FM Stagnation, questions to responsible persons

[CFuller]

7 minutes ago, krlenjushka said:

After final patch in march - game is usually playable. We have only 6 months to enjoy real experience. Its not enough. If they decide to release game every 2 years - we would get more complete game and SI can have more time to make new version.

FM is usually 'playable' from the moment it comes out. Thousands of players do get satisfaction out of the game from the outset. Just because you - and quite a few others - don't doesn't mean that the game is necessarily 'unplayable' until the final patch.

As for SI releasing FM every other year... I've said this before, and I'll say it again. That would be financial suicide. SI would have more time, but they'd also have fewer resources, and fewer staff to work on the game, because of the vastly reduced income. It would actually hurt the company a heck of a lot more than help the game... as would releasing 'season update' DLC, for that matter.

[Mons]

5 minutes ago, krlenjushka said:

The biggest problem is this - FM cant be released every year. Game with database like this - simply there si no time for fix everything on time. We have much "weaker" database games in game world with releases every 2,3,4 years.

After final patch in march - game is usually playable. We have only 6 months to enjoy real experience. Its not enough. If they decide to release game every 2 years - we would get more complete game and SI can have more time to make new version.

About money - SI can find some way to get money from us - higher price or some yearly membership or something like that. Its not problem to pay for something - if you're satisfied.

If all SI did was fix things, then you'd be correct. But they not only "fix" things from one version of the game to another, but also add new features. Releasing the game every 2 years would see loads more features added and loads more potential for bugs, would it not? If anything, using your flawed reasoning, it would make the problem worse and not solve it.

 

And if you really think the game is not playable before March, what's stopping you from buying it in March (when the price would be less) and playing it from March-March?

[Peljam]

4 minutes ago, krlenjushka said:

 

After final patch in march - game is usually playable. We have only 6 months to enjoy real experience. Its not enough. If they decide to release game every 2 years - we would get more complete game and SI can have more time to make new version.

 

 

 

See I struggle with this. On one hand I get what you mean, when there's a new verison out with new things in you want to play it but there's nothing making you do that, and there's nothing to stop you going back to the version you preferred and carrying on with it.  It's not the case you have 12 months to play and then the game just stops working.

I was really enjoying my FM17 save, and even though FM18 had come out I carried on with it until I reached a point I felt was the 'end' (winning the SPL with the mighty Berwick Rangers). I played it for more than the yearly window. Just because a new version was out didn't mean I had to stop, and the new version didn't change my enjoyment of the old version. I've got people on my steam friends list who play FM12 on a regular basis because they love it.

I played FM13 more or less through to FM15. Basically if the version is good enough and the save is good enough then I'm not going to stick to the yearly window just because a new version is out. If I'm enjoying what I've got I'll continue.

I know part of the point is that if there was a 2 year cycle more could be done but that, and the reasons for and against, have been debated to death on the forums.

[krlenjushka]

7 minutes ago, CFuller said:

FM is usually 'playable' from the moment it comes out. Thousands of players do get satisfaction out of the game from the outset. Just because you - and quite a few others - don't doesn't mean that the game is necessarily 'unplayable' until the final patch.

As for SI releasing FM every other year... I've said this before, and I'll say it again. That would be financial suicide. SI would have more time, but they'd also have fewer resources, and fewer staff to work on the game, because of the vastly reduced income. It would actually hurt the company a heck of a lot more than help the game... as would releasing 'season update' DLC, for that matter.

Game with this amount of data simply cant be released every year. This is not PES or some first shooter game. Season update can solve update issue - about money - as i said before - im sure there is some way to get money. Im willing to pay double price for 2 year release. And we and SI can have enough time to solve bugs.

For example - many problems/bugs in editor section are not solved because coders doesnt have enough time to solve everything.

 

5 minutes ago, Mons said:

If all SI did was fix things, then you'd be correct. But they not only "fix" things from one version of the game to another, but also add new features. Releasing the game every 2 years would see loads more features added and loads more potential for bugs, would it not? If anything, using your flawed reasoning, it would make the problem worse and not solve it.True

True but this way SI and beta testers can have lot more time to test everything and to solve problems.

5 minutes ago, Mons said:

And if you really think the game is not playable before March, what's stopping you from buying it in March (when the price would be less) and playing it from March-March?

This game is truly released from March to March. If i install game on release date - and have crash every 5 minutes - how this can be ok? When i buy PES or NBA i dont have any problem...

[CFuller]

1 minute ago, krlenjushka said:

Game with this amount of data simply cant be released every year. This is not PES or some first shooter game. Season update can solve update issue - about money - as i said before - im sure there is some way to get money. Im willing to pay double price for 2 year release. And we and SI can have enough time to solve bugs.

For example - many problems/bugs in editor section are not solved because coders doesnt have enough time to solve everything.

Here's the thing: FM is so vast, so complicated, that it is inevitable there will be plenty of bugs that slip through, no matter how many coders SI employ. I am fine with that, as long as there aren't any that I find to be genuine game-breakers rather than minor inconveniencies.

[krlenjushka]

1 minute ago, CFuller said:

Here's the thing: FM is so vast, so complicated, that it is inevitable there will be plenty of bugs that slip through, no matter how many coders SI employ. I am fine with that, as long as there aren't any that I find to be genuine game-breakers rather than minor inconveniencies.

True but when i see some issues from version to version i dont see reason to play new version. i wish we  have one more fm game with this quality - healthy competition can make things only better.

[CFuller]

9 minutes ago, Peljam said:

See I struggle with this. On one hand I get what you mean, when there's a new verison out with new things in you want to play it but there's nothing making you do that, and there's nothing to stop you going back to the version you preferred and carrying on with it.  It's not the case you have 12 months to play and then the game just stops working.

I was really enjoying my FM17 save, and even though FM18 had come out I carried on with it until I reached a point I felt was the 'end' (winning the SPL with the mighty Berwick Rangers). I played it for more than the yearly window. Just because a new version was out didn't mean I had to stop, and the new version didn't change my enjoyment of the old version. I've got people on my steam friends list who play FM12 on a regular basis because they love it.

I played FM13 more or less through to FM15. Basically if the version is good enough and the save is good enough then I'm not going to stick to the yearly window just because a new version is out. If I'm enjoying what I've got I'll continue.

I know part of the point is that if there was a 2 year cycle more could be done but that, and the reasons for and against, have been debated to death on the forums.

Precisely.

I've got an FM13 save that I am still playing (and more importantly still enjoying) after four-and-a-half years (though I've recently taken a bit of a break from it). Because of that, I skipped FM14 completely, and didn't play a great deal of either of the next two versions. I've now got another long-term save on FM17, and I tend to rotate between that and the FM13 save.

