Is FM being hold back by low specs?

[saihtam]

It is is evident that year after year that frustration rises in the forums. There is lack of understanding how some simple things go broken again that where fixed  in previous iteration of FM. Countless of arguing if the game progress is up to standards anymore. Big let downs in AI - squad building, tactical usage, transfers, training etc.

I have touched this topic other post, but feel it warrants a topic on its own. Really would love to hear maybe more tech savy people ideas and suggestions. Maybe even some truth could be told by FM developers. 

FM has always been used by lot of people and wide range of hardware users. In 10-15 years back we can agree that features and jumps that was made where pinnacles to series and brought us here. But the progress in the last 5 years is drying up . I agree that there have been added some create smaller immersive features, the UI at some point have gone faster and more simple. This is all create and good, but the core meat that is ME and AI is so volatilizing up and down like bitcoin. My own issue with the development of FM has been it specs. In 2020 we relay on CPU that has been discontinued since 2008. Yes these are just min specs but all of the game as bundel is built with these specs in mind.

Here is some list how min specs have evolved during FM time:

Football Manger 2009:

CPU: 1.4GHz or Faster / Vista: 2.0GHz or Faster

Supported Processors: Intel Pentium 4, Intel Core, AMD Athlon

RAM 512MB RAM / Vista: 1.0GB RAM

GPU 128MB *Supported Chipsets (see below)

*Supported Chipsets – Nvidia FX 5900 Ultra or greater; ATI Radeon 9800 or greater; Intel 82915G/82910GL or greater.

DX: Version 9.0c (included)

Football Manager 2011:

• Processor: Intel Celeron E1200 Dual-Core 1.6GHz / AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core QL-60
• Graphics: AMD Radeon X800 XT or NVIDIA GeForce GT 230
• System Memory: 1.5 GB RAM
• Storage: 2 GB Hard drive space
• DirectX 9 Compatible Graphics Card

Football Manager 2015:

• OS: Win Xp 32
• Processor: Intel Pentium 4 1.6GHz / AMD Athlon XP 2000+
• Graphics: AMD Radeon 9800 Pro or NVIDIA GeForce FX 5900 Ultra
• System Memory: 1 GB RAM
• Storage: 3 GB Hard drive space
• DirectX 9 Compatible Graphics Card

Football manager 2019:

• OS: Windows 7 (SP1), 8/8.1, 10 (1803/April 2018 Update) – 64-bit or 32-bit
• Processor: Intel Pentium 4, Intel Core or AMD Athlon – 2.2 GHz +
• Memory: 2 GB RAM
• Graphics: Intel GMA X4500, NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT or AMD/ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3650 – 256MB VRAM
• DirectX: Version 9.0c
• Storage: 7 GB available space

Football Manager 2020:

• OS: Windows 7 (SP1), 8/8.1, 10 (Update 1803/April 2018 or later) – 64-bit
• Processor: Intel Pentium 4 (64-bit), Intel Core 2 or AMD Athlon 64 – 2.2 GHz +
• Memory: 2 GB RAM
• Graphics: Intel GMA X4500, NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT or AMD/ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3650 – 256MB VRAM
• DirectX: Version 11
• Storage: 7 GB available space

 

Looking above specs we have been using min specs of Intel Pentium 4 that is single core CPU for 10+ years. Yes these might be bare minimum to run the game but still the game is built using these specs in mind. Or SI just lying about these sepcs? The only update they have made that is making me somewhat hopefully is that they now demand 64bit CPU (Some read if interested https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/32-bit-vs-64-bit-operating-systems/ ). We have bit pumped up for memory into 2gb and clock speed for the CPU that gives basically nothing. These look like specs that 200-300 euros phone could easily beat, even used phones that are under 100.  CPU benchmark scores are rank are abysmal for this CPU.

Going over to GPU there is not that much better situation, but bit of a pump compared to CPU. NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT was released on 2008 and they are going with the tech world to have DX 11 support, that is necessary. Not sure if this card even supports 1080p monitor. Definitely not gaming, that can barely done in 720p.

Lot of talk is that SI is good that they are able to bring to low end PC this game. But single core and these specs should been obsolete and making changes near maybe 2013-14 the latest. Really dont think anyone plays the game on these specs anyway so why take this as min mark. They are holding themselves so much back. They have to make sacrifices to accommodate lower specs and those are facts. Then we have another issue that is tablets. Have not dig into that but from some comments I have understand that ME is the same as PC versions. Dont you see a bad pattern here? Yeah they have some features cut down, but the meat of ME and AI is running on tablet same way as PC. Even tech savy persons should understand that the game is hold back.
I understand lower specs and the leap cant maybe be so drastic, but there are ways to overcome this. There is no leap even to be honest. Make regular and lite versions, bring innovation to the platform. They have the money for it, being top of game sold on steam year after year.

There should be innovation, excitement to use new technology that industry is offering. But I just dont see it sadly...

Edited April 23, 2020 by saihtam

[XaW]

Miles have said a lot about this on Twitter before, but the general idea is that SI get feedback from Steam regarding what types of specs their users actually use. And they base a lot on that, as far as I can tell. You can even take a look around the bugs forum, especially technical issues, and see that a lot of users are having issues because their specs are BELOW the recommended. So if SI were to stop supporting anything, they would eliminate some of their user base.

And the fact is that the user base of FM is not the average "gamer" user base. I know about 15-20 people that ONLY play FM, nothing else, and don't see any reason why their 7-8 year old laptop should not be enough. They don't want to buy a new pc just to play FM, and I can understand that. So if SI were to have a cutoff for supported specs for say the last 5 years only, what would happen with the FM user base? Most likely, it would decrease.

None of us know the plans for future versions, so anything could happen, but I would very surprised if they suddenly cut out support for a big part of the user base without trying to transition a lot over to Stadia or something similar. And I think that's what they are trying to do. Still, I think that things like Stadia need to mature a bit before a random person in their 50s would transition from their old laptop to using Stadia.

[destmez]

On 23/04/2020 at 11:03, XaW said:

Miles have said a lot about this on Twitter before, but the general idea is that SI get feedback from Steam regarding what types of specs their users actually use. And they base a lot on that, as far as I can tell. You can even take a look around the bugs forum, especially technical issues, and see that a lot of users are having issues because their specs are BELOW the recommended. So if SI were to stop supporting anything, they would eliminate some of their user base.

