Football Manager 2020 Feedback Thread

[battles_atlas]

1 hour ago, pheelf said:

The discussion is not irrelevant because the quality of ME they can produce is inextricably linked to the specification of the computers that are expected to run it. If all the players of the game was lucky enough to have a high end PC like yourself then the quality of the ME would be of a much higher standard but that's not the reality.

How on Earth do you know this? Yes a simulation running on a 16 core machine has a lot more resources than one on a dual core, but those resources are only useful if the match engine is built with the complexity to need them. To use an example in this thread, the audio on FM2020 remains awful, but the CPU/memory requirements for a reasonable facsimile of stadium sound are absolutely minimal - and indeed the problems with the sound are less about quality and more about buggy implementation. It's the same with player animations - the problem with how goalies look isn't a lack of some power-hungry fancy ray tracing or ambient occlusion or whatever, it's a shortage of animations to show what they are doing in relation to the ball.

None of this suggests that SI are deliberately holding back the ME to serve low performance systems. It suggests the ME is held back by a lack of investment by SI (actually probably SEGA who set the budgets) who are leaning heavily on a ME that is decades old now.
 

[battles_atlas]

Also pheelf, I still say its not relevant, but given you are convinced otherwise - on the idea that the min specs have to stay where they are else a "huge majority" of players will be locked out of playing the game, I think a bit of a reality check is worth while.

There is a big space between cutting edge gaming rig on the one hand, and the minimum specs the game quotes, which is basically a Windows Vista era PC. On ebay right now you can buy a refurbed quad core with 8gb ram for £70. So I find it hard to believe that there is a *huge* number of players that can afford to shell out £40 for FM20, but can't find £70 for a modernish PC. Skip a year of FM and you have most of the required cash.

[GuitarMan]

4 minutes ago, battles_atlas said:

Also pheelf, I still say its not relevant, but given you are convinced otherwise - on the idea that the min specs have to stay where they are else a "huge majority" of players will be locked out of playing the game, I think a bit of a reality check is worth while.

There is a big space between cutting edge gaming rig on the one hand, and the minimum specs the game quotes, which is basically a Windows Vista era PC. On ebay right now you can buy a refurbed quad core with 8gb ram for £70. So I find it hard to believe that there is a *huge* number of players that can afford to shell out £40 for FM20, but can't find £70 for a modernish PC. Skip a year of FM and you have most of the required cash.

Again those that are running vista era pcs are not going to be the type to buy a refurbished pc off eBay.

They are also likely to be the kind to just keep playing the last version they could run (I count myself in this group) rather than buy a new pc to play a new version. 
 

This is the first year SI have stopped 32 bit os support, and there have been numerous posts about not being able to play on these systems. 

I would hazard a guess that raising specs drastically may have a bigger impact than you think. 

[forameuss]

Haven't SI themselves hinted in the past that people run on far worse systems than people expect?

[GOODNAME]

There is a difference between striker with 20 finishing and 10 finishing?

Its just feeling that 1v1 is so random to score 

[battles_atlas]

20 minutes ago, GuitarMan said:

Again those that are running vista era pcs are not going to be the type to buy a refurbished pc off eBay.

They are also likely to be the kind to just keep playing the last version they could run (I count myself in this group) rather than buy a new pc to play a new version. 
 

This is the first year SI have stopped 32 bit os support, and there have been numerous posts about not being able to play on these systems. 

I would hazard a guess that raising specs drastically may have a bigger impact than you think. 

Maybe you're right, but consumer technology upgrades get driven by content requiring it. If there is no 4k content, only a few with money to burn would pay extra to have it in their TV. Same goes for those of us with better PCs - I didn't buy it for the sake of it, I bought it to play specific games. I think those running Vista still are exactly those who buy a refub off Ebay, but only if they have a reason to. Needing to for FM is exactly such a reason. If we're role playing these people, *when* (cos it has to happen one day yeah?) FM specs increase they probably dont even notice the change, buy the game, find it cant run on their x86 waffle iron, complain on this forum , then go and buy a £70 PC of ebay to run it, a recognise that actually this was totally worth it because the game is much better and it doesn't take half an hour to boot the PC.

Hell at some point that Vista PC is dying anyway (its already an absolute security nightmare as it hasn't been patched in years). FM spec requirements can't just live forever in their own bubble whilst the rest of the world moves on, unless the Amish are the target market.

[Also this is still irrelevant to the ME performance for the reasons I gave earlier why do we keep debating this omg omg omg ]

[Mitja]

@pheelf

There are two basic things affecting poor gameplay. First are direct ME issues like what we see currently with GKs or poor control on touchline. Second are issues caused by poor tactical implementation. Such issues have absolutelly nothing to do with computor ability.  

[kingking]

People need to remember to CONSTANTLY USE MATCH Preparation Training every week and use set pieces training

During the match your assistant tells you that your match preparation and set pieces training ARE  effectively working during the match

It improves the quality of your team's football

 

 

Edited January 13, 2020 by kingking

[KlaaZ]

2 hours ago, Rashidi said:

For me the biggest issue with FM20 is the lack of reference for freekicks and sometimes even yellow cards. A player can get a yellow card and I can miss it on extended highlights. Direct freekicks are something that's annoyed me for a long time. We need to see why free kicks in dangerous positions are awarded, these are always a sign of underlying issues with your system. No side likes to give up free kicks in front of goal and will do things to avoid it.  I do enjoy playing the game, but its these two niggling things that affect me the most.