I played the FM18 demo last month, and didn't enjoy it all that much. My results were pretty good, but I found the UI to be a mess, and there were a few other annoyances that took away from the experience. That, coupled with the fact I'm not quite finished with FM13 or FM17, led me to skip FM18 altogether. I will probably 'return' - for want of a better word - for FM19.

[Glenn Wakeford]

Yeah I thought about answering some of the questions in the OP (some, I wouldn't be the right person to answer all of them) but the tone is bang out of order.

Last time I tried to answer some questions and clarify some things, it wasn't accepted, it was turned around and argued with, and I received private messages of abuse, calling me and the company arrogant and lazy.

Not sure why we don't respond much to threads like this? There's your answer.

[krlenjushka]

10 minutes ago, Glenn Wakeford said:

Yeah I thought about answering some of the questions in the OP (some, I wouldn't be the right person to answer all of them) but the tone is bang out of order.

Last time I tried to answer some questions and clarify some things, it wasn't accepted, it was turned around and argued with, and I received private messages of abuse, calling me and the company arrogant and lazy.

Not sure why we don't respond much to threads like this? There's your answer.

There is no need for "bad tone" or anything similar. I understand your frustration because reactions are often very bad.  

However some healthy discussion can be helpfull and good for both sides- if we can call us "sides"  😁

Lack of communication can be very big problem. We (customers) and you guys need to understand one thing:

We need you guys and you need us!

We should have more respect for your work.

You should have more respect for our efforts to help and make this game even better.

Cheers!

 

 

[Glenn Wakeford]

2 minutes ago, krlenjushka said:

There is no need for "bad tone" or anything similar. I understand your frustration because reactions are often very bad.  

However some healthy discussion can be helpfull and good for both sides- if we can call us "sides"  😁

Lack of communication can be very big problem. We (customers) and you guys need to understand one thing:

We need you guys and you need us!

We should have more respect for your work.

You should have more respect for our efforts to help and make this game even better.

Cheers!

 

 

We have the utmost respect for your efforts to help the game better, which is why we are so active in the bugs forums. Unfortunately people don't want discussions, they want to vent anger at us. It's been like this for many years now, but if anything it's actually worse these days than it used to be.

[krlenjushka]

Just now, Glenn Wakeford said:

We have the utmost respect for your efforts to help the game better, which is why we are so active in the bugs forums. Unfortunately people don't want discussions, they want to vent anger at us. It's been like this for many years now, but if anything it's actually worse these days than it used to be.

I agree with you but sometimes your feedback can be very bad.

For example- im very active in editor section. I reporter multiple bugs for editor 2017 without any feedback or answer. I spent 10+ hours of my free time to help-for nothing. 

This year i need to test that bugs again. Should i report it again? I risk to have same "feedback" like i had last time. 

This is that "respect" from my previous post. I respect your work and i expect same for my work too.

Lack of communication in action.

Real problem.

 

[Glenn Wakeford]

2 minutes ago, krlenjushka said:

I agree with you but sometimes your feedback can be very bad.

For example- im very active in editor section. I reporter multiple bugs for editor 2017 without any feedback or answer. I spent 10+ hours of my free time to help-for nothing. 

This year i need to test that bugs again. Should i report it again? I risk to have same "feedback" like i had last time. 

This is that "respect" from my previous post. I respect your work and i expect same for my work too.

Lack of communication in action.

Real problem.

 

I am sorry to hear that you didn't get any responses, that's unusual and I'm afraid I can't say why that was the case.

If you take a look at the FM18 Editor bugs forum you will see that a member of staff is replying to everything there, so if you did report anything again I am sure it would be looked into.

Thanks for letting me know.

[krlenjushka]

3 minutes ago, Glenn Wakeford said:

I am sorry to hear that you didn't get any responses, that's unusual and I'm afraid I can't say why that was the case.

If you take a look at the FM18 Editor bugs forum you will see that a member of staff is replying to everything there, so if you did report anything again I am sure it would be looked into.

Thanks for letting me know.

I guess they just dont have enough time for everything.  i know they have "lack of staff" there so i understand. Its not some game-breaking issue but sometimes customers react in bad way because of this. 

Thanks for your answers!

[Neil Brock]

20 hours ago, Novem9 said:

With all due respect, I want to ask for developers & publisher list of questions below :

1. Why FM with minimum set of ipmroves sold every year in AAA-game price?
1.1 Where to spend money from sales, if improves are minimal? 
1.2 What reason of high price for game? Than justified of this?
1.3 Why in game with AAA-price players need to download skins for interface/emblems/kits from third-party manufacturers and volunteers create your database?

2. When you create completely new, created from scratch Match Engine?
2.1 Do not you consider disrespect to yourself and your customers to sell game on morally obsolete technologies each year?
2.2 Is the lack of competition in the market only one reason of slow progress of your product?
2.3 What kind of problem with optimization, if picture of ME looks like middle of 2000th required like modern AAA games?

3. Why your AI so weak?
3.1 Why AI can't pursue quality transfer politic?
3.2 Why AI still does not know how to create realistic tactics?
3.3 Do you consider this acceptable to cheat with the implementation of the moments and other tactical-techique actions for game balance and help for AI?

4. Why you create so bad press-conf-s and still not improve this part of game?
4.1 Why dialogs with players and board so weak and bounded?
4.2 Why AI (managers and boards) can't create strategy for club and change this adjusting in case of success / failure?
4.3 Do you consider the emergence of cheating tactics every year a direct indication of the primitivity of the AI and match engine?

5. Why game is ready to use only in patch 1x.2.0 in fact & from version to version wander the same bugs and errors?
5.1 Do you check wishlist of customers? Do you consider these requests on detail level?
5.2 Do you have approximate course of development for FM games for next one/five/ten years?

6. Why FM don't equipped in-game detailed tutorials for newbies?

Many thanks in advance!

 

 Like all of you, I am a big fan of football and FM game too.
But I can't endure more this stagnation of game.

In this case I want to urge all of you will not buy FM19 and the following games until SI and SEGA will provide a quality product.

I'm not looking for conflicts and create this topic just because this is the only available way to get the desired. 

There's a lack of understanding from the questions raised here, but in part that's on us for not explaining ourselves better, or information not being shared to the type of level where people don't feel so frustrated. 

We look to improve the game with every single version - that's not every release, that's every single update or hotfix. However some changes and improvements are extremely difficult to implement for a number of reasons I'll get to later. 

For instance one of the questions above:

Quote

When you create completely new, created from scratch Match Engine?

That negates the incredible difficulties there are to have any kind of match engine whatsoever under the parameters needed for FM. If it was that easy, why isn't anyone else doing it? We're proud to say that our match engine is the most accurate representation of real life football in the world. But yeah, we know it's not perfect, of course. But on the flip side it's not easy to rip up years and years of coding and implement an entirely new system - this process in itself would take years. The level of coding involved is simply mind-boggling.  