And the fact is that the user base of FM is not the average "gamer" user base. I know about 15-20 people that ONLY play FM, nothing else, and don't see any reason why their 7-8 year old laptop should not be enough. They don't want to buy a new pc just to play FM, and I can understand that. So if SI were to have a cutoff for supported specs for say the last 5 years only, what would happen with the FM user base? Most likely, it would decrease.

None of us know the plans for future versions, so anything could happen, but I would very surprised if they suddenly cut out support for a big part of the user base without trying to transition a lot over to Stadia or something similar. And I think that's what they are trying to do. Still, I think that things like Stadia need to mature a bit before a random person in their 50s would transition from their old laptop to using Stadia.

A 7 or 8 year old pc could run Football manager with better graphics,

you say that "and the fact is that the user base of FM is not the average" gamer "user base. I know about 15-20 people that ONLY play FM" but that may be because of the graphic aspect expired that there is this percentage. When you see that the games push the graphics further and further with ray-tracing the graphics cards RTX, gtx etc ... Why he would be interested in a game like fm, the strength of Fm is in these feature but let's say honest graphics its a weak point, it slows down the immersion, I have the impression that the audio part is also neglected after the second match I muted the sound.

 

Edited October 18, 2020 by destmez

[99]

4 horas atrás, saihtam disse:

There should be innovation, excitement to use new technology that industry is offering. But I just dont see it sadly...

I wouldn't mind to change computer and phone every year to whatever is the ultimate scream of new technology that the industry is offering, but each time I'm reminded that they are not exactly free, or even cheap. And for sure, of all the reasons I may have to start thinking about buying a new machine (work, hardware problems, etc), playing the only game I ever play can't be one of them.

I remember reading an old thread where someone said that the best thing of managing Neymar was to watch him play. And someone else (sorry can't recall nicknames) answered, wisely imo, that in that case the person didn't really understood what Football Manager is about. And I won't add further comments to that cause it frankly says it all

[XaW]

9 minutes ago, destmez said:

A 7 or 8 year old pc could run Football manager with better graphics,

Some could, but these are not high end stationary, they are low end laptops with only integrated graphic cards.

13 minutes ago, destmez said:

you say that "and the fact is that the user base of FM is not the average" gamer "user base. I know about 15-20 people that ONLY play FM" but that may be because of the graphic aspect expired that there is this percentage. When you see that the games push the graphics further and further with ray-tracing the graphics cards RTX, gtx etc ... Why he would be interested in a game like fm, the strength of Fm is in these feature but let's say honest graphics its a weak point, it slows down the immersion, I have the impression that the audio part is also neglected after the second match I mutated the sound.

I don't know what age you are, but a lot of FM'ers are a bit older than the average gamer. I wouldn't be surprised if most FM'ers were in their 30s or 40s, if not even higher! Most at that age don't have time to play a lot of games, and only FM is something they can spend a few hours on here and there. Hell, I watch a mate play and the 3D stuttered like crazy. I checked his preferences and everything was the lowest possible. Still, he was happy with it, and switched to 2D when he had some hours to spend.

There is a lot of brand loyalty in FM, and a lot have been playing this since the early 90s. At that point we played with commentary only as the only option, and that was quite fine. So for most, the visual aspect are nice, but not vital, to the enjoyment of the game.

And honestly, do you really thing the whole FIFA crowd would switch over from an action game like that, to a slower paced game like FM if the graphics were better? I doubt it.

That said, SI have moved forward, and FM are becoming more resource demanding, so at some point there needs to be a cut off. That's why I mentioned Stadia. I'm sure technology like that will allow SI to move away from the oldest specs, but, as I wrote, I don't think the technology is matured enough yet. In time though, I'm sure this push will happen.

[destmez]

@Xaw deep down i know the game is doomed to be like that as long as it doesn't realize their potential, the important thing is to continue improving the AI the question of improving the graphics is maybe too early ? but this question will arise sooner or later 

 

 

goodbye xaw

[LetsNotScoreGoals]

Like what the

15 minutes ago, destmez said:

@Xaw deep down i know the game is doomed to be like that as long as it doesn't realize their potential, the important thing is to continue improving the AI the question of improving the graphics is maybe too early ? but this question will arise sooner or later 

 

 

goodbye xaw

Like the other guy already touched on, the graphics isn't important and they need to focus on what makes them unique — the managing part, the match engine, and the choices you can make. The gaming market is brutal, if you want to fight against EA and Konami (FIFA and PES) by going all out on graphics and match displays, you're not going to come out alive. You'll be murdered and your original fanbase will feel alienated.

So yes it's too early to upgrade the graphics, although they have said they are hiring people in this department. I think its fine to always be a little bit behind, helps keep the price reasonable for something that's not the focus,

[saihtam]

1 hour ago, 99 said:

I wouldn't mind to change computer and phone every year to whatever is the ultimate scream of new technology that the industry is offering, but each time I'm reminded that they are not exactly free, or even cheap. And for sure, of all the reasons I may have to start thinking about buying a new machine (work, hardware problems, etc), playing the only game I ever play can't be one of them.

I dont ask to switch and buy new stuff every year. You all got that part wrong, I am not telling that the specs should be as high like some top AAA games, the graphics should be in category of FIFA or PES. That all is irrelevant. We are looking into the basic of development. The minimum CPU they benchmark themself is 20 years old, it has not been in production for 12 years, it runs on single core. I am not expecting them to up it high but something please.

 

35 minutes ago, LetsNotScoreGoals said:

Like what the

Like the other guy already touched on, the graphics isn't important and they need to focus on what makes them unique — the managing part, the match engine, and the choices you can make. The gaming market is brutal, if you want to fight against EA and Konami (FIFA and PES) by going all out on graphics and match displays, you're not going to come out alive. You'll be murdered and your original fanbase will feel alienated.

So yes it's too early to upgrade the graphics, although they have said they are hiring people in this department. I think its fine to always be a little bit behind, helps keep the price reasonable for something that's not the focus,

Yes those graphics are irrelevant. The issue is that they are unable to bring features and stabilities to the game if they need to optimize so hard for running the game. I am not saying that I know how exactly game development works etc. But it should be clear that technology wise they are holding themselves back.