I noticed something in one of my games to day, I was playing against a team that was playing with a CWB on one flank behind two attacking duties in front. We scored in that area and immediately the AI manager changed it to a FB(S). Initially I thought it was a brilliant change, because that flank was so vulnerable and then I looked at the other flank which had 3 attack duties and held my hands up. The AI was just gifting my side chances to bomb down their flanks without pressure. While the AI has certainly shown some improvements, these set ups are just going to make it really easy to exploit them down the flanks. It was still early in the game so I am still wondering if this was ideal. It's good to see it doesn't now always switch to a 424 when it wants to chase a game.

The defensive side of the game is weak, its still too easy to get around  lot of teams and create too many chances on goal. Initially I thought all penalty kicks look the same then i had one where he scored one in the top right corner, so I am chalking lack of variety off.  I think many have pointed out that defensive headers need some work, I find that its too easy now setting traps up to take advantage of how defenders clear headers.

Striker involvement is another one. Roles life the PF and the AF work really well from what I can see but every time I tried implementing a striker dropping deep to act as a pivot or a playmaker (be it a DLF, F9 or treq), they never seem to be sought out by teammates. Their movement is better than it used to be (a concern on either previous versions of the game or on a previous patch) but if nobody passes to them despite them being in a position to do so, it's still lacking. 

That and a very distinct lack of direct free kick goals.

But overall, I do like the ME. The long balls over the top are an issue in certain tactical setups (playing with a standard D line, narrower and without counterpress seems to negate it for 95% though) but apart from that, it plays very well. 

[Tiger666]

5 minutes ago, kingking said:

People need to remember to CONSTANTLY USE MATCH Preparation Training every week and use set pieces training

During the match your assistant tells you that your match preparation and set pieces training and effectively working during the match

It improves the quality of your team's football

 

 

I do. What you've highlighted there isn't match preparation. It doesn't affect the match at all. only attributes. You want "Attacking Movement"

Edited January 13, 2020 by Tiger666

[Iwabik]

For me the most annoying part about this whole issue is how SI handles things. Their basic response to ME critcism is "Yeah, we know it has issue, but it's difficult to do it right". I mean, duh, that's why we are paying you for it.  Can you imagine paying full price for any other product and when you found fundamental fault in it, the producer response being "Yeah, we know, we'll try to fix, but it's difficult to make our product, so we don't know if we'll be able to" ? That's unacceptable. What's more, there are people speaking on behalf of the producer telling you that they know the product is broken, but you can maybe try using it in other, limited way to make it work a bit better? SI needs to stop acting as if they were just bunch of guys making games for fun in their garage. They sell millions of copies every year, have one of the most active playerbase on steam and are even selling more copies year after year. 

I love the game, I've been playing it almost my whole life and preordering for the past few years. I've always felt that SI do genuinly care about the game and it isn't just a way to make money for them. Lately, I started to have doubts. One thing is certain - this is the first year in my life when will choose not to preorder FM.

[pheelf]

1 hour ago, battles_atlas said:

How on Earth do you know this? Yes a simulation running on a 16 core machine has a lot more resources than one on a dual core, but those resources are only useful if the match engine is built with the complexity to need them. To use an example in this thread, the audio on FM2020 remains awful, but the CPU/memory requirements for a reasonable facsimile of stadium sound are absolutely minimal - and indeed the problems with the sound are less about quality and more about buggy implementation. It's the same with player animations - the problem with how goalies look isn't a lack of some power-hungry fancy ray tracing or ambient occlusion or whatever, it's a shortage of animations to show what they are doing in relation to the ball.

None of this suggests that SI are deliberately holding back the ME to serve low performance systems. It suggests the ME is held back by a lack of investment by SI (actually probably SEGA who set the budgets) who are leaning heavily on a ME that is decades old now.

The more processing power you have available for a simulation the better it becomes (speaking as someone who used to run simulations on parallel computers). I think you are also underestimating the complexity of the ME, if it was as simple as you are suggesting then why is it taking them months and months after release to fix issues.

Do you work for SI? If not then how can you then make definitive statements like "SI / SEGA are holding back investment into ME"? 

1 hour ago, battles_atlas said:

Also pheelf, I still say its not relevant, but given you are convinced otherwise - on the idea that the min specs have to stay where they are else a "huge majority" of players will be locked out of playing the game, I think a bit of a reality check is worth while.

There is a big space between cutting edge gaming rig on the one hand, and the minimum specs the game quotes, which is basically a Windows Vista era PC. On ebay right now you can buy a refurbed quad core with 8gb ram for £70. So I find it hard to believe that there is a *huge* number of players that can afford to shell out £40 for FM20, but can't find £70 for a modernish PC. Skip a year of FM and you have most of the required cash.

I didn't say that the minimum specs have to stay where they are. What I said was that SI have to keep the specifications in line with their customers or risk losing them. It's not only a matter of them being locked out of the game completely, the performance of the game is also important in determining a players enjoyment. If the game processes too slowly that in itself will alienate players.

Yes, I'm aware of the big space between cutting edge gaming and the minimum specs. What you or I may believe to be true about the players of the game is irrelevant. The only ones who know who is playing their game and the specs they have is SI and that will guide their decisions.

38 minutes ago, Mitja said:

@pheelf

There are two basic things affecting poor gameplay. First are direct ME issues like what we see currently with GKs or poor control on touchline. Second are issues caused by poor tactical implementation. Such issues have absolutely nothing to do with computer ability.  