Same with stuff like the AI for transfers and tactics. There's a huge amount of thinking which goes on under the hood - partly to the determent of weaker systems. We could add significantly more factors of AI, but the consequence would the game would become insanely slow. That's the kind of balance we have to choose between improvements and practicality. So as systems generally get quicker and stronger, we can add more and make more advances - as we have done for FM18.  

In regards to the wishlist (which doesn't actually exist any more, there's actually a feature request forum). I made a post here clarifying why certain features hadn't been responded to quite recently so feel free to check it out - https://community.sigames.com/topic/415057-clarifying-when-features-get-reviewed-by-si/

We're actually changing how we look at features internally, so this will mean we can provide a template of sorts to allow you to provide us ideas containing all the information needed to improve the chances of the issue going into the game. But simply put, there are certain aspects we won't look to add to the Football Manager simulation as we don't feel it's realistic, like a chairman mode or spending the manager's cash on cars etc. But every single feature logged is considered by a member of our team.

Hopefully in the forthcoming months we can improve the way we're communicating with the community. We're considering a number of factors across our social channels and here on the forum to improve the visibility or our decisions and allow the community to become more involved with us all.

At the moment we're still busy working on FM18 and we've already got hundreds of features and development ideas in place for FM19. These aren't set in stone - if we (or you!) think of something better there's scope to change this prior to the full development stage beginning. 

Our goal however is simple. We want to make the best Football Management simulation ever. We play the game too, so why on Earth would we want to do the bare minimum? That's not something we've ever done here at SI. Personally as someone who's worked here for over 10 years, I've seen the late nights, the early starts, the worked weekends and everything that comes with that. People here work hard and they do care. But we have a limited number of staff and a limited amount of time, so sometimes priorities have to be taken on certain features and improvements over others. 

All we ask in return from our community when you communicate to us is, is some respect. You're allowed to be unhappy, frustrated and criticise. But we ask for you to do it in a respectful and constructive way. 

Thanks. 

[krlenjushka]

16 minutes ago, Neil Brock said:

But we have a limited number of staff and a limited amount of time

I guess this is main problem. Hope you will improve this

[Tony Wright 747]

33 minutes ago, Neil Brock said:

There's a lack of understanding from the questions raised here, but in part that's on us for not explaining ourselves better, or information not being shared to the type of level where people don't feel so frustrated. 

We look to improve the game with every single version - that's not every release, that's every single update or hotfix. However some changes and improvements are extremely difficult to implement for a number of reasons I'll get to later. 

For instance one of the questions above:

That negates the incredible difficulties there are to have any kind of match engine whatsoever under the parameters needed for FM. If it was that easy, why isn't anyone else doing it? We're proud to say that our match engine is the most accurate representation of real life football in the world. But yeah, we know it's not perfect, of course. But on the flip side it's not easy to rip up years and years of coding and implement an entirely new system - this process in itself would take years. The level of coding involved is simply mind-boggling.  

Same with stuff like the AI for transfers and tactics. There's a huge amount of thinking which goes on under the hood - partly to the determent of weaker systems. We could add significantly more factors of AI, but the consequence would the game would become insanely slow. That's the kind of balance we have to choose between improvements and practicality. So as systems generally get quicker and stronger, we can add more and make more advances - as we have done for FM18.  

In regards to the wishlist (which doesn't actually exist any more, there's actually a feature request forum). I made a post here clarifying why certain features hadn't been responded to quite recently so feel free to check it out - https://community.sigames.com/topic/415057-clarifying-when-features-get-reviewed-by-si/

We're actually changing how we look at features internally, so this will mean we can provide a template of sorts to allow you to provide us ideas containing all the information needed to improve the chances of the issue going into the game. But simply put, there are certain aspects we won't look to add to the Football Manager simulation as we don't feel it's realistic, like a chairman mode or spending the manager's cash on cars etc. But every single feature logged is considered by a member of our team.

Hopefully in the forthcoming months we can improve the way we're communicating with the community. We're considering a number of factors across our social channels and here on the forum to improve the visibility or our decisions and allow the community to become more involved with us all.

At the moment we're still busy working on FM18 and we've already got hundreds of features and development ideas in place for FM19. These aren't set in stone - if we (or you!) think of something better there's scope to change this prior to the full development stage beginning. 

Our goal however is simple. We want to make the best Football Management simulation ever. We play the game too, so why on Earth would we want to do the bare minimum? That's not something we've ever done here at SI. Personally as someone who's worked here for over 10 years, I've seen the late nights, the early starts, the worked weekends and everything that comes with that. People here work hard and they do care. But we have a limited number of staff and a limited amount of time, so sometimes priorities have to be taken on certain features and improvements over others. 

All we ask in return from our community when you communicate to us is, is some respect. You're allowed to be unhappy, frustrated and criticise. But we ask for you to do it in a respectful and constructive way. 

Thanks. 

A very good reply from you as usual Neil,however  having tried the demo of both FM17 and FM18 I decided not to buy.  Last night I did a bit of an experiment I had FM12 on my laptop, FM16 on my desktop and a live match on the TV, looking at the screens in unison the players movements runs etc and the way the match played looked closer to the live game on FM12 than FM16, so I believe while there has been progress in some areas, other areas appear to have gone the other way and I would have to agree with Rdbaylly that the crowds and stadiums in FM18 are a retrograde step.

[Mons]

46 minutes ago, krlenjushka said:

I guess this is main problem. Hope you will improve this

Really, if out of all that evidently heartfelt wall of text, that sentence is all you choose to to respond to, then I 100% don't blame SI for not engaging with the community as much as we'd all want them to.

[krlenjushka]

2 minutes ago, Mons said:

Really, if out of all that evidently heartfelt wall of text, that sentence is all you choose to to respond to, then I 100% don't blame SI for not engaging with the community as much as we'd all want them to.

Thats only my opinion - i can have one i guess...

[XaW]

10 hours ago, Mons said:

Really, if out of all that evidently heartfelt wall of text, that sentence is all you choose to to respond to, then I 100% don't blame SI for not engaging with the community as much as we'd all want them to.

I've never felt someone taking the words out of my mouth like this. Here is Neil giving a very good response and the only reply was "Then fix it"... And even this just after both Neil and Glenn stating why they don't interact as much as they used to... I baffles me...

[Luke Cro]

SI said they lack staff to cover all issues... Honestly, I believe, you (SI) earn decent sum of money every year to hire extra few people to cover all FM game issues... Since FM12 I can only see some "cosmetic changes" in game, and for me (and many other people) game isn't pleasant experience anymore... Things got more complexed than they should...

I'm pretty much annoyed how some things are ignored for severaly years... When did you check editor hideaway section for example?  There are tons of requests which are ignored for many years now, and this year I skipped game for the first time 'cause of that since FM2007... On the other hand do SI check their (head) researchers?? I reported several  data issues last year that needs to be fixed in game's database and guess what - in this year's game edition data isn't corrected... (i asked a friend to check this btw)...