It is no surprise that we wait for long time for patches and in the end those break other features. yes the simulation code is difficult to write and change, but there is also aspect of high optimization and cutting something back to fill the needs on specs.

[Gangor]

Actually I completely disagree with the OP. Sure FM does support older systems, but it can also take advantage of the latest processors in the form of more playable leagues and larger databases. I don't see the point of ditching the old tech and, as @XaW says much of the player base, just for the sake of it. In any case, many players with higher spec machines like playing using some of the more antiquated features, such as 2D matches. Yes there is room to improve in many areas (particularly the match visuals IMO) but SI have to be driven by what the game needs to get better and not what happens to be fashionable or new. 

[The Gold Guard]

You'd be surprised how many people from second/third world countries with hand-me-down PC's and Laptops that absolutely froth this franchise.

[Gangor]

6 minutes ago, The Gold Guard said:

You'd be surprised how many people from second/third world countries with hand-me-down PC's and Laptops that absolutely froth this franchise.

Great point.

[BMNJohn]

To the title question my uninformed guess is... I don't think so. If the yearly benchmarking threads like the ones linked below are any indication, you notice that as long as they hit 5.0GHz or close, there's essentially little difference between the last few flagship Intel CPUs (6700K, 7700K, 8700K, 9700K or 9900K). Obviously you're less likely to actually hit 5.0GHz with the older CPUs than with the newer ones, but it's still noteworthy. In most other modern games that are using more and more cores and threads, and assuming you're not GPU bottlenecked, you would absolutely see scaling between all these Intel CPUs. A 8700K more often than not wouldn't be trading blows even at equivalent frequencies with a 9900K. Hell, in the FM19 thread you see a 9900K basically equivalent with a 8600K when both are at 5.0GHz! FM simply doesn't scale that well across multiple cores and threads.

Sure, you can absolutely wall a modern CPU if you set up FM to do so. For example, Benchmark C for FM20 does that. In order to do so, you need to load a significant load of leagues and run them in high details. As I've written in that thread, you can make FM use more CPU resources: you just wouldn't see it in practice because it would be extremely painful (pun intended) to play due to how slow it is, especially after a few seasons when the save filesize start ballooning significantly. Most people would never see the scaling and it's a shame.

That being said, credit to SI for keeping the game playable on a variety of hardware. All we can do is bring awareness to it and hope they find a way for FM to benefit more from modern CPU trends and improvement for the average user. I do think it would bring a lot more dynamism and realism to FM if people could load more league without facing a significant performance penalty. It's going to be quite important even in the laptop/notebook market because Ryzen 4000 mobile chips absolutely slay Intel offerings, and I would suppose that quite a few people enjoy playing FM on their laptops/notebooks.

But then I'm completely uninformed about software development. So like in the benchmarking thread, it would be cool if someone from the dev team could share thoughts about where FM is going in terms of performance. And If I'm being wrong, do say it. It still would be a learning opportunity.

 

 

Edited April 24, 2020 by BMNJohn
Trimming the fat.

[f.zaarour]

Maybe i missed the point but id like to note my opinion on this. Ofcourse the company needs to look at maximize the modern techs into the game but it would be a disaster if it outplays a lower group who just likes to enjoy the game on their older laptop. Which makes the game still playable for many. For example many of us and me for sure, just like it to play on 2D. I totally have nothing with the 3D improvements. Even if i had a great laptop i would still play on 2D. So im happy that the game runs on low specs aswell, which makes it possible to run it on my laptop. If it needed much better specs and a much better laptop, i would Not buy a better laptop. If you say, oke after a few years you need an update oke, but for sure not every year.

It would be just madness like the smartphone industry where people go crazy having a new phone year after year.

Im glad that the game is playable for many people who just have an older laptop which can run the game. Im sure many wouldnt be able to afford an expensive laptop for a much asked game like FIFA or others. At the end, it is a simulation game, and for me the most important thing is aside doing squadbuilding, is having a balanced ME where you can enjoy the game. If i want great graphics and stuff i would just go play FIFA 20. 

And those with strong laptops can enjoy the game with better graphics if they use it and having more leagues and running the game faster etc. 

Edited April 24, 2020 by f.zaarour

[Padxo]

The most important point that "saihtam" brought up and seems to be being overlooked is how these low requirements may be affecting the final product in terms of ME complexity and AI decisions.

Majority of this fan base doesn't care about graphics, including me (2D 4ever) and I agree that graphics should be at the bottom of the priority list, however, looking at the state of this game right now, I can't leave to ask me if this horrible ME and lack of complexity / intelligence in AI decisions in both ME and management area (ex; coaches and similarities to real life,  PSG spends 40 million on a player who never plays for them and sells for 10 million a year,moral) is because of how limited they are in terms of hardware in order to reach the maximum number of people that they can.

I understand not wanting to "leave" some loyal fans "behind", but really? Possibly not improving this game in terms of complexity, just because some people want to play with their Pentiums? How about all those people who come into contact with the series and leave disappointed because of the problems mentioned earlier? I honestly believe that it is a bad decision to limit the developers and the potential of this game because of players with old hardware, football is the most famous sport in the world, the most played games in the world have system requirements above this game, keeping in mind this 2 points how this game will lose so many players if the requirements are higher? Would it be so catastrophic for the series? Again, just talking about improving the requirements to improve the complexity / intelligence of AI and ME.

Edited April 24, 2020 by Padxo

[alanschu14]

21 hours ago, The Gold Guard said:

You'd be surprised how many people from second/third world countries with hand-me-down PC's and Laptops that absolutely froth this franchise.

Football is a worldwide sport and the last version of EA Sports FIFA ever made for the Playstation 2 was for FIFA 14, which was approaching the end of the Playstation 3 life cycle. So I actually would not at all be surprised if the install base for a game like this is particularly world wide.

On 23/04/2020 at 02:52, saihtam said:

There should be innovation, excitement to use new technology that industry is offering. But I just dont see it sadly...

I think the emphasis here is that you don't *see* it.

But I do know that my game of FM2020 with *every* league set to playable is much more enjoyable now than it was on earlier versions of the game with improvements to things like multithreading as well as 64-bit memory addressing and the like.

9 minutes ago, Padxo said:

how these low requirements may be affecting the final product in terms of ME complexity and AI decisions.

