3D engine: time to take a step back?

[kornflex]

3 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

It can affect their decision making, composure etc indirectly yes, but remember, we're talking very small changes.

So this indirect 15 min.(?) "very small change" to decision making, composure etc. (even small changes) IS in fact changing attributes...
Do YOU - personally - find it a useful feature?
What would you want more: more touchline shouts or a revamp of the offsides?

[HUNT3R]

1 minute ago, kornflex said:

So this indirect 15 min.(?) "very small change" to decision making, composure etc. (even small changes) IS in fact changing attributes...
Do YOU - personally - find it a useful feature?
What would you want more: more touchline shouts or a revamp of the offsides?

As I said -- indirectly. And very small. It's not going to affect a player's technical ability as a footballer or anything physical.

[kornflex]

3 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

As I said -- indirectly. And very small. It's not going to affect a player's technical ability as a footballer or anything physical.

I know the difference between technical, mental and physical attributes, thank you.

[HUNT3R]

Just now, kornflex said:

I know the difference between technical, mental and physical attributes, thank you.

My pleasure.

[kornflex]

4 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

My pleasure.

You ignored this for some reason:

Do YOU - personally - find touchline shouts a useful feature?
What would you want more: more touchline shouts or a revamp of the offsides? I mean, strikers having 5+ offsides called in a match is just ridiculous. A google search reveals that this problem has been around for years. Also, offsides are being called that shouldn't be according to rules (strikers position not affecting neither flow of play nor opponents decision).

[HUNT3R]

5 minutes ago, kornflex said:

Do YOU - personally - find touchline shouts a useful feature?
What would you want more: more touchline shouts or a revamp of the offsides? I mean, strikers having 5+ offsides called in a match is just ridiculous. A google search reveals that this problem has been around for years. Also, offsides are being called that shouldn't be according to rules (strikers position not affecting neither flow of play nor opponents decision).

It wasn't ignored. I chose not to answer. They're different things, so it's not a case of having one over the other. That said, I just went looking and according to a post by SI in the bugs forum, the count isn't too far off real life stats.

[kornflex]

10 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

They're different things, so it's not a case of having one over the other.

It is actually. In terms of development a team will be forced to choose (as both time and money is scarce resources) between:

a) correcting conspicuous flaws or
b) adding new (somewhat useless) features.

Which is actually my point (thank you).

[HUNT3R]

Just now, kornflex said:

It is actually. In terms of development a team will be forced to choose (as both time and money is scarce resources) between:

a) correcting conspicuous flaws or
b) adding new (somewhat useless) features.

Which is actually my point (thank you).

No, not in this case. The ME team will always be there, so they're not going to stop (especially as it involves PaulC) to add another feature.

[kornflex]

2 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

No, not in this case. The ME team will always be there, so they're not going to stop (especially as it involves PaulC) to add another feature.

Then maybe - since time and money will always be scarce, remember - more should be invested in the ME team since the ME is clearly in some areas in beta state. Few of the new features has been well received the later years and many of them has been unnecessary.

[RBKalle]

50 minuti fa, shirajzl ha scritto:

It's fine in the eyes of someone knowledgeable like Rashidi, but an average user is baffled by the whole thing, to put it mildly.

Algebra and Calculus looked just easy enough to my high-school teacher, who was knowledgeable enough to teach in colleges... Too bad him knowing TOO MUCH prevented him from actually being a good teacher to a class of teenagers who simply couldn't keep up with his pace or follow his lead.

 

I have no doubt that Rashidi knows "everything" about the TC and its intricacies and he feels the whole process is, if not easy, at least sensible enough... But to the average FM player, even to those who have been playing half-casually for years, it's still way too cumbersome, unclear and self-contradictory. To a newbie is, simply put, overwhelming.

 

What really does my head in is the mods' blind faith in the "forward is always better" mantra. It's not mandatory, nor always "best for business", keeping on adding stuff, especially if the core mechanics of what you're adding stuff too has had flaws that haven't been solved yet, and likely can't be solved.

