislike community work that are paid-for (cf. the row over tactics guides a couple years back).

FMRTE was good for a scratch built third party programme but it clearly wasn't robust enough due to the save game corruption risks when using it and other issues. Seems a bit cheap and heavy handed to paint SI as some anti-community force of malevolence. The tactics guide creators knew the terms SI set out in their fan site rules and other conditions, and yet decided to profiteer off their userbase instead of contributing in the spirit of the existing, free FM community. FMRTE I can sympathise with for the amount of work involved but at the same time SI have every right to do an official, safer version and charge for it as a non-essential extra without it being an "obvious money-grab". There seems to be a lot of emotive hyperbole being thrown around that is completely unnecessary and daft. Still yet to be convinced that turning what could be rather rudimentary dev tools into a polished user ready RTE is as easy or quick as you're making it out to be, but I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Also, on a side note, while it may not be a massive task making users pay for it does remove the easy temptation of having it available to all from the start. It's not hard to see the fairly sizable number of comments, especially on Twitter, complaining to Miles that having the RTE available to them to cheat would ruin their FM experience. Hearing that it was only unlockable as a purchasable extra was actually a positive for many of those.

[forameuss]

(Ah, reasoned discourse instead of mockery. We're making progress.)

The RTE takes values from memory (whether that's in RAM or cached) and manipulates them. I can't imagine that there wouldn't be devtools that do just that. We're not talking about the kind of bugs in the front end that seemed to be suggested in your example (click this, etc.).

As for public release, just think about FMRTE. All it does is change numerical values, you only need to check the input to make sure it's in the correct range and logic (limit CA to between 0 and 200, etc.). FMRTE has always been a use-at-own-risk utility, and it's pretty robust (because it's really not rocket science). Besides, do we imagine that the devs, having worked on FM for a decade, won't have stable and (to a sufficient degree) user-friendly devtools? If the RTE is free, then people will be perfectly happy using it with the same conditions as FMRTE, i.e., cautiously. Dressing it up as a massive task for the devs is a bit of an obvious money-grab. It would also give SI a much strong case against FMRTE if they can say it tries to reproduce an official tool, and we know that SI have never been shy about how they dislike community work that are paid-for (cf. the row over tactics guides a couple years back).

You're completely missing the point. RTE takes values and manipulates them - fine. What exactly are you doing when you click a series of buttons as a user? Probably taking values and manipulating them. I was not talking about bugs in the front-end, I was talking about any bug, because most of them - if they're user-related - will be reproduced using the front-end.

Also, if you really think that it's sufficient testing just to make sure the input is "correct" then you're sorely mistaken. Even in a simple system, it's not that easy, and certainly not in something as complex as FM. Simple and hypothetical example - you use an editor to boost a set of stats on a player. All stats are still within the range allowed, but changing them causes a glitch in the ME. Your tests wouldn't catch that, but it's exposed a bug in the ME as a direct result of a change made via the editor. There is much, much more testing needed than ticking a box next to the inputs.

Whether there is dev tools available is unknown - they probably do have them, and pretty sophisticated, but I'm 95% sure that they would not be aimed at a consumer. They'll be pretty down and dirty debugging tools. It's very possible this RTE will just be a cleaned up version of one of them, but there would be a lot of cleaning to do.

As for SI disliking paid community work, how is that a bad thing? They're a business. If someone is profiting on their work, you can bet that they'll be unhappy. As far as I know (and mods can redact this if it's too taboo) they're alright with the charge for the other RTE as they're not directly competing. That will soon change, and so it should.

[Mierow]

If the new RTE for FM14 comes as a DLC, will it be available for German Steam users ?

The game itself is not.

I only can import it via Amazon.UK and activate it via Steam then (at least that was the procedure last year)

But what does that mean reguarding the DLC for your German customers?

[MasterOfSuspense]

So will the RTE be available on release day and how much?

Surely that has been decided 4 days before release?