Because of that and many other, minor things (e.g. press confrences) people are staying away from a game... So it's better to release DLC for 2019, and create much better game for 2020... It's ridiculous that this game has 7GB in size when installed on PC...

[Karnack]

39 minutes ago, Luke Cro said:

SI said they lack staff to cover all issues... Honestly, I believe, you (SI) earn decent sum of money every year to hire extra few people to cover all FM game issues... Since FM12 I can only see some "cosmetic changes" in game, and for me (and many other people) game isn't pleasant experience anymore... Things got more complexed than they should...

I'm pretty much annoyed how some things are ignored for severaly years... When did you check editor hideaway section for example?  There are tons of requests which are ignored for many years now, and this year I skipped game for the first time 'cause of that since FM2007... On the other hand do SI check their (head) researchers?? I reported several  data issues last year that needs to be fixed in game's database and guess what - in this year's game edition data isn't corrected... (i asked a friend to check this btw)...

Because of that and many other, minor things (e.g. press confrences) people are staying away from a game... So it's better to release DLC for 2019, and create much better game for 2020... It's ridiculous that this game has 7GB in size when installed on PC...

Just because you believe they can hire extra people doesn't make it so. 

So people are staying away? Is it your own empirical evidence that claim this? Ridiculous post.

Unless your post was meant as an example of posts that turned SI Staff away from the forums then; well done!

[Neil Brock]

39 minutes ago, Luke Cro said:

SI said they lack staff to cover all issues... Honestly, I believe, you (SI) earn decent sum of money every year to hire extra few people to cover all FM game issues... Since FM12 I can only see some "cosmetic changes" in game, and for me (and many other people) game isn't pleasant experience anymore... Things got more complexed than they should...

I'm pretty much annoyed how some things are ignored for severaly years... When did you check editor hideaway section for example?  There are tons of requests which are ignored for many years now, and this year I skipped game for the first time 'cause of that since FM2007... On the other hand do SI check their (head) researchers?? I reported several  data issues last year that needs to be fixed in game's database and guess what - in this year's game edition data isn't corrected... (i asked a friend to check this btw)...

Because of that and many other, minor things (e.g. press confrences) people are staying away from a game... So it's better to release DLC for 2019, and create much better game for 2020... It's ridiculous that this game has 7GB in size when installed on PC...

Well simply put, we're trying - http://www.sigames.com/careers

So if you know anyone suitable get them to apply. 

And I don't wish to be rude, but if you can only see cosmetic changes since FM12, I don't ever suggest you apply for a QA job here as you'd need slightly better attention to detail to qualify to do so!  

[XaW]

12 minutes ago, Neil Brock said:

Well simply put, we're trying - http://www.sigames.com/careers

So if you know anyone suitable get them to apply. 

And I don't wish to be rude, but if you can only see cosmetic changes since FM12, I don't ever suggest you apply for a QA job here as you'd need slightly better attention to detail to qualify to do so!  

I wish I lived in England. I would apply. You wouldn't happen to have a specific need for a Norwegian ISTQB certified tester by any chance? 

[OCD]

With regards to complaints about A.I, unfortunately that's one area in gaming in general that hasn't really evolved in any meaningful way. It doesn't tend to have much focus in other games due to the huge push towards online (where a.i matters less). In a predominantly single player game any issues with A.I become jarring.

The biggest improvement to Football Manager above anything else would be improvements to the A.I. The immersion for me in football manager is what happens in the "world" itself. If what's happening there isn't right e.g during matches, transfers, line ups, tactics etc then any other features become irrelevant.

It's one of the reasons I've never been able to play a career mode in FIfa, the unrealistic transfers and line ups over time, and the fact that a.i players on your team don't carry out the tactics you choose e.g set a holding midfielder to stay back yet they still make forward runs into the box.

I appreciate it's not as easy as flicking a switch to implement better A.I, if it was SI Games would have done it already.

On another note while some people complain about the match engine itself, and I'd agree it doesn't look great in 3D, (I tend to play in 2D classic as I get a better feel for seeing what's happening) the movement of players is far superior to the likes of Fifa etc. In Fifa it's common to see centre backs and defensive midfielders in the box like they're a poacher. So while superficially Football Manager is weaker than the likes of Fifa and PES, what actually happens in the match, i.e build up, player movement etc far resembles real life more accurately than those games.

[santy001]

Game AI (in general) hasn't improved dramatically for so many years now, the industry as a whole is in a bit of a lull. You can simulate more advanced AI with basically a greater repertoire of if-statements at its most simplistic level. We're waiting on new technology, or technology like deepmind to be commercially viable. Although in the case of something like deepmind it would presumably need to be used in a persistent game environment (so we'd all probably need to be connected to it all the time when playing FM) and it could do more reactionary things based on our inputs. It would also need time for SI developers to get to grips with it. Then there would also be the risk of deepmind learning too effectively, and within a few hours @Cleon @Rashidi etc have created some tactical monster AI which is near unbeatable. Yet thanks to folks like knap has fully mastered the arts of overloading the front line when your tactic would be weak to it.

Personally, as a gamer, I think across the whole industry we're in for another pretty underwhelming 10 years or so, unless there's a major change that comes from left-field. In all games, there was a far greater magnitude of change from 2000-2010 than there has been from 2010 to now. It's very easy to go down a very negative route and mindset, but where do you look to for the example of someone doing it so much better/right at the moment? There's only 'examples' of it being done wrong, and they really do feel more like just limitations of the technology and current knowledge rather than any desire to hold back.

A lot of games have actually gotten simpler (not streamlined, but actually simpler - such as factions in Morrowind compared to Oblivion, compared to Skyrim. The nemesis system in the Middle Earth games was horribly over-hyped and not even remotely capable of what they made it sound like) in the last 20 years because of limitations. FM is one of the few that hasn't. Perhaps that has been a bit to their own detriment in the eyes of some who play the game.

[RBKalle]

32 minuti fa, XaW ha scritto:

Have you read Neil's reply at all? He do explains quite a bit of it there.

That's the standard reply we've been getting for years.

Which isn't a criticism in itself. I can totally see SI staff's point of view.

Nobody thinks rewriting the ME's code or one of the complex game modules is a piece of cake, and that's the main reason for FM not having had competition in a decade (and for said competition never being really worthwhile in like 20 years).

HOWEVER

if the current game structure has reached the end of its possible development and SI can't do much more than tweaking old modules (which are like 10 years old already?), it's maybe time to bite the bullet and look for a less conservative approach?

"Hire more staff" is an asinine rebuttal, but the core of the original request is more reasonable than the way it has been worded.