FM is like a country house that keeps on getting new rooms or wings, expanding up and sideways, but on foundations that weren't that firm to begin with. The outcome is a huge HUGE game with way too many imperfect features, even in key areas of the game. Sure it looks like an awesome "mansion", but then you start to notice problems and it stops being that nice.
I can't possibly know if the core problem is in the ME or in the 3D translation of what happens in the ME, but it  has been in need of a hefty trimming down process.

Come on, if the AI itself can't replicate real-life football to a reasonable degree, it's pointless to force the human players to jump through hoops to get his team to play a passable approximation of what he wants to achieve.
Just imagine a RPG game where AI's mages blow themselves up while casting a spell, or AI warriors keep on attacking the weakest enemy in a group... Sure, human players could avoid that with enough practice, but that's besides the point anyway... Customers would be up in arms and good luck with telling them "well, the game is still playable".

 

I don't mean to be too negative, but I feel strongly about FM and it frustrates me to see this stubborn denial of a potentially calamitous scenario.

P.S. As said countless times... A pretty-but-clunky FM won't appeal casual players and will drive plenty of long-time fans away. A leaner and "uglier" game may have a better chance with newbies and will bring lapsed FM'ers back.

It doesn't need to go "backwards", but simply in a different direction. Focus FIRST on getting the teams and players to replicate "easy" stuff, then when that part is done to a tee, add new featuers to your heart's content.

[Rashidi]

1 hour ago, kornflex said:

And mental state would - to some extent - alter attributes, am I right? Or is motivation just completely irrelevant in sports?

Mental state does not alter the attributes it can act as a modifier. The absolute value of the attribute is unchanged but in the algorithm it gets modified up or down by a factor depending on the mental state. And that is happening though the effect isn’t nearly as dramatic as an outright change to his tactical instruction or player instruction.  

[themadsheep2001]

11 minutes ago, RBKalle said:

Algebra and Calculus looked just easy enough to my high-school teacher, who was knowledgeable enough to teach in colleges... Too bad him knowing TOO MUCH prevented him from actually being a good teacher to a class of teenagers who simply couldn't keep up with his pace or follow his lead.

 

I have no doubt that Rashidi knows "everything" about the TC and its intricacies and he feels the whole process is, if not easy, at least sensible enough... But to the average FM player, even to those who have been playing half-casually for years, it's still way too cumbersome, unclear and self-contradictory. To a newbie is, simply put, overwhelming.

 

What really does my head in is the mods' blind faith in the "forward is always better" mantra. It's not mandatory, nor always "best for business", keeping on adding stuff, especially if the core mechanics of what you're adding stuff too has had flaws that haven't been solved yet, and likely can't be solved.

FM is like a country house that keeps on getting new rooms or wings, expanding up and sideways, but on foundations that weren't that firm to begin with. The outcome is a huge HUGE game with way too many imperfect features, even in key areas of the game. Sure it looks like an awesome "mansion", but then you start to notice problems and it stops being that nice.
I can't possibly know if the core problem is in the ME or in the 3D translation of what happens in the ME, but it  has been in need of a hefty trimming down process.

Come on, if the AI itself can't replicate real-life football to a reasonable degree, it's pointless to force the human players to jump through hoops to get his team to play a passable approximation of what he wants to achieve.
Just imagine a RPG game where AI's mages blow themselves up while casting a spell, or AI warriors keep on attacking the weakest enemy in a group... Sure, human players could avoid that with enough practice, but that's besides the point anyway... Customers would be up in arms and good luck with telling them "well, the game is still playable".

 

I don't mean to be too negative, but I feel strongly about FM and it frustrates me to see this stubborn denial of a potentially calamitous scenario.

P.S. As said countless times... A pretty-but-clunky FM won't appeal casual players and will drive plenty of long-time fans away. A leaner and "uglier" game may have a better chance with newbies and will bring lapsed FM'ers back.

It doesn't need to go "backwards", but simply in a different direction. Focus FIRST on getting the teams and players to replicate "easy" stuff, then when that part is done to a tee, add new featuers to your heart's content.

The numbers show that it's not driving people away though

People have been mentioning this calamity for years tbh, and it terms of player numbers it's overstated 

[MBarbaric]

13 minuti fa, Rashidi ha scritto:

Mental state does not alter the attributes it can act as a modifier. The absolute value of the attribute is unchanged but in the algorithm it gets modified up or down by a factor depending on the mental state. And that is happening though the effect isn’t nearly as dramatic as an outright change to his tactical instruction or player instruction.  

