FM16 tactics screen discussion

[Dagenham_Dave]

Any chance of seeing the tactics screen from the non-match-screen desktop version then?

Just put a few people at ease.

This is the one thing I don't really understand. Why on earth, when you're trying to promote the game, would you show the tactics screen at such a low-res level? Even the developers must know it looks awful from the screenshot provided. I'm quite sure when the game is released, it'll look much better, and the usability will be a notch up from last year, but it's strange that whilst most games advertise themselves with eye popping cut-scenes to entice potential buyers, SI seem content to publish a screenshot at a resolution that makes one of the most important screens in the game look half finished at best.

In the social media driven world we now live in, perception is everything. Bit of an own goal by SI on this one, which is a shame, as I'm sure the actual game will be up to their usual (very) high standards.

[isignedupfornorealreason]

it seems it will stay same - since someone asked gaffer Miles Jacobson & he says current one improves "usability": https://twitter.com/OllieDS/status/640923701958066176

Sounds par for the course. They really need to hire a PR guy.

Why would he not defend something he believes in? Sports Interactive have a number of people including Miles who communicate directly with the people who play our games, through social media and the forums so please don't throw around such pithy comments.

Everyone who works incredibly hard on the game deserves more respect than comments like that.

Because he comes off really defensive and like a ***** basically. I mean the first response he's basically called someone's opinion 'silly' and 'not serious', two comments which are really dismissive.

Part of that might be because it's twitter and it is the written word. Put this way, if an Indie Dev was commenting along those lines, it would be a bit of a 'oops' moment.

On that note, I'm with everyone else if I'm throwing my two cents in, it looks disgusting, though it may well be functional.

Edit: In FM Terms, Mr Miles = Complacent. >_>

[TIR669]

200 posts mostly complaining about the new screen.

Twitter:

Q: So no chance of the kits coming back then........

Miles: not if we want the tactics screen to be usable, no

Great job SI.

Loving the usability and functionality speech as well.

The change to zoomed shirts (it's still the kit, just zoomed in) rather than full shirts was made for a number of reasons, mainly to make better use of the limited space and limit overlaps, whilst still allowing for the role buttons, position comfort indicator and player name to be clearly displayed. Over recent versions we've had issues with overlaps and the kits becoming tiny depending on the formation set and resolution used. This change has helped that.

"Gaffer, we have limited space on the tactics screen"

"OK, let's magnify everything, then we'll have even less space but usability will be better apparently"

The screenshot released is of the match screen version, which has less vertical space than the standard version. The standard version looks better as the pitch is taller, giving each player more breathing space.

How about horizontal space? Users playing on low-res? Or will it be non-proportional when needing to put 5 players in a row. Their icons will decrease in size, it will look even more silly than now.

All the changes made to this screen for FM16 were made based off the feedback from FM15 and to improve the usability of this screen. Hopefully once you all get to play around with the screen your opinions will change and will understand that the changes have made the screen easier to read and interactive with.

Of course it is easier to read and interact with when it looks zoomed in to 200%.

Also, why the sudden need to remove pitch texture after no less than 9 years?

[Firehouse]

After all being said, I just don't realize why they don't want us to see this screen everyone is talking about in larger resolution. It's like they just have the mockup of the screen (which they surely don't), and not the actual game. It would stop such many angry users from posting things they post. Including me.

[MBarbaric]

After all being said, I just don't realize why they don't want us to see this screen everyone is talking about in larger resolution. It's like they just have the mockup of the screen (which they surely don't), and not the actual game. It would stop such many angry users from posting things they post. Including me.

indeed, somebody really messed up with these low res screen shots.

[Kriss]

Because he comes off really defensive and like a ***** basically. I mean the first response he's basically called someone's opinion 'silly' and 'not serious', two comments which are really dismissive.

Part of that might be because it's twitter and it is the written word. Put this way, if an Indie Dev was commenting along those lines, it would be a bit of a 'oops' moment.

On that note, I'm with everyone else if I'm throwing my two cents in, it looks disgusting, though it may well be functional.

Edit: In FM Terms, Mr Miles = Complacent. >_>

Don't start getting personal, read the house rules on that subject.