The basic issue here is that if SEGA/SI decide to write a brand new game, the yearly "update" will suffer, and so will their revenues, meaning they'll have less money to pay the new game with. So it's a messy situation, but sooner or later something's gonna give.

Or in FM2024 we'll still be struggling with closing down, crossing, nonsensical AI transfers, the Unholy Trinity of CA+PPA+Reputation etc

 

 

 

[themadsheep2001]

Deleted a couple of posts already, because despite actually hearing why they don't post, people still just can't help themselves. It's tiresome. If people still can't post with basic respect even with Neil coming in here, posting and asking for respect, I'm simply going to start handing out infractions. Because really, common decency isn't hard.

[MBarbaric]

56 minuti fa, themadsheep2001 ha scritto:

Deleted a couple of posts already, because despite actually hearing why they don't post, people still just can't help themselves. It's tiresome. If people still can't post with basic respect even with Neil coming in here, posting and asking for respect, I'm simply going to start handing out infractions. Because really, common decency isn't hard.

i wonder why you (I mean all the mods, not you personally), don't do it already? Just block anyone that is stepping over the line with a message to reword their post. Enforce some decent behavior and create conditions so the SI can come back on the boards and be protected from foul speech. 

I feel a lot of things in the OP merit an answer (not that it deserves an answer, mind) but till we get conditions the SI staff is back and ready to speak, we won't get those answers.

[Novem9]

18 часов назад, Neil Brock сказал:

 

Dear Mr. Brock

At first thank you for operative answer, I'm glad to see SI staff in feedback there.

Because you and few participants of this topic were negatively reacted for my tone, I analyzed this and probably I should have expressed my opinion in a less agressive tone. (But I dont give up my opinion)
Also letter style was defiant on purpose to be heard. I propose to close this question here.

I postpone the main part for last and I will continue the theme of feedbacks. I wrote about silver/bronze medals that's don't update in footballer's profiles. (Look attach.)

Спойлер

Answer was - 'Yes we know about this, thanks!'.
Wandering through the forum I find this request from another user one year before me! 

I mentioned another example - press-confs. We spent a decent amount of time in answers but honestly, conferences in real moment look unfinished or broken. (Questions less logic, less prehistory, etc. Especially managers relations) No reaction, the same things.

I wrote about vision of GK. Manuel Neuer in game has vision 10+. All regen keepers lose vision after 20 years old. This is no critical, but mistake and contradiction. Nobody want to listen, they know better etc. 
Asking about new game mode. Please just told me - We recieved your request, say your opinion about this and is there a probability for integration in future. No more for first reaction!

I didnt hear about feedback form. I visit this site rarely and if I see wishlist area, I write there.

Obviously, this ignore not for me personal, this is system problem.

I see your point about ME and AI case. Yes, nobody create something like this game. In my opinion, this reason of little staff of SI (there is no abuse or cue). Question is not so much of technologies how much in human resources and financial budgets, doesn't it?

 

I played FM17 about 1,6k hours from pre-release and see a lot of lacks. And yes, If I have alternative, I just change game and spent your and my time there. Of course, I have joy in process, but mixed with disappointment.
And of course FM has big potential for grow.

I visit this community rarely, preferring few sites from FM official 'join list'. A lot of growing dissatisfaction there. And Im not talking about medals or press-confs, no. There is negative about AI strategy decisions in career mode, tactic weaks, ME flaws, etc. Fundamental points. There is no just me like crazy person who want something else and other people are totally happy. 

Yes you have certain group of users who always buy your product, who always will 'protect' you from critics, but you dont need effort to see the tendency. I will not be unfounded - look at Steam. FM18 probably first game of FM with mixed rating from the very beginning. Perhaps this is not the most convincing argument, but this is meaning something.

 

I just want to say there that critics have some justification and I'm really surprised to see such a small number of updates/fixes. Unfortunatelly as I understand, there is no reasons for changes in SI/SEGA politics in this question?

Gamers want a quality football manager, as I understand SI/SEGA want a good sales. Seems like in keep of current way both sides will not get what they want in full.

 

P.S. SI provides a pre-order opportunity before presentation of novelties in the game. In fact we order a 'cat in a sack'

P.P.S. Really, create full guide for newbies. Even description of skills in-game happens just in FM17!

 

 

[Luke Cro]

5 hours ago, Neil Brock said:

Well simply put, we're trying - http://www.sigames.com/careers

So if you know anyone suitable get them to apply. 

And I don't wish to be rude, but if you can only see cosmetic changes since FM12, I don't ever suggest you apply for a QA job here as you'd need slightly better attention to detail to qualify to do so!  

I am more capable for research department... but I'll write about that in research section...
I didn't want to be rude, there were some cool features but imo nothing special... I still ask assistant to take press confrences, I skip player roles in tactics menu, I dont use director of football etc... and things go well  

However, I really think there should be DLC for 2019, and brand new game for 2020..So, you have plenty of time to create good, bug-free manager simulation...

[Novem9]

8 минут назад, Luke Cro сказал:

I am more capable for research department... but I'll write about that in research section...
I didn't want to be rude, there were some cool features but imo nothing special... I still ask assistant to take press confrences, I skip player roles in tactics menu, I dont use director of football etc... and things go well  

However, I really think there should be DLC for 2019, and brand new game for 2020..So, you have plenty of time to create good, bug-free manager simulation...

As I understand a problem of every-year-releases games - keep balance between new and sells. If they create really good game, all buy this and they lose sells in next 2-3 years (for example) Or they need to create new FM with the same count/quali of new things , that difficult more for each new version.

Maybe alternative is paid subscription per month, but this need very sensitive settings and balance again.

[forameuss]

Every time someone mentions a 2-year cycle for development, SI down tools and don't work again for the rest of the day.  And they laugh.  It's a completely and utterly terrible idea, with absolutely no redeeming features for anyone, least of all SI.  

Unfortunately for SI, nowadays everyone is allowed to have their say, and usually express it in absolutes.  Everything is either the absolute best ever, or the worst thing ever.  You can also express your opinion on things you know nothing about without reproach.  If someone knows actual facts about something, then that doesn't matter, because I can shout louder!  And I can't back down obviously, so why not just keep shouting until the other party gets tired and just gives up.  Then you win - yay!  When really, you're just spouting rubbish that only other people who don't know what they're talking about will agree with.  And if you get in the way of that, well you must be a fanboy.  

Urgh.

21 hours ago, Glenn Wakeford said:

Yeah I thought about answering some of the questions in the OP (some, I wouldn't be the right person to answer all of them) but the tone is bang out of order.

Last time I tried to answer some questions and clarify some things, it wasn't accepted, it was turned around and argued with, and I received private messages of abuse, calling me and the company arrogant and lazy.

Not sure why we don't respond much to threads like this? There's your answer.

Aye but... 

Sticky this, pin it, blow it up in huge font and project it onto the sky above everyone who wonders aloud "why do SI not comment more".  