 

Where I come from, they say: "It isn't a poop, the dog just took a ****". 

[kornflex]

2 hours ago, Rashidi said:

Mental state does not alter the attributes it can act as a modifier. The absolute value of the attribute is unchanged but in the algorithm it gets modified up or down by a factor depending on the mental state. And that is happening though the effect isn’t nearly as dramatic as an outright change to his tactical instruction or player instruction.

Oh, I believe I understand now. It is just like raising the price of a product don't affect it's demand. It is only AFTER the price has been processed inside the complex algorithm of a human mind, that the demand will fall...

[JesterSTJ]

No not in a million years, I absolutely love the 3D match engine even with its faults. Keep pushing Si, can't wait to see how it looks and plays in 5 years time :O  

[kornflex]

3 hours ago, themadsheep2001 said:

The numbers show that it's not driving people away though

Are those numbers official? I would like to see them.
I suspect that Asian and American customers have heavily inflated the fan base .

[RBKalle]

4 ore fa, themadsheep2001 ha scritto:

The numbers show that it's not driving people away though

 

Sales alone aren't a good enough indicator though...

Many may purchase the game out of habit/curiosity but never clock enough hours to experience all the issues we've been talking about. Ditto for those who add £500M to their club's bank acccount and go on to win everything for a couple of seasons and then, when they get bored, they move on to another game.

I have played the hell out of some versions, while completely losing interest in others in a matter of weeks (580hrs in FM16, 160 in FM17, 440 in FM18 spread over like 4 or 5 career attempts).

Moreso, purchasing the game AND playing a lot doesn't even mean enjoying it... Back to my counters, a solid half of those hours are either the game sitting idle in background while I'm doing other things, or me trying to figure out why something isn't working like it should.

Surely 3D isn't driving people away, and I never claimed it does, but in the long run I maintain that insisting on this "style-over-polish" policy isn't going to benefit the franchise. Casual gamers will still feel it's "too much" for them, no matter how FIFA-like the 3D presentation gets, and more dedicated players will eventually grow tired of playing Football Manager Manager.

[themadsheep2001]

1 hour ago, RBKalle said:

 

Sales alone aren't a good enough indicator though...

Many may purchase the game out of habit/curiosity but never clock enough hours to experience all the issues we've been talking about. Ditto for those who add £500M to their club's bank acccount and go on to win everything for a couple of seasons and then, when they get bored, they move on to another game.

I have played the hell out of some versions, while completely losing interest in others in a matter of weeks (580hrs in FM16, 160 in FM17, 440 in FM18 spread over like 4 or 5 career attempts).

Moreso, purchasing the game AND playing a lot doesn't even mean enjoying it... Back to my counters, a solid half of those hours are either the game sitting idle in background while I'm doing other things, or me trying to figure out why something isn't working like it should.

Surely 3D isn't driving people away, and I never claimed it does, but in the long run I maintain that insisting on this "style-over-polish" policy isn't going to benefit the franchise. Casual gamers will still feel it's "too much" for them, no matter how FIFA-like the 3D presentation gets, and more dedicated players will eventually grow tired of playing Football Manager Manager.

Sales combined with playing numbers and playing time (both of which can be tracked) are huge indicators. Certainly far more than a forum which onky accounts for a minority of players. 

[warlock]

2 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

Certainly far more than a forum which onky accounts for a minority of players

And even more so than the minority of the minority. It's notable that all of the negative threads attract the same 15 or 20 forumites, making the same complaints over and over again.

[zele]

I firmly believe that getting back to 2d would save FM as a game. I fear that the game is going from simulation to arcade. 3D should be kept in closed testing until is finished and polished. Animations issues is so big and animation is so bad that most of the time and don't know is behaving of my players bug or animation went wrong.

[KUBI]

vor 1 Minute schrieb zele:

I firmly believe that getting back to 2d would save FM as a game. I fear that the game is going from simulation to arcade. 3D should be kept in closed testing until is finished and polished. Animations issues is so big and animation is so bad that most of the time and don't know is behaving of my players bug or animation went wrong.