What I don't understand is how people can say that the quality of a simulation (the ME) has nothing to do with the processing power available to generate it (whether that be GPU for animations or CPU to determine what's going to happen). You strike me as a sensible guy who makes some reasonable and well thought out posts on here so I'm really surprised to see you come out with this.

Edited January 13, 2020 by pheelf

[Mitja]

3 hours ago, mp_87 said:

In terms of the Match Engine, everything in terms of what plays out just feels rushed and forced to me and unrealistic. I don't want to be unkind, but seems like whoever works on it either is/was a fan of 80's style football and just rushing it forward, or has been brought up on arcade-style games, FIFA etc, where every passage of play is trying to do something. The play rarely "calms down", it's too end to end. Some might like that, constant action and it's less of an issue if you only play in brief highlights, but for a game that strives for realism I'd argue it very much isn't.

For a few years now I've bemoaned the utterly one dimensional and arcade-y nature of wide play. Unfortunately this year it's as bad as ever. Get ball, sprint in straight line to corner flag/towards the box, cross/shoot. Every single time.

That feeds into another longstanding gripe of mine - the game far too readily sends the ball out to the flanks. Keeping it central and being patient is difficult because the moment a wide player is noticed in a modicum of space it goes out there, and then its time for run, cross/shoot spam again....

Defenders seem to force the play far too much, no matter what instruction or PPM they have there are hoofs forward or defence splitting passes. Also very easily made to hoof it by the press instead of playing round it. I'm not seeing enough of stepping out of the back with the ball and building up play.

On pressing (it's still overpowered) I see no difference between players, no matter attributes, size, role, style of play etc. If they're instructed to press they all of a sudden tear after the man on the ball at 100mph. Doesn't matter if they're Bobby Firmino or Peter Crouch, there is so little difference.

And even on lower mentalities seeing a lot less of players turning out and being prepared to go back. It will just go cross field to the other flank or a shot or forced ball into the box instead of recycling possession.

Movement also seems a real issue, not quite as bad as last year but the options, particularly centrally in the final third, are still lacking.

The versions weren't perfect, but I feel even four or five years ago with less and more limited options you could put together more patient controlling football and recycling of the ball that just looked better, to me at least. If you want to play that style now it's much more of a struggle because the game just doesn't allow for it. My biggest bit of feedback I can make to SI, not particularly a helpful one I admit, is that the football action should slow down a bit and reconsider the direction of travel the football part of the game is going down. It's too rushed in terms of getting the ball forward and trying to force play or score a goal at every opportunity.

 

I've been saying the same for years. To me it is obvious that FM has more styles than real football. This fact is especially noticeable on both ends of mentality ledder. Can anyone show real life example of football style that is represented with very defensive and defensive mentality tactics in FM? Such lethargy? Defensive teams being able to dominate possession even against top teams? If you can't fix it remove it. I

On the other hand I think attacking tactics and mentality are more similar to real life but they have pernament issue of being too rushed and direct. 

All this might not be big issue for human manager who will adapt from what he sees but it holds back AI, gameplay realism and development of ME. Many of the current ME issues are directly connected to how mentality works and affects all other instrcutions. 

I wrote a thread few days ago if anyone is interested give some support support or write your own suggestion. ME won't get any better until something changes in essence.  

 

[kingking]

31 minutes ago, Tiger666 said:

I do. What you've highlighted there isn't match preparation. It doesn't affect the match at all. only attributes. You want "Attacking Movement"

 

Match Preparation training involves 

Teamwork, Attacking Movement, Defensive Shape, Match Practice, 

Set Pieces training involves Defending Free kicks and Defending Corners 

If you use these Training units every week it affects the match because your assistant in match feedback highlights that it is effective

Edited January 13, 2020 by kingking

[Mitja]

41 minutes ago, pheelf said:

What I don't understand is how people can say that the quality of a simulation (the ME) has nothing to do with the processing power available to generate it (whether that be GPU for animations or CPU to determine what's going to happen). You strike me as a sensible guy who makes some reasonable and well thought out posts on here so I'm really surprised to see you come out with this.

I can't believe how stubborn you are. AI doesn't think or determines what's happening these are simple game plans. Tactical issues in gameplay that are genereted from poor implementation of tactics have very little to do with high end machines when they work on any comp!! Can anybody explain this in better english please

[saihtam]

9 minutes ago, Mitja said:

I can't believe how stubborn you are. AI doesn't think or determines what's happening these are simple game plans. Tactical issues in gameplay that are genereted from poor implementation of tactics have very little to do with high end machines when they work on any comp!! Can anybody explain this in better english please

You are.

How can you believe that product that is built to run on system that has Processor:Intel Pentium 4, Intel Core 2 or AMD Athlon2.2 GHz or higher as min requirement. For so long they have kept this min req and to run on this aging processor they must make some cuts. Here lies the fault also i think. It does not matter how many fancy pieces you put on a car that has rusty old engine, it wont go faster.

Their aim is to make it work on so low pc specs that they must cut corners, thats why it is hard to rework on code. Year after year faults come back. Just feels they are holding back their ability to offer so much more regarding simulation and what will be shown on the pitch in the end for us. It is hard for developers.

Only positive this year is that they went over to 64bit finally.