[Tony Wright 747]

6 hours ago, forameuss said:

Every time someone mentions a 2-year cycle for development, SI down tools and don't work again for the rest of the day.  And they laugh.  It's a completely and utterly terrible idea, with absolutely no redeeming features for anyone, least of all SI.  

Unfortunately for SI, nowadays everyone is allowed to have their say, and usually express it in absolutes.  Everything is either the absolute best ever, or the worst thing ever.  You can also express your opinion on things you know nothing about without reproach.  If someone knows actual facts about something, then that doesn't matter, because I can shout louder!  And I can't back down obviously, so why not just keep shouting until the other party gets tired and just gives up.  Then you win - yay!  When really, you're just spouting rubbish that only other people who don't know what they're talking about will agree with.  And if you get in the way of that, well you must be a fanboy.  

Urgh.

Aye but... 

Sticky this, pin it, blow it up in huge font and project it onto the sky above everyone who wonders aloud "why do SI not comment more".  

I agree with you on the two year cycle thing, financially not viable, although less new features and more 'polishing' might help in some areas, but everyone is entitled to express their opinions even if you don't agree with them, thats what a forum is for after all.  you also don't have to have a detailed knowledge about something to have an opinion, you don't have to know all the ingredients of a dish to know you don't like it

[forameuss]

35 minutes ago, Tony Wright 747 said:

I agree with you on the two year cycle thing, financially not viable, although less new features and more 'polishing' might help in some areas, but everyone is entitled to express their opinions even if you don't agree with them, thats what a forum is for after all.  you also don't have to have a detailed knowledge about something to have an opinion, you don't have to know all the ingredients of a dish to know you don't like it

Absolutely, opinions are fine.  But passing them off as fact and then taking the hump when someone who does know what they're talking about tells them they're talking rubbish, isn't.  I won't talk about the ins-and-outs of tactics in FM because I know very, very little about them.  Software development, not so much, and I'll quite happily tell someone when they're talking rubbish.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion, just like others are entitled to tell them their opinion is rubbish.  The key is to recognise when you're wrong, accept it, and maybe learn something.  Instead, most just jump to whataboutery and the aforementioned shouting loud and hoping it'll go away.

[FrazT]

OK, guys- lets not get too far away from the original thread discussion

[krlenjushka]

9 hours ago, forameuss said:

Every time someone mentions a 2-year cycle for development, SI down tools and don't work again for the rest of the day.  And they laugh.  It's a completely and utterly terrible idea, with absolutely no redeeming features for anyone, least of all SI. 

There is so many games in game world with releases every 2,3 or 5 years.  Games that are not complex like this game. There is no game like this one.

You can think this is not good idea. Someone can think this is good idea. You should have respect to someones opinion if you expect same respect for yours.

As i can see - many problems in FM are related to lack of staff and time - i think Neil Brock said something like this. I had problems related to this - i didnt get any answer in my bug threads because they dont enough time to test. It was july and they were

buried over the heads with their work on FM18. They simple cant care about FM17 at this point anymore.

Only problem with 2 year release is money. Everything else can be better this way. They can have more time to solve bugs or to test implementation of new features. Also they can have much more time for development. 7-8 moths compared with 19-20 months. Do your math.

[Spedding]

3 hours ago, krlenjushka said:

There is so many games in game world with releases every 2,3 or 5 years.  Games that are not complex like this game. There is no game like this one.

You can think this is not good idea. Someone can think this is good idea. You should have respect to someones opinion if you expect same respect for yours.

As i can see - many problems in FM are related to lack of staff and time - i think Neil Brock said something like this. I had problems related to this - i didnt get any answer in my bug threads because they dont enough time to test. It was july and they were

buried over the heads with their work on FM18. They simple cant care about FM17 at this point anymore.

Only problem with 2 year release is money. Everything else can be better this way. They can have more time to solve bugs or to test implementation of new features. Also they can have much more time for development. 7-8 moths compared with 19-20 months. Do your math.

If they release every 2 years most likely they'd have to release quite a few of the team so you'll end up with the same problem not enough staff or time

[Phil930]

What a fascinating thread this turned out to be. Credit to Neil and SI team for candid responses. I do question some of the responses saying to add more staff - if only it was that easy in the real world! 

I’ve been playing FM since floppy disk days. Love it. Always have. It’s part of life. I have less time than ever to play now. FM Touch 2016 was a breath of fresh air for me. FMT 2017 was immense. I’m disappointed in FMT2018 as I feel that game is edging closer toward the full game with unnecessary complication. 

Anyway I digress. Keep up the good work. Someone mentioned earlier the hours played for investment. It’s hard to beat that. Going to the movies costs $50 these days. Buying FM for a similar price feels quite fair (I buy FMT on iOS and steam). Shoot there was a period I’d have to wait for family to visit from the UK to bring a version over to me - I’d have paid $100 back then!

I always look back to secondary school and university days and recall the versions of FM. Way off topic but I live for each iteration to recapture that magic. 

[HUNT3R]

4 hours ago, krlenjushka said:

Only problem with 2 year release is money. Everything else can be better this way. They can have more time to solve bugs or to test implementation of new features. Also they can have much more time for development. 7-8 moths compared with 19-20 months. Do your math.

They would have double the time, but half the staff. So, really, it would be the same outcome and we'd have to wait 2 years for something we could have had in a year. That's the math and the problem. Everyone loses, including us.

[samuelawachie]

1 hour ago, HUNT3R said:

They would have double the time, but half the staff. So, really, it would be the same outcome and we'd have to wait 2 years for something we could have had in a year. That's the math and the problem. Everyone loses, including us.

Or if they wanna go the 2 year deal, they should just double the price of the game lol. 

I think the current schedule is okay tbh. 

[krlenjushka]

8 hours ago, HUNT3R said:

They would have double the time, but half the staff. So, really, it would be the same outcome and we'd have to wait 2 years for something we could have had in a year. That's the math and the problem. Everyone loses, including us.

Half of their staff works on next version probably after december update or maybe right now. So how can you say "thats the math"???   Half of staff can make same amount of work in 8 and 18 months? Strange math you have. So i guess they can release new game every 6 months if youre statement is correct?? Obviously time is not important here...   Maybe Usain Bolt can run 200 meters in 9 seconds Im work in restaurant. We have 5 people in shift.

Neil said earlier they need to work overtime and weekends when needed because they have staff/time issue. I respect that. But math is simple - if they can have more staff or time - they can do more.

[Cougar2010]

20 minutes ago, krlenjushka said:

Neil said earlier they need to work overtime and weekends when needed because they have staff/time issue. I respect that. But math is simple - if they can have more staff or time - they can do more.

Thats not totally true.

I imagine only one person at a time can work on one section of the coding so having more staff wouldn't always help.