Improving the ME and 3D animation will save FM. There is no way that they are going back to 2D.

[RBKalle]

38 minuti fa, warlock ha scritto:

And even more so than the minority of the minority. It's notable that all of the negative threads attract the same 15 or 20 forumites, making the same complaints over and over again.

 

Yeah, how dare we to point out that recent iterations of FM have been plagued by the same flaws and that even AI teams struggle to play a decent approximation of their real-life counterparts...

Again, I don't care one bit if I suck at FM and can't translate my football idea into a working FM tactic. I can accept that SOME weird events are "my tactic". But when you see the same crap happening year in and year out in games and leagues where the human player has no direct input whatsoever, it's only fair to ask questions.

The complaints you promptly dismiss aren't a matter of "waah we can't win the Treble with Brighton"... They're more a "where is FM going?!" worry.

But if SI feel it's not a problem, sales are higher than ever and the Negative Nellys are only a few annoying losers, more power to you and to them.

Out of all my football-loving friends, I can count on the finger of ONE hand those who still play FM. And only one of them plays half-seriously. At this rate, SI will have to cater to casuals (FMT), serial cheaters or a tiny minority of uber-specialsits who graduated in FM Engineering. But for a niche product, I maintain it's a very dangerous choice.

[RBKalle]

43 minuti fa, KUBI ha scritto:

Improving the ME and 3D animation will save FM. There is no way that they are going back to 2D.

 

Ok, fair enough.

At least is a new direction with the ME/3D even on the cards, or will the eventual new rewrite simply expand on what we've got so far?

No chance for a "less is more" direction, with fewer "crippling specializations" and a "basic tactics first" mindset?

Frankly, what's the point in having 10 roles and 30 duties for the (A)MR/ML position if transitions are flawed, if wide play either works too well or not at all, if FBs can't cover, if crossing is overpowered, if several crosses go into the net in a "he didn't mean that!" goal we've seen for 5+ years already?

[warlock]

1 hour ago, RBKalle said:

The complaints you promptly dismiss aren't a matter of "waah we can't win the Treble with Brighton"... They're more a "where is FM going?!" worry.

You see, this is your problem. I didn't dismiss your complaints, I didn't allege the complaint you accuse me of. I merely pointed out that it's a very vocal minority making the same complaints.

1 hour ago, RBKalle said:

even AI teams struggle to play a decent approximation of their real-life counterparts...

And this is your other problem. The best SI can do is make a simulation that works for most of the teams, most of the time. The only way they could make Barca play like Barca (of recent years) is to explicitly code it that way. Ditto Man City. Ditto whoever you want. And it's noticeable that no-one ever complains that SI can't make Huddersfield play like their RL counterparts this season. You have an absurd demand of SI to make everything in FM just like the real world. IBM had to make one of the world's most powerful computers to win at chess (with 32 pieces, two sides and a very limited set of rules). What chance does any company have of coding a perfect simulation of real world football?

You (and your limited number of fellow-travellers) want a perfect representation of an infinitely complex domain. It isn't going to happen, but SI do a very good job of getting close. If you want to criticise their choice of screen colours, knock yourself out. If you want to complain about the number of clicks to show a screen, be my guest. If you want to carp about the fixture generation, I'm with you. If you criticise the media interviews, or the idiot assistant manager, or the dumb player interactions, let's have that conversation. But if you're arguing that 3D is the death of FM - as you seem to be - then you're ploughing a lonely furrow.

[russell9]

24 minutes ago, warlock said:

You see, this is your problem. I didn't dismiss your complaints, I didn't allege the complaint you accuse me of. I merely pointed out that it's a very vocal minority making the same complaints.

And this is your other problem. The best SI can do is make a simulation that works for most of the teams, most of the time. The only way they could make Barca play like Barca (of recent years) is to explicitly code it that way. Ditto Man City. Ditto whoever you want. And it's noticeable that no-one ever complains that SI can't make Huddersfield play like their RL counterparts this season. You have an absurd demand of SI to make everything in FM just like the real world. IBM had to make one of the world's most powerful computers to win at chess (with 32 pieces, two sides and a very limited set of rules). What chance does any company have of coding a perfect simulation of real world football?