[Tyburn]

There are games out there I want to play that I can’t because of my PC. I accept it. If FM needs more power to become the best it can be, I’d accept that too. And then go and buy a better pc ... somehow  

Kudos for SI thinking about us paupers ... but I’d rather the game became the absolute best it possibly could.

[Nick_CB]

I left the room after my CF missed 6 clear opportunities

[Mitja]

35 minutes ago, saihtam said:

You are.

How can you believe that product that is built to run on system that has Processor:Intel Pentium 4, Intel Core 2 or AMD Athlon2.2 GHz or higher as min requirement. For so long they have kept this min req and to run on this aging processor they must make some cuts. Here lies the fault also i think. It does not matter how many fancy pieces you put on a car that has rusty old engine, it wont go faster.

Their aim is to make it work on so low pc specs that they must cut corners, thats why it is hard to rework on code. Year after year faults come back. Just feels they are holding back their ability to offer so much more regarding simulation and what will be shown on the pitch in the end for us. It is hard for developers.

Only positive this year is that they went over to 64bit finally.

That's not what I said. What I said is stuff that runs even on nokia 3110 could be implemented better. 

[JEinchy]

1 hour ago, Mitja said:

The versions weren't perfect, but I feel even four or five years ago with less and more limited options you could put together more patient controlling football and recycling of the ball that just looked better, to me at least. If you want to play that style now it's much more of a struggle because the game just doesn't allow for it. My biggest bit of feedback I can make to SI, not particularly a helpful one I admit, is that the football action should slow down a bit and reconsider the direction of travel the football part of the game is going down. It's too rushed in terms of getting the ball forward and trying to force play or score a goal at every opportunity.

I hard agree. I felt the same about last year's edition, too. I was just playing a match with Very Short Passing on a Positive mentality, which is hardly the most aggressive combination, and kept seeing my CBs play long passes (despite having Take Fewer Risks ticked), my midfielders attempt balls over the top, and IFs attempting to switch the ball to one another.

It's discouraging because it renders this style of play very difficult to implement without putting some hard limits on what the players can do, which has knock-on effects else where and potentially kills chance creation. It especially doesn't help when higher defensive lines, a core component of this style, are routinely punished due to a well-known defect in CB positioning. While this has made me experiment with different styles, I feel limited because my preferred way of playing just isn't a good way to play anymore even though it's still going strong in reality. The issue is only compounded by the really weak shooting this year. Focusing on creating high quality chances instead of volume is a lot harder when players can't bury those chances properly, and I'm not just talking about 1v1s here. 

I've had such a love-hate relationship with my save because of this. My team has been successful, but I feel it's less because my tactics are good, and more that they're inadvertently exploiting the CB splitting bug and generating a lot of 1v1s for my striker to score. Yet compared to what you can find out there, my tactics aren't even that aggressive. I'm winning, but not the way I would like to.

Giving feedback or suggestions here is difficult without knowing the intricacies of the ME and why this is happening in the first place, but I think expressing the sentiment is important. 

[bleventozturk]

Just a thought: We know that SI is working on resolving the issues at the moment. Since the list of reported issues is long, it would make sense to me to release a 20.4 sometime soon that will at least provide us a better product for the time being, with 'some' improvement that they have already accomplished (if they did), while we wait on another patch with the winter transfer update. What is the reason why we can't have more frequent patches with minor improvements? 

[dannyfc]

2 hours ago, Iwabik said:

For me the most annoying part about this whole issue is how SI handles things. Their basic response to ME critcism is "Yeah, we know it has issue, but it's difficult to do it right". I mean, duh, that's why we are paying you for it.  Can you imagine paying full price for any other product and when you found fundamental fault in it, the producer response being "Yeah, we know, we'll try to fix, but it's difficult to make our product, so we don't know if we'll be able to" ? 

Sorry but this is absolute nonsense, and this is from someone that hates the current ME. 

Sigames make the best football simulation hands down. Many developers have tried and haven't come even remotely close, even huge studios like EA. 

The reason why is its extremely difficult to code. There's no existing precedent to build from, so it's not as if they can simply recruit expertise for an easy fix. 

They've acknowledged the problem and are working toward a solution. That's just being honest, what more do you want them to say? The only other option would be to deny the existence of any issues and continue to sell record numbers to the majority of users who simply do not care. 

[Double0Seven]

1 hour ago, saihtam said:

You are.

How can you believe that product that is built to run on system that has Processor:Intel Pentium 4, Intel Core 2 or AMD Athlon2.2 GHz or higher as min requirement. For so long they have kept this min req and to run on this aging processor they must make some cuts. Here lies the fault also i think. It does not matter how many fancy pieces you put on a car that has rusty old engine, it wont go faster.

Their aim is to make it work on so low pc specs that they must cut corners, thats why it is hard to rework on code. Year after year faults come back. Just feels they are holding back their ability to offer so much more regarding simulation and what will be shown on the pitch in the end for us. It is hard for developers.

Only positive this year is that they went over to 64bit finally.

I already said it before. Even with these minimum specs, you can do better. Just look at the old Fifa/PES games. They had better graphics than we have now despite being decades older. This if fifa 06 from 15 years ago https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9PFWvMGMGM

You cant tell me something like this doesnt look much more smooth in terms of animations for example. This game also had much bigger crowds and online gameplay against each other. 

https://www.systemrequirementslab.com/cyri/requirements/fifa-06/10544 

The min specs are also a lot lower than FM. The graphics of FM are just heavily outdated to the point that mobile phones with less power can outperform it. If we want to attract a more modern crowd, the graphics need to be better. They can be better even at this level. 