I'd be more inclined to suggest that stuff like this is actually very challenging and wouldn't see significant improvement simply by having more CPU cycles and memory available. I'm not overly convinced that things like expanding the search space for AI decision making in a timely manner is the big issue with the ME/AI, but rather that creating a match engine that accurately mimics real people playing football in a believable way is a bigger issue here.

[BMNJohn]

I reread my post and maybe I wasn't too clear. What I think is that FM isn't held back by low specs because there are quite a few ways in which FM could (in my completely ignorant opinion) better utilise CPU processing power; especially at a time where laptops and desktop CPUs alike are moving towards less emphasis on frequency and more on parallelism. That being said and while I really don't mean that to be a jab at all, FM Touch sort of exists specifically for those who want FM but cannot reasonably play the "main" version because their hardware doesn't allow them to; or for those who prefer the simpler, no-nonsense approach FM Touch offers.

[saihtam]

@(sic)@BuzzR
Really glad to see old  topic coming more to life and maybe push SI to take some consideration to push game itself. Just sad that many people round this topic into some fifa graphics and need for super computers. It has never been for that. It is to move on from legacy and unleash capabilities that AI and the game could do.
 

 

[aj6658]

At the end of the day, this is a business in a niche market. They need to make as much money as possible to keep making these games. Taking risks is not as easy because its a niche market. They only sell around 2m copies a year. They clearly have data saying that there is a material number of people who use lower spec machines 

there are 3 options 

• Slowly increase in the minimum spec and any development of the AI/ME need to be invested with those large restraints considered at the forefront 
• Increase the minimum spec - lose players but hope a better ME/AI will bring new players in. An argument written above is that the FM gamer isnt your average gamer and that they only play FM. If that is the case they would invest in a better machine top play this. 
• Have a two tiered game. The standard game with the type of improvements we usually see each year that still caters low spec machines and a premium game which comes at a higher price point (or even a subscription model) where it has more advanced ME/AI. 

[2feet]

Currently the minimum recommended is 2 x AMD Athlon, which is circa 2006.

If they jumped forward with the minimum specs required to a PC from circa 2010, that might help?

They seem to slowly creep forward with the minimum specs each year instead, so a one-off big leap forward could be a good thing?

The result might allow more possibilities in terms of taking the game forward.

[saihtam]

2 hours ago, aj6658 said:

At the end of the day, this is a business in a niche market. They need to make as much money as possible to keep making these games. Taking risks is not as easy because its a niche market. They only sell around 2m copies a year. They clearly have data saying that there is a material number of people who use lower spec machines

They are SO lucky not to have competition. In business you should be moving  along with trends and up your game.  I still have my concerns in the downgrade from stadiums after 2017, think it was lowered just to handle potential new stuff in ME. I would assume they would need to capture new players also not holding on to older ones. Wonder if they have then data also how many newer people skip releases on drop the game, with newer hardware.

 

Only 2m copies a year is not little number. Bear in mind this is constant and hitting 1-2mil sold EVERY YEAR is huge number. There are games that sell few million one per game and in 3-5 years make a sequel. Take into consideration there is not similar marketing some games are doing that is eating most revenue for game company. Marketing is minimal for them. Dont forget they are also getting fixed cash money from Microsoft because of Gamepass. I dont assume they are making huge bangs of money, but they are no way close on the edge of staying alive.

The two tiered game is the possibility I see. Definitely might strain their workforce a bit, but there's clear option to do it with Touch version as it can be played also on PC.

[BuzzR]

I've started to talk on the other thread because I was annoyed of the same old mantra that we keep hearing every year with "low-end PCs hold us down".

You guys said what it is to say .. the business controls the drive forward. No competition, no drive for significant improvements. 

What I am really looking for is an hones approach from the company in order to stop this blame shift towards the gamers. I would like to hear a decent discussion with the community:

Guys an graphics overhaul will cost X amount of money - we cannot invest it or we want to invest in this, or we are planning to save money to do it in 2027.

Our current dev plan is A,B,C .. generics. Maybe will happen, maybe not. What do you really need now? And the community could say : maybe we can squeeze something in your next release - like set pieces, or stadium builder. I don't know. 

And the community will understand if you they will say graphics in 2028, or we are trying but we don't have money. But I just can't hear this " lower end PCs " gamers hold the game back. It's ugly and insulting.

[rusty217]

Nope. FM is held back by it being an annual release and the lack of necessity for big improvements. If you can release every year and get consistently good sales with minimal changes, why would you invest heavily into larger changes? Especially since realistically that would require an increase in staff, the annual release schedule probably keeps the SI staff very busy already, they don't have time to make big graphical improvements, so new staff would be needed to cover that. Then it's an extra risk since there's no guarantee the new staff would peform at an adequate level, especially since a large number of them would need to be recruited at the same time and they'd then just be thrown into it, no time to bed in or anything.

As long as it's an annual release don't expect much more than minor improvements to graphics (just live every other aspect of the game) every now and then. If some serious competition came up then that might change, but until then...

[DarJ]

17 hours ago, aj6658 said:

Have a two tiered game. The standard game with the type of improvements we usually see each year that still caters low spec machines and a premium game which comes at a higher price point (or even a subscription model) where it has more advanced ME/AI. 

No reasonable company wound do that because it is just a waste of money and time, unless you're Samsung or apple and you can afford to produce a product where you know for sure you're not going to make the money. And even as big as apple are, the don't make moves like that

[Rashidi]

The minimum specs are the very least needed to run a game of football manager, but it may not be the experience people want.  The game is not being optimised to play on those specs, and you won't find anyone in SI telling people to go out there and play it on minimum specs to enjoy the new animations, the data hub or even playing with 20 leagues loaded. When you are playing on those specs you might end up having to play it on 2D, the 3D might look decent but there could be artifacts if you play at it say 100% game speeds. Processing between matches could take longer. 

Being playable with those specs doesnt' mean its optimized for them, and I am not sure, but i doubt there are any min specs machines like that at SI HQ.

Its just meant to be a guide.

[DarJ]

14 hours ago, saihtam said:

Bear in mind this is constant and hitting 1-2mil sold EVERY YEAR is huge number.

it's hard to make those comparisons because those games usually don't try to replicate something real so they don't have to spend money on licenses and lawyers and no one know what those licenses agreements entails. For example with the new Champions League license, part of the agreement could be that they need to guarantee to release a game for the next five years so things like that are not in the hand of SI

[DementedHammer]

22 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

The minimum specs are the very least needed to run a game of football manager, but it may not be the experience people want.  