 

SI doesn't need to code it specifically for Barca or Man City. They just need to improve short passing and possession based football in the game when it is employ by team with top players. This means improving passing accuracy and penetration by top players for example players with vision and passing attributes more than 15. This will make sure that teams without such quality players will not be able to play effective short passing and possession football. They also need to improve through balls finishing success rate by top players with finishing and composure more than 15 because right now 30-40 shots on target but zero goals happens too frequent for top teams.

If SI did what I mentioned above teams with players meeting the attribute requirements will be able to play effective possession football and that means not only Barca and Man City but any AI teams or player control team with the right players will be able to have success with possession football.

Besides that improving AI managers ability will help too. AI managers like Pep or any other elite managers with tactical knowledge of 16-20 should be able to make better decision and perform better in the game.

[warlock]

48 minutes ago, russell9 said:

because right now 30-40 shots on target but zero goals happens too frequent for top teams

Post those screenshots, because I've never seen that, ever.

[RBKalle]

5 ore fa, warlock ha scritto:

You see, this is your problem. I didn't dismiss your complaints, I didn't allege the complaint you accuse me of. I merely pointed out that it's a very vocal minority making the same complaints.

Had half of the stuff being fixed to a decent level, we'd stopped to complain around FM16...

 

Quote

And this is your other problem. The best SI can do is make a simulation that works for most of the teams, most of the time. The only way they could make Barca play like Barca (of recent years) is to explicitly code it that way. Ditto Man City. Ditto whoever you want. And it's noticeable that no-one ever complains that SI can't make Huddersfield play like their RL counterparts this season.

I don't want team X to play "exactly" like team X... I expect ANY team to be able to play a decent enough approximation of whatever kind of football the AI manager plays in real life.

And, idieally, that I won't need to read through 20-pages essays to achieve a modicum of tactical success either. At least not if I'm looking to play a rather straightforward formation and setup.

Oh and maybe non-faulty wide play, defensive movements, closing down, shot-to-goals ratio etc...

 

Quote

You have an absurd demand of SI to make everything in FM just like the real world. IBM had to make one of the world's most powerful computers to win at chess (with 32 pieces, two sides and a very limited set of rules). What chance does any company have of coding a perfect simulation of real world football?

Exactly !!!

"why make 31 flavors when you can't get vanilla right? "

While I commend SI's ambition and achiements, this whole topic is about thinking to go "back to the roots" with the game, visually and in terms of football being THE core of the game.

Again, I don't want "everything" like in the real world, just a serviceable approximation that works ok in the basics and then may eventually expand on them.

Quote

You (and your limited number of fellow-travellers) want a perfect representation of an infinitely complex domain. It isn't going to happen, but SI do a very good job of getting close. If you want to criticise their choice of screen colours, knock yourself out. If you want to complain about the number of clicks to show a screen, be my guest. If you want to carp about the fixture generation, I'm with you. If you criticise the media interviews, or the idiot assistant manager, or the dumb player interactions, let's have that conversation. But if you're arguing that 3D is the death of FM - as you seem to be - then you're ploughing a lonely furrow.

All those fair criticisms stem from SI's choice to add plenty of new and complex features (on paper, a great thing) on a foundation that looked solid enough 15 or even 10 years ago, but that has since become too shaky to support that mammoth of a game nowadays.

Do you worry about the colour of the bathroom tiles or would you add a hot tub if the piping system is leaky?

[masno]

3D engine doesnt need to go away,a lot of players love it, but modern football needs to be more present on FM.

Defensive and offensive formations and pressing are things that have to be implemented and needs to work on the AI, some decision that players do are really weird.