[Kriss]

After all being said, I just don't realize why they don't want us to see this screen everyone is talking about in larger resolution. It's like they just have the mockup of the screen (which they surely don't), and not the actual game. It would stop such many angry users from posting things they post. Including me.

I don't think it's a case of don't want us to, they just haven't done it yet, sooner the better though methinks.

[BoxToBox]

indeed, somebody really messed up with these low res screen shots.

I think they have to give the low res screenies, imagine the rage if they released high res ones, and lads with low res gear picked up the game. "This isn't like advertised at all...."

That said, I wish they had made low and high res ones at the same time, and released them together.

[MBarbaric]

I think they have to give the low res screenies, imagine the rage if they released high res ones, and lads with low res gear picked up the game. "This isn't like advertised at all...."

That said, I wish they had made low and high res ones at the same time, and released them together.

do you really think majority of players play the game on low resolution nowadays?

[BoxToBox]

do you really think majority of players play the game on low resolution nowadays?

I have no idea whatsoever what any/everyone else is using to play the game.

[Kriss]

do you really think majority of players play the game on low resolution nowadays?

From the evidence in the bugs forum that would be a yes, well certainly a heck of a lot of people try to play on the bare minimum spec or even below it.

On the subject of the image released, it's puzzling that they haven't yet thought to show a HR image too just to dispel the unrest bit.

[Crb1986]

FM16 tactics screen doesn't look that well. I'd rather use one of the previous versions if we had that option.

We could possibly setup a poll for this

[s1111]

Looks strange. The screenshot shows a 4-4-2 as well, no idea how any formation with more than 2 DM/CM/AMs is represented, doesn't look like there'd be space without making the shirts smaller.

[Denis7]

To be quite honest I am a bit disappointed with the reveal, I bought FM every year for the last 8 years and I'm quite disappointed. The screenshot of the tactics really upset me, why fix something that was never broken. I thought the 2015 tactics screen was absolutely perfect. Of course I won't dismiss my decision to buy the game just yet since its so early, but I hope to hear some good new features that will want me to buy the game....just so far to I am not that impressed. Of course there are some things that I do like but we will see how things look going forward

[friend0]

Looks like a global battle "PC vs. Consoles" ("Argh! Again they made this ugly graphics/interface to be able to use it in consoles") was lost. Now we are losing "PC vs. Tablet" ("Argh! They made this ugly graphics/interface to be able to use it on tablets"). What's next? Losing "PC vs. Watch"?

[reo hustler]

I can't wait for a free form tactics screen.

[Cougar2010]

I can't wait for a free form tactics screen.

You already have one so where is the issue?

[jujigatame]

Really feels like the tactics screen has gone backwards for 2 straight years now. FM14 was great. FM15 removed the dropdown role/duty selection which was senseless and hurt the "usability" in a big way, and cluttered the screen up quite a bit. Now we have big blocks replacing player shirts? What purpose does that serve other than to make it easier for touchscreen players who will probably be in the minority at the expense of desktop players? It really looks poor. In what way does this improve usability?

[grade]

This is the one thing I don't really understand. Why on earth, when you're trying to promote the game, would you show the tactics screen at such a low-res level? Even the developers must know it looks awful from the screenshot provided. I'm quite sure when the game is released, it'll look much better, and the usability will be a notch up from last year, but it's strange that whilst most games advertise themselves with eye popping cut-scenes to entice potential buyers, SI seem content to publish a screenshot at a resolution that makes one of the most important screens in the game look half finished at best.

In the social media driven world we now live in, perception is everything. Bit of an own goal by SI on this one, which is a shame, as I'm sure the actual game will be up to their usual (very) high standards.

Unless it is marketing stunt? I mean release a lower resolution screen and when comes the time to play the Beta or Demo and normally a lot of people have reasonable resolution monitor, would be suprise and say "Actually it is not that bad!"

[BoxToBox]

You already have one so where is the issue?

I think he means total freedom to slide the players to any position, like in PES.

[Cougar2010]

I think he means total freedom to slide the players to any position, like in PES.

Wouldn't make any difference.

While FM calls it a position it isn't in a technical sense. Its an area of the field to work in, pushing a player a few inches forward or backwards isn't relevant within FM and would make zero difference to the ME.