For giggles, I loaded up my English league level 10 save on my Intel Atom tablet yesterday lunchtime. 

I'd suggest renaming the game from Football Manager to Progress Bar Manager if I was to play the game on that system for any length of time. 🤣

The 3D view worked surprisingly well though. It certainly exceeded my expectations. 

Edited October 8, 2022 by DementedHammer

[rp1966]

37 minutes ago, DementedHammer said:

I'd suggest renaming the game from Football Manager to Progress Bar Manager if I was to play the game on that system for any length of time. 🤣

The 3D view worked surprisingly well though. It certainly exceeded my expectations. 

Doesn't surprise me.  What really hits the CPU is match day calculations - when the ME is being run for 100s of games across multiple leagues. More impact the more leagues you have active and, especially, when you have them running in full detail.  Also when you're in a transfer window and the game has to do the processing to determine the outcomes in the transfer market.  

For the match visualisation, things should be relatively lightweight at lower settings - the ME has already generated the match events. The visualiser is just showing it in graphical form. 

 

 

[BuzzR]

2 hours ago, rp1966 said:

Doesn't surprise me.  What really hits the CPU is match day calculations - when the ME is being run for 100s of games across multiple leagues. More impact the more leagues you have active and, especially, when you have them running in full detail.  Also when you're in a transfer window and the game has to do the processing to determine the outcomes in the transfer market.  

For the match visualisation, things should be relatively lightweight at lower settings - the ME has already generated the match events. The visualiser is just showing it in graphical form. 

 

 

Exactly. FM is blessed from this point of view vs other types of video games - as the computation can and IS MADE prior to graphical representation.  Whatever graphical representation would that be -2D, 3D high / medium / low quality.

This alone should stop the idea that "low-end PCs" are stopping the improvements of graphics. If graphic cards from 2008 can run the visual representation for FM23 ( per recommended specs ) then maybe this graphical representation should be the " lower settings " going forward and improve. 

But there should be a will , and there would be costs.. 

Edited October 8, 2022 by BuzzR
Spelling

[TheArsenal63]

Games have almost always had a graphics setting, why not have the top end graphics be for high spec PCs, just have it automatically detect the users graphics card and adjust accordingly. I assume this already happens but just increase the quality of what the highest setting can do.

The match engine sim part is trickier though because it can noticeably impact your experience if you increase the complexity of the engine and thus the requirement from the CPU, then players with low specs will have a bad time with slow background simming and not many nations etc.

The one thing I can't excuse (also why should we, they are a very very wealthy company with zero competitors, hold them accountable, it's ok to do that) is the absolute absence of good lighting in this game. Everything looks so bad , even baked lighting for different times of the day that match takes place would be better than what we have. The stadiums look like something I would come up with when I was in university, it's 2022 and there are indie games with low spec requirements that look amazing graphically.

And SI have 1 pitch, 1 stadium and some surrounding trees/decorations that look like someone bought them from the asset store, I'm sorry but that's honestly inexcusable. I'm not talking about the animations or the players even, just the absolutely horrendous stadiums, lighting and atmosphere.

You can't even excuse it for the low spec players because you just let them keep playing the older graphics, that's what graphics settings are for, every game out there does them.

The truth is probably that they make enough money already that they can't justify a graphics upgrade to whoever holds the purse, even if it would take just an intern probably a few months (possibly a year) to update the lighting, grass, stadiums etc. They can't/won't even commit to that.

[Gangor]

To my mine there are a couple of issues. Firstly that Graphics haven't improved a great deal in the last decade, especially when you consider the change in hardware during that time. Secondly that the game doesn't seem to parallelise tasks very well to take advantage of modern processors. I'd love for a dev to jump in and tell me I'm wrong, but honestly I haven't seen the uplift you'd expect in performance from upgrading my hardware over the years. Both of these areas could be improved without seriously impacting the people still gaming on their old pentium laptop and IMO it's about time SI got around to doing it.

[BuryBlade]

Yes I’d like to see improvements in how the match day looks. FM17 looked better in terms of stadiums, pitches and weather. FM22 is a better visual representation of the football. Combine the two.

In terms of performance, I’d be happy if they enabled the game to take advantage of multi-cores instead of running on just 1 core most of the time. 

[aj6658]

On 08/10/2022 at 08:30, DarJ said:

No reasonable company wound do that because it is just a waste of money and time, unless you're Samsung or apple and you can afford to produce a product where you know for sure you're not going to make the money. And even as big as apple are, the don't make moves like that

Apple 100% moves like that. Its the whole reason under Tim Cook they are a trillion dollar company. They fill each segment 

Mentioned why this would be a good idea is if FM wanted to expand it reach. Considering how popular football is and the amount of people who chat to friends or online about tactics e.c.t there is a massive untaped market. 

Got to ask why FM isn't doing better. Part of the reason is that when people look at the game., they see something that looks like its from the late 90's

While it will cost more and take time, if you can charge a higher price and it entices new people then it could be an option. all dependent on cost benefit 

 

[bahij37077]

FIFA Manager 14 Specs:

 

CPU: 1.8 GHz Core 2 Duo or AMD equivalent.

CPU SPEED: Info. RAM: 2 GB.

OS: Windows Vista SP1 / Windows 7/8.

VIDEO CARD: ATI Radeon HD 3600,

NVIDIA GeForce 6800GT with 256 MB VRAM. PIXEL SHADER: 3.0. VERTEX SHADER: 3.0. SOUND CARD: Yes.

Now think... (I don't know if it's allowed, but if not, I'll delete the comment.)

They're not otherworldly graphics, but they're not ugly graphics either.

Really the graphics will go on like this forever SI? I love the game and I won't stop playing for graphics, but..

[saihtam]

5 hours ago, bahij37077 said:

FIFA Manager 14 Specs:

 

CPU: 1.8 GHz Core 2 Duo or AMD equivalent.

CPU SPEED: Info. RAM: 2 GB.

OS: Windows Vista SP1 / Windows 7/8.