[Svenc]

5 hours ago, RBKalle said:

Oh and maybe non-faulty wshot-to-goals ratio

Agreed, but from a different proposal. Similar to injuries, the game doesn't simulate realistic woes. E.g. generally the correlation between shots and goals in-game is higher than it is in football, and has been so for a big while.  That's why in football, whenever big sides underperform (Dortmund 2014, Real this season), there's at least to some degree finishing streaks involved that persist over weeks or months -- which may be helped by the fact that in most scenarios the forward simply is not expected to score). In FM you can rule that out. Such streaks you have in football don't even happen in-game. You also won't get Ronaldo to taking like 100 shots in the box over four successive months, and scoring but 3 goals (plus a penalty) off them, that can be categorically ruled out (and that's what's happened this term -- Real comfortably create the most shots in the league in general). As the comparably recently introduced shot on target tables in-game reveal, the big sides sometimes don't dominate near as much as they do in real football, in particular as to FM 18 to begin with. Not even Celtic, which in real football average 8-9 shots on target per match, double as much as their "rivals".

Now to have all this in the game may drive players nuts. If on the tactical side the game were a "true" simulation, there would be only ever this much that tactics were to do alone too, btw. But faulty is a relative term. In generally, the shot-to-goals ratio has been mostly fine for a good few years though, 1d, 2d, 3d. It shows in each team's report right there. I agree that some of the overhauls as to the tactics UI have in tendency overcomplicated more than what they solved. This started by about FM16...

[JesterSTJ]

11 hours ago, warlock said:

Post those screenshots, because I've never seen that, ever.

Yes please do, I can confirm I have never seen that happen before.

[Rashidi]

On 03/02/2018 at 23:35, MBarbaric said:

 

Where I come from, they say: "It isn't a poop, the dog just took a ****". 

*sigh" I guess the concept of absolutes and relatives escapes you.

When you use them during the duration of the effect, Your attributes may get changed, modified, altered. However once the duration is over the effect will pass and the attributes return  unchanged. So it’s absolutes and relatives, I hope that has helped.

[MBarbaric]

1 ora fa, Rashidi ha scritto:

When you use them during the duration of the effect, Your attributes may get changed, modified, altered. However once the duration is over the effect will pass and the attributes return  unchanged. So it’s absolutes and relatives, I hope that has helped.

2

well, I doubt anyone thinks a sideline shout modified, altered, changed... attributes of a player for the rest of his career. What if you did it more than once  

[RobertPage]

@RBKalle I agree with pretty much everything you've said in this thread. 3D is currently appalling and combined with the current ME which isn't great, it's made for a poor product. Focus on getting the quality of getting the ME as realistic and fairly problem free then add the graphics later on. my 86 hours on game this year compared to 450 - 850 hours in previous editions shows just what i think of the state of the game. 

[JPChenet]

On 03/02/2018 at 11:09, Rashidi said:

Like I said if we want it to be a true simulation why have 2D. Remove it altogether. We already have decision making affected by distance, why can’t we take it further and make it a true simulation? In real life does the manager see a 2D view or 3D? 2D is an exploit, I can see every gap and make adjustments to exploit it.

Just wondering... would you also like to see number attributes (1-20) removed too? In real life us real football coaches don't have the luxury, instead relying on what you observe on the pitch, feedback from others and then trying to assess their personality on and off the field. I guess this would be the future in FM in many years from now for real football enthusiasts?

[Lawlore]

On 2/3/2018 at 11:17, RBKalle said:

Those four aspects (mentality, shapes, roles and duties) have turned into an inbred mess of FM-exclusive lingo and intertwined cause-effect dynamics that no amount of better Assman advice or on-field feedback can possibly untangle.

Straying from the point of the thread, but this is what got me in the end, nail on head.

The last version I bought was FM15, having put in 3000+ hours on FM12 and FM15, and 2000+ on FM13 & FM14. I've grown up with the game- from the Amiga days of the original CMs, through playing FML 10+ hours a day, every day, during its existence, to being a reasonably active part of this forum back at its peak. I've written stories in the story forum, I've done a shedload of extra-curricular graphics work and I've got neck-deep in editing in the Editors Hideaway. I was interviewed as a Tester at one point, and I've got a very tatty copy of the "Ruined My Life" book. But that problem, the inescapable importance of those four game concepts to being able to play the game in any way, shape or form, cured me of my FM addiction. I suppose ultimately it's a good thing for my life, but I wasn't really crying out for a cure.