[krlenjushka]

1 minute ago, Cougar2010 said:

Thats not totally true.

I imagine only one person at a time can work on one section of the coding so having more staff wouldn't always help.

What is "section" by you? I dont think one person works on - for example ME. Anyway we cant discuss about staff because we dont know how they work. But that "one person" can do much more work for 10 days compared to 5 days, right? Thats my point.

[Cougar2010]

4 minutes ago, krlenjushka said:

What is "section" by you? I dont think one person works on - for example ME. Anyway we cant discuss about staff because we dont know how they work. But that "one person" can do much more work for 10 days compared to 5 days, right? Thats my point.

I don't know because I don't work there but I imagine the coding is broken up into sections, in fact I know it is because SI stated they did break it up into blocks many years ago to make it easier to work on.

Something like the ME I would guess involves a small team and they will work together so that their work isn't overlapping/interfering with someone elses.

Just like in a restaurant only one person takes an order from a table, you could have 20 staff but there would be no point in 20 of them taking the order.

Sure in more days they can do more work but eventually it has to be tested and put together for the final product.  If FM19 was skipped and FM20 released with two years work would it be much different to FM20 released one year after FM19?  The answer is probably not.

[krlenjushka]

6 minutes ago, Cougar2010 said:

I don't know because I don't work there but I imagine the coding is broken up into sections, in fact I know it is because SI stated they did break it up into blocks many years ago to make it easier to work on.

Something like the ME I would guess involves a small team and they will work together so that their work isn't overlapping/interfering with someone elses.

Just like in a restaurant only one person takes an order from a table, you could have 20 staff but there would be no point in 20 of them taking the order.

Sure in more days they can do more work but eventually it has to be tested and put together for the final product.  If FM19 was skipped and FM20 released with two years work would it be much different to FM20 released one year after FM19?  The answer is probably not.

I work in restaurant so im right person to answer that

[Mallidon]

On 07/12/2017 at 19:29, Neil Brock said:

There's a lack of understanding from the questions raised here, but in part that's on us for not explaining ourselves better, or information not being shared to the type of level where people don't feel so frustrated. 

We look to improve the game with every single version - that's not every release, that's every single update or hotfix. However some changes and improvements are extremely difficult to implement for a number of reasons I'll get to later. 

For instance one of the questions above:

That negates the incredible difficulties there are to have any kind of match engine whatsoever under the parameters needed for FM. If it was that easy, why isn't anyone else doing it? We're proud to say that our match engine is the most accurate representation of real life football in the world. But yeah, we know it's not perfect, of course. But on the flip side it's not easy to rip up years and years of coding and implement an entirely new system - this process in itself would take years. The level of coding involved is simply mind-boggling.  

Same with stuff like the AI for transfers and tactics. There's a huge amount of thinking which goes on under the hood - partly to the determent of weaker systems. We could add significantly more factors of AI, but the consequence would the game would become insanely slow. That's the kind of balance we have to choose between improvements and practicality. So as systems generally get quicker and stronger, we can add more and make more advances - as we have done for FM18.  

In regards to the wishlist (which doesn't actually exist any more, there's actually a feature request forum). I made a post here clarifying why certain features hadn't been responded to quite recently so feel free to check it out - https://community.sigames.com/topic/415057-clarifying-when-features-get-reviewed-by-si/

We're actually changing how we look at features internally, so this will mean we can provide a template of sorts to allow you to provide us ideas containing all the information needed to improve the chances of the issue going into the game. But simply put, there are certain aspects we won't look to add to the Football Manager simulation as we don't feel it's realistic, like a chairman mode or spending the manager's cash on cars etc. But every single feature logged is considered by a member of our team.

Hopefully in the forthcoming months we can improve the way we're communicating with the community. We're considering a number of factors across our social channels and here on the forum to improve the visibility or our decisions and allow the community to become more involved with us all.

At the moment we're still busy working on FM18 and we've already got hundreds of features and development ideas in place for FM19. These aren't set in stone - if we (or you!) think of something better there's scope to change this prior to the full development stage beginning. 

Our goal however is simple. We want to make the best Football Management simulation ever. We play the game too, so why on Earth would we want to do the bare minimum? That's not something we've ever done here at SI. Personally as someone who's worked here for over 10 years, I've seen the late nights, the early starts, the worked weekends and everything that comes with that. People here work hard and they do care. But we have a limited number of staff and a limited amount of time, so sometimes priorities have to be taken on certain features and improvements over others. 

All we ask in return from our community when you communicate to us is, is some respect. You're allowed to be unhappy, frustrated and criticise. But we ask for you to do it in a respectful and constructive way. 

Thanks. 

Appreciate your reply and while I'm not going to jump in and say I agree with the OP (AAA price, hello £60+ is AAA FM is nowhere near that for a start) he does raise issues that you touch on, and some that are quite good (if badly put forward).

I think the biggest issue is how difficult and frustrating it is for us the FM fans to actually communicate in any real and effective way with you guys the staff. We've butted heads before Neil, you blocked me on twitter due to it and threatened to ban me here. I can understand that your side of it isn't easy, and if I was annoying I do apologise for that. Being annoying though almost seemed like the only thing I could actually DO to try and get answers to my issue at the time. I mean it took many months to actually even get told 'sorry the issue wont be fixed for this FM'. Frustrating experience all around no doubt.

Communication improvements would be something I would love to see. At best right now SI staff seem detached and often communication is poor. I'm sure you are all working very hard behind the scenes and swanning off doing nothing is certainly NOT what is going on, however when things are raised, the frustrating experience of feeling like you are getting no answers (and to many people, the points raised by the OP fall into this category. Many of his points are out there in the community and a lot of people DO agree with him).

I guess what I'm hinting at is there is a huge disconnect here between SI and the community. You guys don't like being shouted at (fair enough) and we don't like being frustrated when trying to feed things up or asking for updates only to wait a very long time. Sure there could be reasons for this, you guys might just not have the time. The issue might be linked to something bigger than it seems or some other roadblock, but I'd love it if we were told. Heck I bet there are codey people out there who would love it if you guys were like 'well ABC is the issue and that has caused issues all the way down to XYZ and we are messing with this part of the code atm'. Code nerds love a bit of that lol.

Basically 'we know about this issue and are looking into it' and 'More goes on behind the scenes than you can imagine' could be replaced with 'We have a team working on this, they are currently checking to see if XYZ is the issue or if it can be patched before our next update on or around xx/xx/xxxx' and 'Hey check out our Dev vlogs here for insights into what actually goes on'. 

Obviously not everything is possible. Issues will have no 'fix dates' but just being more communicative in the threads when someone has an issue and maybe tweeting out 'Dev diaries' or I dunno insight videos where someone walks around the office and asks questions from the forums or something could make things better. More communication and maybe even a friendlier relationship could appear between fans/staff. That way people will actually SEE more of whats going on and might stop the perennial 'its the same thing every year' complaints (although this year clearly seems much different but that is still being wailed around).