[jeid2000]

I personally don't like the look of it, but I also understand that it's a "work in progress" which a lot of people don't seem to be grasping. Perhaps when I use it and see it with a higher resolution, it'll be glorious.

[BoxToBox]

Wouldn't make any difference.

While FM calls it a position it isn't in a technical sense. Its an area of the field to work in, pushing a player a few inches forward or backwards isn't relevant within FM and would make zero difference to the ME.

It'd be exploitable though, as you wouldn't be limited by slots in sections, and could overload areas.

[isignedupfornorealreason]

Don't start getting personal, read the house rules on that subject.

I'm not being personal, I'm saying how I see people will/can read into that response from experience. I ain't getting the pitchforks out and going down that route. (And hey, I qualified the remarks.)

[Kriss]

(And hey, I qualified the remarks.)

If you hadn't you'd be serving time Miles might be somewhat abrasive at times but he does have to suffer too many fools gladly tbf.

[fabioke]

I still prefer the FM 2014 tactics screen at first sight. I hope that the "improved usability" is going to prove me wrong.

[Dagenham_Dave]

Miles might be somewhat abrasive at times but he does have to suffer too many fools gladly tbf.

Which is understandable, but sometimes I feel he has to be more patient with people asking straightforward, relevant questions, otherwise it's pointless him having a Twitter account. I know the interwebs is full of slavering idiocy, but there are a few sensible punters out there.

What would be nice - going back on topic - is if they had video gameplay of the more 'static' screens. All gameplay you normally see is of the 3d match. Miles says the new tactics screen improves usability, so how about a short video showing someone actually, you know, using it? Would be far more worthwhile than a poor, lo-res screenshot, which let's be honest, has just got most people's backs up, rightly or wrongly.

[forameuss]

Personally I think the more Miles acts like that the better. Must be grating to have to stick to a bs customer service script when I imagine all he's been getting is abuse. I imagine if he's treated with respect, he'll answer with the same. If you don't, then he should be perfectly within his rights to reply like that. It's akin to fans screaming 90 minutes of abuse at a footballer, and then ending up absolutely seething when he gives some back after scoring.

As always "customer is always right" is to blame.

What would be nice - going back on topic - is if they had video gameplay of the more 'static' screens. All gameplay you normally see is of the 3d match. Miles says the new tactics screen improves usability, so how about a short video showing someone actually, you know, using it? Would be far more worthwhile than a poor, lo-res screenshot, which let's be honest, has just got most people's backs up, rightly or wrongly.

I wouldn't be surprised if the entire process was part of a wider "marketing plan" that we'll see little deviation from. Great if it all works out, but if step 1 goes wrong, not sure there would be much contingency for deviating. Maybe. Or maybe they just don't want to. Who knows.

[Shake Appeal]

I have no idea whatsoever what any/everyone else is using to play the game.

Less than 3% of Steam users have a desktop resolution of that size or smaller.

[Kriss]

Less than 3% of Steam users have a desktop resolution of that size or smaller.

Far, far less than 3% of Steam users play FM, it's a meaningless statistic in this context.

The bugs forum holds ample proof that FM players as a breed seem to try playing it on antiquated systems using long unsupported operating systems

[stevemc]

Now this was a tactics screen:

[Shake Appeal]

Far, far less than 3% of Steam users play FM, it's a meaningless statistic in this context.

The bugs forum holds ample proof that FM players as a breed seem to try playing it on antiquated systems using long unsupported operating systems

All FM users are Steam users; arguing that the general population of Steam users is not representative of FM users puts the burden of proof on you. But okay, if you want to move the goalposts:

http://gs.statcounter.com/#desktop-resolution-ww-monthly-201506-201508-bar

This is representative of everyone in the entire world browsing the Web on a desktop computer in the last three months. As you'll see, well over half are using a widescreen resolution above standard HD (720p). That includes kids browsing on their school computer from Lesotho to Laos.

[forameuss]

All FM users are Steam users; arguing that the general population of Steam users is not representative of FM users puts the burden of proof on you. But okay, if you want to move the goalposts:

http://gs.statcounter.com/#desktop-resolution-ww-monthly-201506-201508-bar

This is representative of everyone in the entire world browsing the Web on a desktop computer in the last three months. As you'll see, well over half are using a widescreen resolution above standard HD (720p). That includes kids browsing on their school computer from Lesotho to Laos.