[battles_atlas]

2 hours ago, pheelf said:

The more processing power you have available for a simulation the better it becomes (speaking as someone who used to run simulations on parallel computers). I think you are also underestimating the complexity of the ME, if it was as simple as you are suggesting then why is it taking them months and months after release to fix issues.

Do you work for SI? If not then how can you then make definitive statements like "SI / SEGA are holding back investment into ME"? 

I didn't say that the minimum specs have to stay where they are. What I said was that SI have to keep the specifications in line with their customers or risk losing them. It's not only a matter of them being locked out of the game completely, the performance of the game is also important in determining a players enjoyment. If the game processes too slowly that in itself will alienate players.

If you used to "run simulations" then you should understand that a simulation doesn't automatically become better on more powerful hardware, it just has more coding headroom to become better. Not the same thing. The coding part still has to be done. I've already said why I think the problem is investment (eg the state of audio for one example), you're just choosing to ignore it.

Anyway, here's a different tack: if the ME was being held back for the sake of the min specs it would be commercial idiocy:
A) people upgrade their hardware when they need to, within reason. I flat out do not believe that there is a huge number of FM buyers out there who would not fork out the equivalent of two annual FM titles to buy a refurb machine in order to keep playing - because that isn't how any other consumer technology market plays out. The £70 refurb PC I found on ebay in seconds earlier has 4 times the RAM of the min spec, and 3 times the processing power. If it were really true that the ME is being crippled by this min spec then a simple bump to a £70 upgrade would open up incredible new opportunities - 3 times the power! Three times better simulation!!!!
B) the ME as it is costs a ton of extra sales, because of all those buyers who ignore FM for the crap visuals it has. For proof, just look at Farming Simulator 19. It sold 2m copies, twice what FM20 managed! You think farming is more popular than football? No, but FS19 sure is a pretty game, so despite having the most niche of subjects, it has shifted a mountain of copies.

The idea that the underlying problem with the ME is the min specs does not add up, which ever way you look at it.

[KUBI]

vor 10 Minuten schrieb battles_atlas:

 For proof, just look at Farming Simulator 19. It sold 2m copies, twice what FM20 managed! You think farming is more popular than football? No, but FS19 sure is a pretty game, so despite having the most niche of subjects, it has shifted a mountain of copies.
 

Farming is popular. And men and women are playing the simulation. While a football sim is played at least 80% by men. So there is a different potential of customers.

With this years edition 64 bit computers are the the new minimum. For older pcs it's usually not RAM or processor that limits, it's the graphic card. 

If you think they should skip the low specs computers, please post a feature request. This is a general feedback thread and not the place to discuss that kind of stuff.

[battles_atlas]

1 hour ago, dannyfc said:

Sigames make the best football simulation hands down. Many developers have tried and haven't come even remotely close, even huge studios like EA. 

The reason why is its extremely difficult to code. There's no existing precedent to build from, so it's not as if they can simply recruit expertise for an easy fix.

I have a dream that someone comes along that finds some way of using image recognition and machine learning to build this mindblowing match engine just by feeding the ML algorithm footage of millions of football games, from which it learns football simulation from the ground up. Overnight Football Manager's match engine is shown to be the obsolete programme that it is, SEGA/SI panic and throw money at it, and suddenly we get the match engine we - as purchases of this series for the last three decades - get the simulation we deserve.

How you could hook up what the ML simulation could do, with a user interface to set tactics and instructions is something way beyond my limited comprehension, but now Google's Deepmind has conquered Starcraft maybe this can be its next challenge.
 

Edited January 13, 2020 by battles_atlas

[WelshMourinho]

I reckon we should just rename this years edition of the game from Football Manager 2020 to Tony Pulis's Wet Dream.

[Mitja]

1 hour ago, JEinchy said:

I hard agree. I felt the same about last year's edition, too. I was just playing a match with Very Short Passing on a Positive mentality, which is hardly the most aggressive combination, and kept seeing my CBs play long passes (despite having Take Fewer Risks ticked), my midfielders attempt balls over the top, and IFs attempting to switch the ball to one another.

The above is mentality obstructing other passing instructions to work properly. It has always been like that. There are super clear and simple instructions: passing directness, tempo, pass into space plus a few other that indirectly influence passing decisions. Why does mentality have to interfere?

[battles_atlas]

2 minutes ago, KUBI said:

Farming is popular.

Tell me about it, when I go to the park at the weekend and all the kids are there raising livestock and digging up the football pitches to plant crops I get furious! Then I come home and turn on Sky Sports and all there is to watch is the Farming League highlights, so I drive to the shops but I get stuck in traffic from all the fans going to the stadium to watch the combine harvesters!

Mad of me to think football simulation could ever sell as many games as this

[KUBI]

vor 1 Minute schrieb battles_atlas:

Tell me about it, when I go to the park at the weekend and all the kids are there raising livestock and digging up the football pitches to plant crops I get furious! Then I come home and turn on Sky Sports and all there is to watch is the Farming League highlights, so I drive to the shops but I get stuck in traffic from all the fans going to the stadium to watch the combine harvesters!

Mad of me to think football simulation could ever sell as many games as this

Or they playing FIFA. A simulation like FM will always be a niche product, even when it becomes more popular. If you compare the amount of football fans to the amount of sold copies, this is something for the ones who like football and the idea to manage a club in general and not only watching and playing football.   