VIDEO CARD: ATI Radeon HD 3600,

NVIDIA GeForce 6800GT with 256 MB VRAM. PIXEL SHADER: 3.0. VERTEX SHADER: 3.0. SOUND CARD: Yes.

Now think... (I don't know if it's allowed, but if not, I'll delete the comment.)

They're not otherworldly graphics, but they're not ugly graphics either.

Really the graphics will go on like this forever SI? I love the game and I won't stop playing for graphics, but..

 

I understand the good itent you are talking and it is good comparisson, but fifa graphics are never happening and not the main goal of this thread. The complixecty of the engine and all animations etc hand made and too complex to achive something like this. Maybe in far far future.

We want to see push to better graphical fidelity for sure, for better and realistic stadiums. For me personaly the biggest want is to have more complex AI, tactics and more systems baked into the ME and the game.

[SC00P0NE]

Many modders are already complaining about a lack of fresh blood and general enthusiasm for FM.. SI really need to make some improvements so that more kids on steam start converting to FM..

[Alexb9582]

9 horas atrás, saihtam disse:

I understand the good itent you are talking and it is good comparisson, but fifa graphics are never happening and not the main goal of this thread. The complixecty of the engine and all animations etc hand made and too complex to achive something like this. Maybe in far far future.

We want to see push to better graphical fidelity for sure, for better and realistic stadiums. For me personaly the biggest want is to have more complex AI, tactics and more systems baked into the ME and the game.

Honestly I don't think it's complex, they are graphics from 8 YEARS ago, from the print he showed the game has beautiful graphics that would run on any PC As for the stadiums, I think that's another thing they should invest in, all stadiums look the same.

 

[..Valhalla..]

Weirdly - and kind of an antonym to the OP topic, I have a super computer that I only use to play games like FM, Minecraft, Cities:Skylines and so on. Nothing even remotely demanding. 

It's cool that FM remains low-spec. 

[Brother Ben]

Surely FM is great in that it scales depending on your specs?  Got a crap computer?  Just run one league.  Got a top of the range rig?  Run an entire continent.  

[kevhamster]

1 hour ago, Brother Ben said:

Surely FM is great in that it scales depending on your specs?  Got a crap computer?  Just run one league.  Got a top of the range rig?  Run an entire continent.  

Absolutely.  The "meat" of FM, which is all the calculations etc, don't require a hefty computer.  The only thing which is possibly being held back is the graphics, but for most FM players this is the least important aspect of the game.  On the new PC thread, I'm surprised by the number of people who still play using the 2D match view.

FM is very inclusive in terms of PC specs, and I think this is a good thing.

[GreenTriangle]

15 hours ago, SC00P0NE said:

Many modders are already complaining about a lack of fresh blood and general enthusiasm for FM.. SI really need to make some improvements so that more kids on steam start converting to FM..

In this case, SIGames will have to simplify the game. Kids are not attracted to games that have very good graphics but an unattractive gameplay. Maybe they will try once, then ignore the game (the next iterations). And simplifying the game means completely redesigning the match engine.

[fc.cadoni]

DICE made a hard decision for them back in 2010, after Bad Company II.
To re-write the source code for multi-core.
That was mean to leave in the dust a good amount of fan base.

The challenge is here for SEGA & SI; especially with women football. Otherwise we will see a female player playing like male player. 2024 is good year, because it is 30 y/o for SI

[saihtam]

4 hours ago, kevhamster said:

Absolutely.  The "meat" of FM, which is all the calculations etc, don't require a hefty computer.  The only thing which is possibly being held back is the graphics, but for most FM players this is the least important aspect of the game.  On the new PC thread, I'm surprised by the number of people who still play using the 2D match view.

FM is very inclusive in terms of PC specs, and I think this is a good thing.

But how old the "meat" is? I mean, it is not all about graphics or running game faster, it is constant missunderstanding when talking of lower req specs.  They are building very complex system on top of very complex system, that is old. At somepoint gotta ask if parts of FM could be better if something is rewriten from legacy side and made a bit more modern. If you base your minimal AI on low specs you have set those standards too low. It is not only changing the fact that your game runs slower.  Ofc graphics updates some part could be cool also, or varierty in stadiums, fans, celebrations etc.

If you start going backwards of the previous FM headline features you will start seeing that features coming in are not that ground breakting (ofc they can always be) But rather see like bloating some parts up with feature that really is not creating new uniqe situation, just new screens full of information that most skip or wont use, nothing AI could use to make itself smarter. Lot of headline features are new revamped screens or info that might be good for user to see, but not that much bringin up the game from AI. I think if I remember correclty we have gotten one new role for CB in the past few years, a bit changes into tactical wording to stream line it and some match fitnes or sharpness changes.

The feeling is that they very carefully adding(or reworking) few pieces here or there, becase there is some cap that they cant build on their AI or ME.

 

[forameuss]

2 hours ago, fc.cadoni said:

DICE made a hard decision for them back in 2010, after Bad Company II.
To re-write the source code for multi-core.
That was mean to leave in the dust a good amount of fan base.

The challenge is here for SEGA & SI; especially with women football. Otherwise we will see a female player playing like male player. 2024 is good year, because it is 30 y/o for SI

But you're not comparing like for like.  DICE's market for something like Battlefield is absolutely enormous, and FMs is not.  From a quick google, FM claims - from Miles itself - to have sold 1 million copies of FM22 as of August this year.  FIFA - probably your closest genre sibling (although not a direct match) sold (allegedly, according to EA so...lol) 9 million units in the first few months of its life.  So even within football it's niche, and doesn't have the pick-up-and-play nature that FIFA has (despite that product being a horrible, grasping amalgam of a casino and a pub toilet).  

Battlefield One was pretty well received, and DICE have claimed there have been 25 million players.  Now I take that number with a massive pinch of salt given they're not mentioning sales, but it's not even in the same ballpark as the reach FM has.  So whether the numbers are exaggerated or not, I expect they're along the right lines, and if we're following your line that DICE had to make a difficult decision, the decision would be magnitudes harder for SI, especially given they've repeatedly said that people would be surprised what systems people play on.  The size of the problem of scything off a good portion of your userbase is likely exponentially and inversely proportional to the size of your audience, and people seem to be keep glossing over that because they want something shiny.