Over half?! Wow, let's just sack lower resolutions then, it's clearly time.

[Shake Appeal]

Over half?! Wow, let's just sack lower resolutions then, it's clearly time.

Straw man. I've never suggested they get rid of them. But they should use promotional materials that are representative of the overwhelming majority of worldwide desktop users, let alone Steam users.

[Neil Brock]

do you really think majority of players play the game on low resolution nowadays?

I saw the numbers the other day and was stunned by how many people still play in the lowest supported resolution.

[forameuss]

I saw the numbers the other day and was stunned by how many people still play in the lowest supported resolution.

But...but...but...Steam users?!

[Monkee91]

Please give us a more professional looking UI (like <=2014). The reason i didn't play 2015 was because of the arcadeish look and feel of the game.

Edit. Or please allow us to switch between the older looking UI compared to this new one.

[HUNT3R]

Monkee91, according to Miles, the Tactics screen will stay. Whether you agree or not, it's staying. Feedback is great of course (constructive feedback) and SI do take it on board. We have ONE, low resolution to judge from. Wait until there's more or you have the full game to make a complete judgement on it.

[Monkee91]

Monkee91, according to Miles, the Tactics screen will stay. Whether you agree or not, it's staying. Feedback is great of course (constructive feedback) and SI do take it on board. We have ONE, low resolution to judge from. Wait until there's more or you have the full game to make a complete judgement on it.

With all due respect i won't be wasting my money on the full game at release, i will wait until reviews are out etc. Football Manager 2015 on steam had 76% positive feedback from user reviews. Im pretty sure the year before it was higher.

And IMO i think it will be lower this year.

[HUNT3R]

With all due respect i won't be wasting my money on the full game at release, i will wait until reviews are out etc. Football Manager 2015 on steam had 76% positive feedback from user reviews. Im pretty sure the year before it was higher.

And IMO i think it will be lower this year.

Using steam user reviews is a bad idea. At the very least get the demo and see for yourself.

[Monkee91]

Using steam user reviews is a bad idea. At the very least get the demo and see for yourself.

I have 2015 and i put 4hrs into it, i just couldn't get into it, the interface as it was in 14 etc just seemed right for this game. We had the sidebar in 2007? i think, and it was removed due to people not liking it so why bring it back?

Steam user reviews are the best way to judge a game IMHO real people with honest opinions (apart from the odd few who try to be funny) and not biast in anyway. I will try 16 and i hope i like it because i love the FM franchise. But it feels like its appealing to the more basic user than hardcore Football sim fans in recent years and i find my self hoping we get a new franchise HECK even LMA manager is welcome!

[Cougar2010]

I have 2015 and i put 4hrs into it, i just couldn't get into it, the interface as it was in 14 etc just seemed right for this game. We had the sidebar in 2007? i think, and it was removed due to people not liking it so why bring it back?

Steam user reviews are the best way to judge a game IMHO real people with honest opinions (apart from the odd few who try to be funny) and not biast in anyway. I will try 16 and i hope i like it because i love the FM franchise. But it feels like its appealing to the more basic user than hardcore Football sim fans in recent years and i find my self hoping we get a new franchise HECK even LMA manager is welcome!

The number of Steam reviews where people actually know what they are talking about and can give an unbiased view is fairly minimal I find.

[forameuss]

Steam user reviews are the best way to judge a game IMHO real people with honest opinions (apart from the odd few who try to be funny) and not biast in anyway. I will try 16 and i hope i like it because i love the FM franchise. But it feels like its appealing to the more basic user than hardcore Football sim fans in recent years and i find my self hoping we get a new franchise HECK even LMA manager is welcome!

While not being as bad as Metacritic, I don't think I've used a Steam review beyond the very general "Mostly positive/mostly negative" etc. Any review, short of a select few critics, will be biased in some way. Steam reviews in particular seem to be totally about trying to be "funny" now (quotes intended). The best way is to completely ignore reviews, unless they're from someone you trust that has exactly the same tastes as you. The best way is always going to be grabbing the demo and trying it out for yourself, completely separate from anyone else's opinion. For a product that is designed purely for user enjoyment, why would you trust a random persons idea of enjoyment over a free chance to try it for yourself? In the end, people can't be trusted. People created selfie sticks.