I don't doubt the sure the sales figures of the game are amazing, and I'm sure they're going from strength to strength. FM is still the only serious player in this game, even moreso with FIFA Manager dying a death. But playing the game, you're not put into the seat of being a football manager any more. You're put into the seat of someone playing a game. These are not football concepts- they are FM concepts. What they are, what they mean and what they do, especially their (often contradictory) relation with one another, is not intuitive in the slightest, bears no relation to football management, and is extremely poorly explained in-game.

It is no surprise people end up downloading exploit tactics, potentially not even realising that's why they work, or come to forums with complete misunderstandings. Look at herne79's recent explanation about how much stock should be put into the colour of circles- buried deep in a thread, years after they've been introduced as a game concept, and yet still news to regular forum goers in that thread, such as RBKalle. The game says nothing explicit about them, and natural association tells you that green is good and red is bad, so you want them all green and heaven help you if any of them are red. The same is true of, for example, team talk feedback, where again, the reaction is actually more nuanced than good/bad- yet that is what the game is suggesting is happening from the colouring- obviously, this may have been changed since FM15.

Neither of those examples have anything to do with being a football manager, and everything to do with choices made in FM's development that take it away from football management and towards being a separate entity from football altogether. Directing people to the Tactics Forum should be because they are interested in tactics, not because they are struggling to get their team to do what they want them to, and yet this is all too often the case. The challenge of the game is supposed to be overcoming an opposing AI manager, not overcoming the UI to try and get your players to do what you ask of them. For a game series that built its reputation off of letting your imagination run wild as you stepped into the hot seat as a real football manager, the direction the series is moving is massively sad to me.

[Svenc]

6 hours ago, Lawlore said:

These are not football concepts- they are FM concepts.

In fairness, I have a feel the game is taking a backwards direction in that sense. Else the term "Mentality" for instance wouldn't have at all cropped up again (which arguably, prior to overhauls made, wasn't necessary to have in-game again). And the "intertwined" criticism also sticks true. Actually, up to FM 15, things were far more straight forward. For instance, picks in duties mainly governed forward runs, that was their main inception. Ever since, giving players attack duties encourages them to be inherently more risky/aggressive in their decision making, and vice versa. So, if you have a lot of attack duties in there, players may be slightly less keen on recycling the ball vs. pushing it forward. How muchs o naturally also depends on the team mentality -- and shape. Intertwined it is, increasingly so.

What's more, for an old-timer the feedback on the player instruction screen can be confusing, as he knows the "player mentalities" implied here on "very structured shapes" on various older releases could lead to bloody awful football, or at the least, a disconnected team (obviously doesn't happen anymore to that extent). Giving defenders an "ultra low" mentality and the attackers a "super aggressive" -- as the new screen implies -- was akin to telling half of the team: "Boys, we're just not trying to get smashed today". Vice versa, the other half: "Go get em!" It would also make picking an overall team strategy or "mentality" (as it's explicitly called now) moot, in a sense. None of the original "strategies" allowed for such huge mentality splits. That would defeat the entire point of having team strategies in the first place. Point is, that stuff is being made explicit again, and it is an SI concept through and through. It's also a concept that only old timers may understand -- if you didn't at all understand this paragraph: QED!

The aim of the Tactics Creator 1.0 was translating the game's mechanics into football concepts. Anybody who's ever argued the Creator was ever meant to make the game easier or was ever opposed to it has a fundamentally misunderstanding what the issue was. In the light of the changes made post FM15, I'm not sure whether that's understood anymore, including those early releases. In particular as some of the original co-authors aren't involved anymore (which coincidentally or not, happened around FM15ish). There's another factor to it, which is AI. For an AI to get competitive, this needs to be as straight forward as it gets... unless some of the changes were made with AI in mind. At the least, the more influential feedback seems to have shifted things into a slightly different direction. And it's obvious it seems mainly player based. E.g. long-term FMers who -- mechanically -- know FM's engines inside out. They can also explain things inside out, on a mechanical level. A few of them can do that better than SI staff. Knowing how things click does not necessarily equal being able to translate it all into the most coherent football concepts though. Oft, it's the vice versa, as you see it mainly from a mechanical level -- as demonstrated by SI themselves years back. It was an initial community effort that sparked the progress.