[SC00P0NE]

6 hours ago, GreenTriangle said:

In this case, SIGames will have to simplify the game. Kids are not attracted to games that have very good graphics but an unattractive gameplay. Maybe they will try once, then ignore the game (the next iterations). And simplifying the game means completely redesigning the match engine.

By *kids*, I meant, like, college *kids*, not kiddie *kids*.

Basically, in order to maintain a healthy playerbase you, as the developer, have to, at least to some degree, go with the time.. It's like VHS, most youngsters wouldn't have a clue what this funky new abbreviation might mean if you asked them.. OG FM players will probably soldier on until their dying breath but most of us will eventually decide to spend more time with the family, and I said earlier that modders are already complaining that more and more of their peers have stopped modding.. I at least would most definitely stop purchasing FM if there weren't any good mods around anymore..

@saihtam is talking a lot about AI, it's about those recurring behavioral patterns of the CPU (*AI*) which make playing FM a predictable experience. Graphics are at the end of the day superficial, the real meat is what's under the hood, or bonnet.. Fifa, for example, has fancy graphics but feels boring and repetitive almost immediately once you've bought your second iteration of it..

Nice Graphics are, however, sort of like advertisement meant to capture younger gamers' attention on steam, certainly not because they're *young n' dumb*, but because they're used to certain graphical standards in this day and age.. Waving that VHS we call ME in front of their noses won't really captivate them in the short term.. @saihtam and pals alrdy elaborated on what matters in the long run..

Edited October 11, 2022 by SC00P0NE

[Consiglieri]

Why did brands like Kodak and Nokia fail? Because they failed to adapt to the market. 
Sure many "old" gamers don´t mind the graphics, but if your want to bring in new audience and expand to make the brand even stronger, you need to look at the market. 

Football fans are in all agedes, but the graphics are way to outdated, and don´t appeal to the younger generations. Amiga 500 graphics, just don´t cut it. 
I´m not taking about fifa 23 graphics, but somethings needs to change if FM on the longer run wants to stay relevant. 

When we see Frontier just released F1 Manager with sublime graphics, it really expose what FM are missing. The raceday experience is fantastic!  
The immersion into match day in FM, its just not there. The stadium looks horrible, and dont create any atmosphere on match day, it don´t reflects the clubs, and don´t get me started with what is going on, on the pitch. Its like FM gives you minesweeper (old windows game), and force you to pretend its battlefield you are playing.

I strongly suggest that SI put their focus on the matchday experience (graphics) - and cut down development of things like fans satisfaction, analyst, and agents - until the matchday experience are better.       

[grade]

No, I don't think FM is being hold back by low specs computers.

I my opinion, there is one reason: SI. They are holding back the game. This is going to divide into two reasons:

• One is their mantra of Evolution, rather then Revolution.
• They are very, very, very, very, very comfortable with the game as is.

SI is at this point very, very comfortable with the position their in and FM23 proves that. I mean, pre-sales of this game set a new record or something, without any new features announced. People are giving their thumbs up to SI they are doing a wonderful job (i disagree with this). So for SI, they truly and unequivocally are doing everything right. This slow, almost snail pace of evolution if fine by them. They are serving old tech, because, the game can be run in old systems, nothing else. Also doesn't mean they aren't doing stuff, they are, but there is no rush for them to release them, why would they. They defeated two major competitors off the market (Championship Manager and FIFA Manager), there is no competitor that plays at their level, the next competitor is probably Top Eleven, which is a Mobile game. Until the majority of their fanbase, make pressure to change (much like what happen with the FIFA games, where their fanbase actually demand the game to be better, despite defeating PES), this will be their game plan, for now, and for the future, until the fanbase says, we have enough, we want better).

No I'm not talking about these forums, sad to say we are just a very, very, very small group of the fanbase (just selling what mods tell here in the forums and sadly I have to agree with them).

1 hour ago, forameuss said:

But you're not comparing like for like.  DICE's market for something like Battlefield is absolutely enormous, and FMs is not.  From a quick google, FM claims - from Miles itself - to have sold 1 million copies of FM22 as of August this year.  FIFA - probably your closest genre sibling (although not a direct match) sold (allegedly, according to EA so...lol) 9 million units in the first few months of its life.  So even within football it's niche, and doesn't have the pick-up-and-play nature that FIFA has (despite that product being a horrible, grasping amalgam of a casino and a pub toilet). 

I'm sorry, but to my mind, that is poor excuse. Firstly many mods here state, endlessly and painfully reminds us that FIFA and FM are two different games... We get it. FIFA is more popular, perhaps is more fun to play, as the main focus is the match itself then to scroll 25 news scouting and other items, talking to agents, play 21 questions with the news media and Press Conferences and playing mini games with the scouting and training, while Juggling with player emotions, so they don't ruin the rest of the team. Curious isn't... why people prefer to play a computer game the let's you play an actual football match, then actually taking a second job. That is my main criticism of Football Manager, SI has forgotten that FM is computer game. They have done nothing to make a season shorter, this year, in fact they made it longer, with that agent stuff you probably have to do now. They say they will reduce the inbox messages... PEOPLE, this shouldn't be a problem in 2022. I mean we have this issues with inbox, for ten years and they did little to fix that, I don't really believe is gonna actually be fix now.

Sure, you can say but EA is bigger company the SI, they have more cash to burn. But I say, SI have 10 or 14 years of 3D match engine, they made this slow progress of the 3D, because they wanted it. Even Miles stated bluntly they didn't want FIFA graphics. They are comfortable with the game is at, specially when people are coming back for newer versions, without any questions. We here, are simply peasants, talking to other peasants, where part of these forums go unnoticed by them or even worse, they simply ignore it, because we are the minority of the entire fanbase. They have no need to change stuff. They will continue to add 1000 new "features", because the majority go crazy with number 1000. They had one decade to push the envelop and they decided to not to. For me I wish they made 100 new "features" and really, really push the envelop on match and graphics engine. Now I'm to believe that women's football will be the major breakthorugh we want to match and graphics... Don't count on it. Its been years since a major update on anything on this game, again evolution instead of revolution. I'm sick of this excuse...

So people, just vote with your wallets, because for me, this ain't enough to shell € 47,99 (42 pounds). We only had the Headline features, where 3/4 aren't headline features, we have got 0 other features announced, 1 feature to mobile (team talks) and 0 for Touch and Console. This just poor marketing and to be honest this ain't good enough for me to buy this game. It's the only way, for SI to actually listen to us, is actually not buying the game. They are too comfortable, their egos are too high with the recent pre-order record and what not.