Cheers, TL:DR maybe. Probably a bit of a ramble but there you go. Again, apologies for stuff last time and again, at the time frustration boiled over. I'm over it now

[HUNT3R]

15 hours ago, krlenjushka said:

Half of their staff works on next version probably after december update or maybe right now. So how can you say "thats the math"???   Half of staff can make same amount of work in 8 and 18 months? Strange math you have. So i guess they can release new game every 6 months if youre statement is correct?? Obviously time is not important here...   Maybe Usain Bolt can run 200 meters in 9 seconds Im work in restaurant. We have 5 people in shift.

Neil said earlier they need to work overtime and weekends when needed because they have staff/time issue. I respect that. But math is simple - if they can have more staff or time - they can do more.

Your comparisons are ridiculous and missing the point. There's a budget for each game. Whether you divide it into 6, 12 or 24 months, the budget remains the same, so everything else needs to be adjusted accordingly.

[michael]

3 hours ago, HUNT3R said:

Your comparisons are ridiculous and missing the point. There's a budget for each game. Whether you divide it into 6, 12 or 24 months, the budget remains the same, so everything else needs to be adjusted accordingly.

At last someone has said the crucial word "Budget". SI are not a charity or a 'not for profit business, I'm sure there a lots of things they would love to do but have to stick to a budget for doing them. Some people are saying simply hire more staff but then the cost of those staff would then have to be passed on to us the customers, so it's a double edged sword. Also time comes into play, the SI staff must have a life outside of work like we all do so having the time to make all the improvements that people demand is no doubt a challenge as well.

We all want to play the best football management game there possibly can be and I'm pretty sure SI want to give us the best football management game they possibly can, but time and money no doubt complicates this from time to time.

[forameuss]

12 hours ago, Mallo said:

Appreciate your reply and while I'm not going to jump in and say I agree with the OP (AAA price, hello £60+ is AAA FM is nowhere near that for a start) he does raise issues that you touch on, and some that are quite good (if badly put forward).

I think the biggest issue is how difficult and frustrating it is for us the FM fans to actually communicate in any real and effective way with you guys the staff. We've butted heads before Neil, you blocked me on twitter due to it and threatened to ban me here. I can understand that your side of it isn't easy, and if I was annoying I do apologise for that. Being annoying though almost seemed like the only thing I could actually DO to try and get answers to my issue at the time. I mean it took many months to actually even get told 'sorry the issue wont be fixed for this FM'. Frustrating experience all around no doubt.

Communication improvements would be something I would love to see. At best right now SI staff seem detached and often communication is poor. I'm sure you are all working very hard behind the scenes and swanning off doing nothing is certainly NOT what is going on, however when things are raised, the frustrating experience of feeling like you are getting no answers (and to many people, the points raised by the OP fall into this category. Many of his points are out there in the community and a lot of people DO agree with him).

I guess what I'm hinting at is there is a huge disconnect here between SI and the community. You guys don't like being shouted at (fair enough) and we don't like being frustrated when trying to feed things up or asking for updates only to wait a very long time. Sure there could be reasons for this, you guys might just not have the time. The issue might be linked to something bigger than it seems or some other roadblock, but I'd love it if we were told. Heck I bet there are codey people out there who would love it if you guys were like 'well ABC is the issue and that has caused issues all the way down to XYZ and we are messing with this part of the code atm'. Code nerds love a bit of that lol.

Basically 'we know about this issue and are looking into it' and 'More goes on behind the scenes than you can imagine' could be replaced with 'We have a team working on this, they are currently checking to see if XYZ is the issue or if it can be patched before our next update on or around xx/xx/xxxx' and 'Hey check out our Dev vlogs here for insights into what actually goes on'. 

Obviously not everything is possible. Issues will have no 'fix dates' but just being more communicative in the threads when someone has an issue and maybe tweeting out 'Dev diaries' or I dunno insight videos where someone walks around the office and asks questions from the forums or something could make things better. More communication and maybe even a friendlier relationship could appear between fans/staff. That way people will actually SEE more of whats going on and might stop the perennial 'its the same thing every year' complaints (although this year clearly seems much different but that is still being wailed around).

Cheers, TL:DR maybe. Probably a bit of a ramble but there you go. Again, apologies for stuff last time and again, at the time frustration boiled over. I'm over it now

But in all that post, you've already mentioned the exact reason why there's such a disconnect.  You said that you've been blocked on twitter and threatened with a ban.  No idea what you did, but you're not alone in it.  Why should the devs assign time - largely away from actually developing, too - when they're likely to get a fair amount of abuse for it?  They used to communicate a lot more, now they don't, and it's easy to see why.  It's not really in their job description to listen to people tell them how they should do their jobs, and certainly not to listen to people call them lazy, incompetent etc etc

It would be great if they did come on, and the community would get a lot out of it, that's obvious.  But it's not a necessity, and I'd far rather they spent the time doing their jobs rather than placating people that will often have little idea what they're talking about.  When the majority of people that visit here can converse in a civil, mature manner, then maybe one day we'll see more of the devs around here.  I wouldn't hold your breath though.

[Svenc]

53 minutes ago, forameuss said:

Why should the devs assign time - largely away from actually developing, too - when they're likely to get a fair amount of abuse for it?  They used to communicate a lot more, now they don't, and it's easy to see why.  It's not really in their job description to listen to people tell them how they should do their jobs, and certainly not to listen to people call them lazy, incompetent etc etc

Actually getting banned or something anywhere takese a whole lot. And I mean a whole lot from my experience. Reminds me of this.

https://boingboing.net/2017/09/25/gamer-culture-is-so-toxic-that.html
 

Quote

Forums and comment sections are full of dunning-kruger specialists who are just waiting for any reason to descend on actual developers.

See any thread where some dumbass comments how "easy" it would be to, say, add multiplayer or change engines.

Any dev who talks candidly about the difficulty of something like that just triggers a wave of people questioning their entire resumé.

It's not just gaming though. It's social media/internet communication in general.  There are lines crossed that wouldn't ever be crossed if people would actually face each other face to face when "communicating". And in the general tone, that's a line crossed by that developer in the above too. But it's all a different topic... In a sense, it may actually be better to not get too close to your community, as with it seems to come sense of entitlement too, which is a paradox. Cue in all the user reviews/feedback/starting with "I've been playing this since I Was This Close WIth These Guys On Champ Man 1799 and they actually seemed to listen to me back then, but.... enough is enough." Off some anonymous corporation churning out their Call Of Duty knock-offs, another perceived rehash is perceived as another rehash (which is fine and all). The other way disappointment  may get deeply personal (in several ways). And let's be realistic here, the game, any game will always be compromise, which means some kind of disappointment is a given.