[He can't believe he's missed it]

30 minutes ago, arwelt said:

I reckon we should just rename this years edition of the game from Football Manager 2020 to Tony Pulis's Wet Dream.

I would hate to see the front cover of that game...

[pheelf]

3 hours ago, Mitja said:

I can't believe how stubborn you are. AI doesn't think or determines what's happening these are simple game plans. Tactical issues in gameplay that are genereted from poor implementation of tactics have very little to do with high end machines when they work on any comp!! Can anybody explain this in better english please

I guess I'm stubborn then .

49 minutes ago, battles_atlas said:

If you used to "run simulations" then you should understand that a simulation doesn't automatically become better on more powerful hardware, it just has more coding headroom to become better. Not the same thing. The coding part still has to be done. I've already said why I think the problem is investment (eg the state of audio for one example), you're just choosing to ignore it.

Anyway, here's a different tack: if the ME was being held back for the sake of the min specs it would be commercial idiocy:
A) people upgrade their hardware when they need to, within reason. I flat out do not believe that there is a huge number of FM buyers out there who would not fork out the equivalent of two annual FM titles to buy a refurb machine in order to keep playing - because that isn't how any other consumer technology market plays out. The £70 refurb PC I found on ebay in seconds earlier has 4 times the RAM of the min spec, and 3 times the processing power. If it were really true that the ME is being crippled by this min spec then a simple bump to a £70 upgrade would open up incredible new opportunities - 3 times the power! Three times better simulation!!!!
B) the ME as it is costs a ton of extra sales, because of all those buyers who ignore FM for the crap visuals it has. For proof, just look at Farming Simulator 19. It sold 2m copies, twice what FM20 managed! You think farming is more popular than football? No, but FS19 sure is a pretty game, so despite having the most niche of subjects, it has shifted a mountain of copies.

The idea that the underlying problem with the ME is the min specs does not add up, which ever way you look at it.

What would be the point in creating coding headroom which you aren't going to use because a significant section of the games customers doesn't have the processing power to utilize it?

They could program an exceptional AI into the game if they could be confident that the majority of their customers could run it well. The problem is they don't have that confidence based on the profile of their customers computers which is the point.

Visuals are a different thing entirely from the ME. I agree that the graphics could be better and I've said so before but again we go back to the whole issue of hardware. If you have a low spec PC then it's unlikely that you are going to have a good dedicated graphics card.

So it's commercial idiocy to continue with a strategy which is getting them record sales year on year?

Anecdotally speaking, I don't think that a lot of sales are lost because people are concerned about the games visuals. I don't think it's the sort of game where people pay as much attention to graphics as they would with a different genre of game.

Best Regards

[Mitja]

9 hours ago, mp_87 said:

For a few years now I've bemoaned the utterly one dimensional and arcade-y nature of wide play. Unfortunately this year it's as bad as ever. Get ball, sprint in straight line to corner flag/towards the box, cross/shoot. Every single time.

That feeds into another longstanding gripe of mine - the game far too readily sends the ball out to the flanks. Keeping it central and being patient is difficult because the moment a wide player is noticed in a modicum of space it goes out there, and then its time for run, cross/shoot spam again....

 

The versions weren't perfect, but I feel even four or five years ago with less and more limited options you could put together more patient controlling football and recycling of the ball that just looked better, to me at least. If you want to play that style now it's much more of a struggle because the game just doesn't allow for it. My biggest bit of feedback I can make to SI, not particularly a helpful one I admit, is that the football action should slow down a bit and reconsider the direction of travel the football part of the game is going down. It's too rushed in terms of getting the ball forward and trying to force play or score a goal at every opportunity.

 

Every wide player be it fullback or winger plays like Adama Traore. I don't know where devs see such football but it surely doesn't help half of fullback roles have dribble often and all PL fulbacks PPMs get further forward and dribbling often ticked.

It was perfectly possible to play patient style even on attacking mentalities just a ME version before latest. These things change quickly and always have. 

[Tiger666]

17 minutes ago, Mitja said:

Every wide player be it fullback or winger plays like Adama Traore. I don't know where devs see such football but it surely doesn't help half of fullback roles have dribble often and all PL fulbacks PPMs get further forward and dribbling often ticked.

Raised it. No response.

 

[sulljda]

Quite simply and sadly, for me the game has reached a point when it is no longer enjoyable to play

[Iwabik]

3 hours ago, dannyfc said:

Sorry but this is absolute nonsense, and this is from someone that hates the current ME. 

Sigames make the best football simulation hands down. Many developers have tried and haven't come even remotely close, even huge studios like EA. 

The reason why is its extremely difficult to code. There's no existing precedent to build from, so it's not as if they can simply recruit expertise for an easy fix. 

They've acknowledged the problem and are working toward a solution. That's just being honest, what more do you want them to say? The only other option would be to deny the existence of any issues and continue to sell record numbers to the majority of users who simply do not care. 

Well, it's difficult not to make the best product when you are the only one making it? Surely, you are not comparing FM to FIFA/PES? 

 

Nobody said it's easy to code, but there were iterations of ME that were much better than the current one. Also, is it fair to charge the customers full price for a product you yourself admit might be too difficult to make properly? 