PS: I bet you, that the Editor is gonna have some sort of bug, that prevents us to use it properly, and it will take months to fix it. It has been like that in the past 3 to 4 years. I don't have no incentive to buy the game on release. And also this lack of communication with us in these forums, really, really get me frustrated.

Edited October 11, 2022 by grade

[aj6658]

Last year FM hit a milestone of 33m (https://www.pcgamesn.com/football-manager-2021/football-manager-sales). So around 2m a year and further corroborated in the features reveal where Miles said they sold a couple of million. 

Football is the most popular sport in the world. . FIFA22 sold 9m in the first few months. Fifa 21 was the most popular Fifa sold 31m copies. Now I use FIFA as an example of the popularity of football games but it should be used in any other way as its mostly console driven and "pick & play" and PvP and now the ultimate team.

But the amount of people who think they know about football, who talk tactics with friends or online is massive. Each transfer window people are looking at who their team are linked to, giving an opinion. 

All of this brings the question is why only 2m is sold for FM.

• I think first off is that younger gamers/ football fans first introduction is a game that looks like its built in the late 90's. They are used high fidelity graphics now so the game looks ancient to them. Why would they pick up and play? Im the same. I cant really go back to older games like Skyrim because it looks so old. 
  • The graphics also lends to the streamers who will who introduce new generations to the game
  • Can you imagine if you had decent graphics and saw some great team goals - that wouldn't entice other players? 
• Think there has been vast improvements in helping players understand how the game works but more can be done 
• Lighter players who dont want to do a journey man or other challenges would get annoyed by the poor transfer module. It frustrates current players so imagine someone coming in and seeing stupid low offers for players 
• investment is needed in a PvP offering. Currently its too clunky 

 

[forameuss]

3 minutes ago, grade said:

I'm sorry, but to my mind, that is pure excuse. Firstly many mods here state, endlessly and painfully reminds us that FIFA and FM are two different games... We get it. FIFA is more popular, perhaps is more fun to play, as the main focus is the match itself then to scroll 25 news scouting and other items, talking to agents, play 21 questions with the news media and Press Conferences and playing mini games with the scouting and training, while Juggling with player emotions, so they don't ruin the rest of the team. Curious isn't... why people prefer to play a computer game the let's you play an actual football match, then actually taking a second job. That is my main criticism of Football Manager, SI has forgotten that FM is computer game. They have done nothing to make a season shorter, this year, in fact they made it longer, with that agent stuff you probably have to do now. They say they will reduce the inbox messages... PEOPLE, this shouldn't be a problem in 2022. I mean we have this issues with inbox, for ten years and they did little to fix that, I don't really believe is gonna actually be fix now.

It's hilariously ironic that you go after FM for being a second job, when FIFA itself has devolved into a grindy part-time job that endlessly strips you of your time, while hoping it can strip you of your wallet too.  

Plus, I literally said that they weren't a direct comparison, just that they were the closest to be able to draw a comparison.  They're both generally football games, but one has a much, much, much wider market to sell to.

 

4 minutes ago, grade said:

Sure, you can say but EA is bigger company the SI, they have more cash to burn.

I could say it, but I didn't.  I mentioned nothing about how big companies were, I specifically mentioned the products.  FM is a niche product.  FIFA isn't.  That's how it always going to be.

I'd al

 

4 minutes ago, grade said:

So people, just vote with your wallets, because for me, this ain't enough to shell € 47,99 (42 pounds). We only had the Headline features, where 3/4 aren't headline features, we have got 0 other features announced, 1 feature to mobile (team talks) and 0 for Touch and Console. This just poor marketing and to be honest this ain't good enough for me to buy this game. It's the only way, for SI to actually listen to us, is actually not buying the game. 

The one part I actually agree with.  If you're not happy with the direction the game is going in, don't buy it.  No ifs, no buts, it really is the only means to show your displeasure.  Worst case scenario, you're largely alone in that, and SI are actually going the way the majority want, but you're still 40-odd quid richer.  Best case, the numbers actually taking action make SI rethink.  

 

8 minutes ago, grade said:

PS: I bet you, that the Editor is gonna have some sort of bug, that prevents us to use it properly, and it will take months to fix it. It has been like that in the past 3 to 4 years. I don't have no incentive to buy the game on release. And also this lack of communication with us in these forums, really, really get me frustrated.

By all accounts it seems like communication used to be better, but I can absolutely see why it isn't now.  Generally, people can't be trusted to communicate effectively.  Which obviously spoils it for those that can, but hey ho.

[grade]

54 minutes ago, forameuss said:

It's hilariously ironic that you go after FM for being a second job, when FIFA itself has devolved into a grindy part-time job that endlessly strips you of your time, while hoping it can strip you of your wallet too.  

Plus, I literally said that they weren't a direct comparison, just that they were the closest to be able to draw a comparison.  They're both generally football games, but one has a much, much, much wider market to sell to.

 

By all accounts it seems like communication used to be better, but I can absolutely see why it isn't now.  Generally, people can't be trusted to communicate effectively.  Which obviously spoils it for those that can, but hey ho.

Gonna, reply to this one and another thing, as the rest either agree or not arguments from my part.

Just because Ultimate Team and Career Mode is there, doesn't mean you are obligated to play them. there are other game modes. Last year, we only did have two versions and didn't care about the users that play the third version. In FIFA haven't spent any money on it, aside from buying the game. Sure it can strip you of your wallet, if you aren't carefull, if you play Ultimate Team, but there is option of not to and save some money.

As for the lack of communication, sure we can blame trolls and what not, but I thought that was part of moderators jobs to cast a side those trolls... if it wasn't for the dysfunctional family, I call this community, that actually helps many users provided information and knowledge along the years. SI hasn't been helpful at all these years, not considering fixes (with the exeception of handfull of SI people).

SI should be grateful for this community and the Moderators... but the sentiment is not reciprocate. At least from my point of view.

Again they are fine with the decisions they made for this game, including this community.

[2feet]

Does anyone know what type of graphics are in the 3d match engine?

Are the players movements created with motion capture?

Or are they sprites?

Or something else?

Edited October 11, 2022 by 2feet