[isignedupfornorealreason]

While not being as bad as Metacritic, I don't think I've used a Steam review beyond the very general "Mostly positive/mostly negative" etc. Any review, short of a select few critics, will be biased in some way. Steam reviews in particular seem to be totally about trying to be "funny" now (quotes intended). The best way is to completely ignore reviews, unless they're from someone you trust that has exactly the same tastes as you. The best way is always going to be grabbing the demo and trying it out for yourself, completely separate from anyone else's opinion. For a product that is designed purely for user enjoyment, why would you trust a random persons idea of enjoyment over a free chance to try it for yourself? In the end, people can't be trusted. People created selfie sticks.

Steam reviews are best used as an aggregate. If a game is 'mostly negative' you know something is wrong.

FM12 was Overwhelmingly positive, it dropped down to 'mostly positive' for 13, 14 and 15. That's off memory, I did go and check Steam as I have all the way back to 2009 on my Steam library but SI take the policy of removing the older versions from the store quite quickly nowadays.

If you hadn't you'd be serving time Miles might be somewhat abrasive at times but he does have to suffer too many fools gladly tbf.

That's fair, but I don't think that twitter post was deserving of the response it got.

[Cougar2010]

FM12 was Overwhelmingly positive, it dropped down to 'mostly positive' for 13, 14 and 15. That's off memory, I did go and check Steam as I have all the way back to 2009 on my Steam library but SI take the policy of removing the older versions from the store quite quickly nowadays.

and yet FM15 is far better than FM12, what does that tell you?

[forameuss]

Steam reviews are best used as an aggregate. If a game is 'mostly negative' you know something is wrong.

FM12 was Overwhelmingly positive, it dropped down to 'mostly positive' for 13, 14 and 15. That's off memory, I did go and check Steam as I have all the way back to 2009 on my Steam library but SI take the policy of removing the older versions from the store quite quickly nowadays.

Yeah, that's what I meant by looking at the "mostly" part. If it's mostly negative, I'll take a look to see why, but rarely take too many individual reviews very seriously. For what it's worth, I'd rate FM at a pretty constant 7-7.5 for the past few editions. That probably puts it around the mostly positive I guess. In my opinion.

[martplfc1]

I find customers' internet reviews are completely unreliable. For example, the amount of 1 out of 10 reviews for the film "Boyhood" on IMDB was incredible. 1 out of 10!! It might not be to everybody's taste but the lowest possible score is ridiculous, basically suggesting it's just a video of a rock on the floor for 3 hours.

I imagine a lot of Steam reviews are like that - if the game isn't perfect or you lose or can't get into it, the reviewer gives it the lowest score possible to vent their own frustrations.

The only way you'll be able to tell for sure is to download the demo and see for yourself.

[friend0]

Yeah, that's what I meant by looking at the "mostly" part. If it's mostly negative, I'll take a look to see why, but rarely take too many individual reviews very seriously. For what it's worth, I'd rate FM at a pretty constant 7-7.5 for the past few editions. That probably puts it around the mostly positive I guess. In my opinion.

User rating include (my opinion): actual game quality + comparsion with previous versions + comparsion with similar games + fulfilled/unfulfilled expectations. So the "Supergame2" for new player can be good, but for the other it will be bad, because he owns "Supergame1" and only number has changed. So it's useful to read user reviews to determine your own rating.

[BoxToBox]

Now this was a tactics screen:

Kill it! Kill it with fire!

While not being as bad as Metacritic, I don't think I've used a Steam review beyond the very general "Mostly positive/mostly negative" etc. Any review, short of a select few critics, will be biased in some way. Steam reviews in particular seem to be totally about trying to be "funny" now (quotes intended). The best way is to completely ignore reviews, unless they're from someone you trust that has exactly the same tastes as you. The best way is always going to be grabbing the demo and trying it out for yourself, completely separate from anyone else's opinion. For a product that is designed purely for user enjoyment, why would you trust a random persons idea of enjoyment over a free chance to try it for yourself? In the end, people can't be trusted. People created selfie sticks.

I have yet to see a genuinely funny Steam review.

[Kriss]

The worst reviews are those done by professional reviewers, at least with ordinary folk you have a chance of some sensible observations.