 

I'm very happy that they acknowledged the issues with the ME but that was a month ago and there were no new updates since. It'd be nice to have any information on the stage of the fix. I'm not talking about a date but a simple "we found the faulty part of ME code and are working on fixing it", "we are testing our fix" or "we have no idea what's causing the problems, we are still trying to identify it" would be nice. Instead we get the "it's difficult process" answer. 

 

After the last patch the game will probably be very good, as it always have been. However, after this year release I cease to see the point of buying the game before the winter update. 

[Toonrock]

Pre-bought the game on 7th of November.

- 67 days in (and counting), it´s a ME with great graphics, I agree (well, there´s the lagging game play of course), and with obvious errors (Balls over Def, 1-on-1´s etc.)

This version included, why is it okay to have customers wait each year for a game to be optimized to a playable state (?)

Had I bought a 12 days holiday each year on a 5-star Hotel (and payed full price), but "unfortunatelly" each year was told that I had to spend 3 of those days at a 1-star Hotel - ...As the years gone by, I would end up pretty furious to put it mildly 

Edited January 13, 2020 by Toonrock

[bleventozturk]

10 hours ago, mp_87 said:

For a few years now I've bemoaned the utterly one dimensional and arcade-y nature of wide play. Unfortunately this year it's as bad as ever. Get ball, sprint in straight line to corner flag/towards the box, cross/shoot. Every single time.

That feeds into another longstanding gripe of mine - the game far too readily sends the ball out to the flanks. Keeping it central and being patient is difficult because the moment a wide player is noticed in a modicum of space it goes out there, and then its time for run, cross/shoot spam again....

Defenders seem to force the play far too much, no matter what instruction or PPM they have there are hoofs forward or defence splitting passes. Also very easily made to hoof it by the press instead of playing round it. I'm not seeing enough of stepping out of the back with the ball and building up play.

The versions weren't perfect, but I feel even four or five years ago with less and more limited options you could put together more patient controlling football and recycling of the ball that just looked better, to me at least. If you want to play that style now it's much more of a struggle because the game just doesn't allow for it. My biggest bit of feedback I can make to SI, not particularly a helpful one I admit, is that the football action should slow down a bit and reconsider the direction of travel the football part of the game is going down. It's too rushed in terms of getting the ball forward and trying to force play or score a goal at every opportunity.

 

This 100% is by far my biggest concern too, and I would love to hear from SI about what direction they are taking regarding this in the latest patch. As you say, the ME's got worse and worse in the last few years (with the exception of FM 17) in not allowing any central play, yet we hear absolutely nothing from SI.  Every once in a while they come out and respond to some disrespectful and completely false accusations from some people, but when it comes to real fundamental concerns such as this one, I don't see any input from SI.

The 19 ME was fundamentally broken with extremely narrow defenses and ball being forced to wide open areas ALL the time. FM 20 is a little bit better, but not enough by any means. With my tactical setups things looked relatively better, but in AI vs. AI matches majority of goals come from crosses (either open play or set piece) where it is always the attackers who are quick to react while defenders just watch.

[mp_87]

48 minutes ago, Mitja said:

Every wide player be it fullback or winger plays like Adama Traore. I don't know where devs see such football but it surely doesn't help half of fullback roles have dribble often and all PL fulbacks PPMs get further forward and dribbling often ticked.

That's been happening since I can remember really paying attention to the game though. Since about FM13 or 14 I've had discussions about the behaviour of wide players and how one dimensional and predictable and unrealistic it is. It's nothing new. Wingers just zooming in a straight line towards the flag before dumping a cross into the box. Inside Forwards cutting inside similarly and banging a shot at goal. Even generic Wide Midfielder roles had/have to be modified with loads of PI's to prevent the run + cross/shoot spam occurring. And other roles have issues too. Raumdeuter has been in for years now and is still such a confused role in how it plays. Also a good point on the fullbacks.

Said before but what is badly needed is a generic role that isn't so predicated to ultra aggressive attacking behaviour. And also some sort of semi-passive role would be good that holds it's width but isn't massively involved in the play and is more of a wide poacher looking to get on the end of things. Think how David Villa played at Barca in the early 2010's, or Sterling is used for Man City now - probably totally revamping the Raumdeuter role in other words.

Edited January 13, 2020 by mp_87

[bleventozturk]

3 minutes ago, mp_87 said:

That's been happening since I can remember really paying attention to the game though. Since about FM13 or 14 I've had discussions about the behaviour of wide players and how one dimensional and predictable and unrealistic it is. It's nothing new. Wingers just zooming in a straight line towards the flag before dumping a cross into the box.

True, but this became even more problematic and unrealistic with how the defensive lines got narrower in the last few versions, completely leaving the wide areas to the abuse of the wingers and fullbacks. Cross after cross after cross.

[Double0Seven]

1 hour ago, KUBI said:

Or they playing FIFA. A simulation like FM will always be a niche product, even when it becomes more popular. If you compare the amount of football fans to the amount of sold copies, this is something for the ones who like football and the idea to manage a club in general and not only watching and playing football.   

A niche product isnt a top 10 played game where even older versions consistently beat out triple AAA games. Is the userbase small compared to the amount of football lovers? Yes, but why would that make a product with consistent 70k players concurrently every day of the week a "niche" product? The game is huge, top 10 in PC games on steam and consistently sells every year despite being a yearly game instead of long developements like some other franchises.

The game is small compared to Fifa or whatever, but far from "niche" in the grand scheme of things. 

If a game that sells millions, has multiple versions for PC, phone, Nintendo Switch and manages to sell millions every year then how is it "niche"?

Edited January 13, 2020 by Double0Seven

[He can't believe he's missed it]

With all the managing of expectations and trying to drive the narrative that it's too difficult to fix these issues with the resources they have, I'll be amazed if the update does anything more than make the game somewhat bearable.

[mp_87]

10 minutes ago, bleventozturk said:

This 100% is by far my biggest concern too, and I would love to hear from SI about what direction they are taking regarding this in the latest patch. As you say, the ME's got worse and worse in the last few years (with the exception of FM 17) in not allowing any central play, yet we hear absolutely nothing from SI.  Every once in a while they come out and respond to some disrespectful and completely false accusations from some people, but when it comes to real fundamental concerns such as this one, I don't see any input from SI.

The 19 ME was fundamentally broken with extremely narrow defenses and ball being forced to wide open areas ALL the time. FM 20 is a little bit better, but not enough by any means. With my tactical setups things looked relatively better, but in AI vs. AI matches majority of goals come from crosses (either open play or set piece) where it is always the attackers who are quick to react while defenders just watch.

I wouldn't expect anything to change with a new patch, to be honest. Behaviour in wide areas, and wide player roles, would require a massive change and reworking of several things.

[Mitja]

13 minutes ago, mp_87 said:

Think how David Villa played at Barca in the early 2010's, or Sterling is used for Man City now - probably totally revamping the Raumdeuter role in other words

Most rl teams have 0 to 1 player who will dribble more often. How many in FM, avarage AI team for example? 

[bleventozturk]

10 minutes ago, Mitja said:

Most rl teams have 0 to 1 player who will dribble more often. How many in FM, avarage AI team for example? 

That's interesting too, and I think you are right, there is just way too much dribbling happening. If players were more inclined to pass than dribble, things may open up at the center of defenses a bit more? With so many players just dribbling towards the corner flag, defenders probably don't have any reason to chase them, instead they just pack it in and wait for the inevitable cross.

Edited January 14, 2020 by bleventozturk

[danstam]

Went back to FM17 yesterday, and there's no doubt that the match engine is vastly, vastly superior, BUT... I've heard people say that not enough changes year by year, or the features added are trivial or what have you, but personally, I find it hard to continue with 17 because the immersion is so much more advanced in FM20: training, staff roles, youth development, etc. So I have to give credit to SI in that regard, although I entirely agree with all the ME critiques (albeit my feeling is one of bemusement rather than "anger"). If Football Manager was a Director of Football simulator, it would be one hell of a game in my opinion.

[Nick_CB]

[robinthebest]

2 hours ago, Tiger666 said:

Raised it. No response.

 

I also made a similar thread, I ASSUME they will look into it?

[bleventozturk]

1 hour ago, danstam said:

Went back to FM17 yesterday, and there's no doubt that the match engine is vastly, vastly superior, BUT... I've heard people say that not enough changes year by year, or the features added are trivial or what have you, but personally, I find it hard to continue with 17 because the immersion is so much more advanced in FM20: training, staff roles, youth development, etc. So I have to give credit to SI in that regard, although I entirely agree with all the ME critiques (albeit my feeling is one of bemusement rather than "anger"). If Football Manager was a Director of Football simulator, it would be one hell of a game in my opinion.

The rest of the game is absolutely fantastic. SI made strides in the last few years. I just can't help but think, WHAT IF they would just accept that they went in the wrong direction the last 3 years, just consider it sunk cost, and go back and restart from where they left off in FM 17 ME? And I know of course the answer to that will be

1) you have no idea how much the ME has improved under the hood

2) FM 17 had major flaws

And my answers are:

to 1) maybe, but visibly it has nothing to show for it

to 2) and FM 20 doesn't??

Played a few hours of FM 17 today. ME is just (relatively) brilliant. But I'm about 10 years into my save there, and and there are only 3! newgen inside forwards in the world who can play in my good but no so great Benfica team. Almost all the AML and AMR's are wingers, and that by itself just kills the long term gameplay. Newgens and AI's player development is so far ahead in FM 20, it is not even comparable, so kudos to SI for that.

 

Edited January 14, 2020 by bleventozturk

[Altair89]

26 minutes ago, bleventozturk said:

The rest of the game is absolutely fantastic. SI made strides in the last few years. I just can't help but think, WHAT IF they would just accept that they went in the wrong direction the last 3 years, just consider it sunk cost, and go back and restart from where they left off in FM 17 ME? And I know of course the answer to that will be

1) you have no idea how much the ME has improved under the hood

2) FM 17 had major flaws

And my answers are:

to 1) maybe, but visibly it has nothing to show for it

to 2) and FM 20 doesn't??

Played a few hours of FM 17 today. ME is just (relatively) brilliant. But I'm about 10 years into my save there, and and there are only 3! newgen inside forwards in the world who can play in my good but no so great Benfica team. Almost all the AML and AMR's are wingers, and that by itself just kills the long term gameplay. Newgens and AI's player development is so far ahead in FM 20, it is not even comparable, so kudos to SI for that.

 

The perfect solution here would be the FM17 ME with all FM20 features because apart of that the game is amazing but that is impossible i guess.

We are not the only one who thinks FM17 ME is still the best i hope they reconsider the situation and go back to the right direction. Sometimes you have accept critics and go a couple of stepbacks for advance one.