Should Football Manager be released every 2 to 3 years?

[DarJ]

I want to start by saying that I’m in no way trying to tell SI what to do, this just to know peoples’ opinion on the topic after Zealand released a video yesterday saying they should adopt the subscription model which is a terrible idea in my opinion.

Personally, I think the game should be released every 3 years and within those 3 years they could sell database updates after every transfers window for like £5 as an add on.

The 3 years period gives them enough time to work on new big features for the next game and build up excitement while releasing little updates throughout the course of the year to fix bugs and improve little issues with the game.

The problem with this tho is that as far as I’m aware SI have to renew the license for the leagues every year so they will have to get change that and maybe pay for 3 years license but that in turn will make them increase the price of the game to make up for the 2 years where they don’t sell anything. They will also have to make agreements with fan sites that uploaded databases and make sure they no longer make databases with the updated squad after every transfer window since they will be selling those themselves as an add on.

The problem with releasing the game every year is that you don’t have enough time to make big changes and the consumers would feel like it’s just basically the same game with an updated database and annoying bugs. This way after the game is released, the have time to keep improving it and also work on the big exciting features.

This is just my 2 cents on the matter 

[fc.cadoni]

Since pre-editor is free (included in the package when you buy the game); releasing every 2-3 years with 5 pounds for an updated DB (which everyone can edited) will see SI go to "Administration". It's terrible idea. 

[Daveincid]

no, just no

[DarJ]

2 minutes ago, fc.cadoni said:

Since pre-editor is free (included in the package when you buy the game); releasing every 2-3 years with 5 pounds for an updated DB (which everyone can edited) will see SI go to "Administration

That’s why I said they will have to increase the price of the game 

[fc.cadoni]

2 minutes ago, DarJ said:

That’s why I said they will have to increase the price of the game 

If they gonna release the game, let's say FM23; without Pre-Game Editor, then I will still play FM22 and I will search for edited (free and up-to-date) databases. I am pretty sure the majority will do the same. No.

[kingjericho]

Financially: No

Gameplay: Every 2 years with additional purchasable editor and updated database

[Zemahh]

No, I enjoy the yearly FM hype. 

[Mars_Blackmon]

People who think this way tend to ignore development cycles. Delaying the game 2-3 years isn’t going to speed any process up. If you want a huge leap in the game just buy it every 2-3 years. Are you ok with FM possibly being delayed and maybe come out the 4th year since obviously you don’t want them to stick to a schedule.

 

i can’t think of any AAA titles that comes out every 2-3 years consistently without any hiccups in development.

[Johnny Ace]

Nah, give us our annual fix 

[DarJ]

5 minutes ago, Mars_Blackmon said:

People who think this way tend to ignore development cycles. Delaying the game 2-3 years isn’t going to speed any process up. If you want a huge leap in the game just buy it every 2-3 years. Are you ok with FM possibly being delayed and maybe come out the 4th year since obviously you don’t want them to stick to a schedule.

 

i can’t think of any AAA titles that comes out every 2-3 years consistently without any hiccups in development.

That’s a fair point. 
I’m pretty happy how it is right now. I can decide to skip a few years if I want.

This was just a late night thought I wanted to throw out there. I really want to hear those that say the game is the same every year, it’s directed mainly towards them 

[forameuss]

Releasing yearly, and releasing every 3 years would lead to largely similar products at the end of it.  It's really simplistic to suggest that more time automatically equals a better product in a game that is so heavily linked to a seasonal schedule.  

[KillYourIdols]

Nah. Personally I'd rather keep the current setup. I cant see major benefits to going to a "Subscription" service. For £26 a year, year in, year out, I know what I'm getting.

Quote

The problem with releasing the game every year is that you don’t have enough time to make big changes and the consumers would feel like it’s just basically the same game with an updated database and annoying bugs. This way after the game is released, the have time to keep improving it and also work on the big exciting features.

Konami have entered the chat

[mibsweden]

Every year is the best. 

[Footix]

I don't mind the annual release cycle, but I wish it had been released earlier in the season and rather add transfer/squad updates later on. Getting into it in November seems so late, the season is well underway already. When my favorite team starts their season I want to start mine.  

[jimbo22]

Not gonna happen. I do think it needs extra time to try to do something different. The game is stagnating. Even in terms of look its gone backwards. Now we get one skin, its been taken to an area where it feels the same managing one team to the next. Stadiums are all the same depending on the level you manage at.

[Weed07]

No, i play one long save per FM for around 3000 hours so i'm usually ready to start a new save when the next FM comes out.

[Britrock]

2 hours ago, Footix said:

I don't mind the annual release cycle, but I wish it had been released earlier in the season and rather add transfer/squad updates later on. Getting into it in November seems so late, the season is well underway already. When my favorite team starts their season I want to start mine.  

Miles has said the plan is to get back to a late October release, but covid and remote working is making that difficult at the moment 

[enigmatic]

Quite apart from slashing development budgets rarely leading to better games, I've no idea why people expect a match/transfer engine which has changed a massive amount in three years without many people actually playing it wouldn't be a lot buggier than one on an annual release cycle with interim patch updates,

[alian62]

They could sell subscriptions.  So you subscribe then pay a low fee for updates 

[Viking]

No thanks. The annual FM release is one of few highlights in my dark world.

[Trucce]

No, I like it the way it is. Those subscription ideas usually only works for games like World of Warcraft, but there you still have to pay for the expansions, haha. 

The last couple of years I've bought my FM's on Steam, but I have a friend that has been collecting the physical version since forever. He would be devastated. 

There's a special feeling of getting a new FM every year and I wouldn't want to trade that away for anything.

It's almost like being a kid at Christmas whenever a new FM releases. At least those are the feelings I get every time and I'm 30+.

Edited November 2, 2021 by Trucce

[Daveincid]

vor 9 Minuten schrieb Trucce:

It's almost like being a kid at Christmas whenever a new FM releases. At least those are the feelings I get every time and I'm 30+.

exactly^^ Subscription-Model reminds me more on taxes, monthly rent, insurances, tv-abo and so on.... So all the expenses we need to pay but not really happy about because they are too high anyway I don't want that FM becomes that kind of expenses^^

[XaW]

1 hour ago, prot651 said:

They could sell subscriptions.  So you subscribe then pay a low fee for updates 

I hate subscriptions for games. I want to buy the game and play it as much as I want as long as I have the hardware to run it.

I prefer the yearly version, and hope SI stick with it.

[Yuko]

4 hours ago, Footix said:

I don't mind the annual release cycle, but I wish it had been released earlier in the season and rather add transfer/squad updates later on. Getting into it in November seems so late, the season is well underway already. When my favorite team starts their season I want to start mine.  

for me, the ideal release date would be early September

[pdmalcolm]

I'm gonna go out on a limb and suggest that after 20 odd years of this, SI have got their business model pretty well dialled in. 

[baris28]

For a business persective it should be every year. Plus forums more lively and Devs response to bugs more systematic frequent by annual relase. And content creators have an economy for a living they should show something in Youtube.   But it gets expensive every year outside countries those do not use Euro or Dollar as currency. Low in inflation.

Apart from economics corners, long shots, throughball&cross ratio discussion every year. ME surely improves in somehow but key highlight of assists and goals are always in the centre of discussions. 2 step forwars 1 step backwards or vice versa running in circles lacking in real progress sometimes between versions.

 

[FrazT]

Commercially it makes no sense, so it wont happen.

[Powermonger]

I think yearly release is still best plus SI have licensing obligations to consider.

Yearly releases work better too in terms of career/team stories. I find the clear demarcation between releases helps elevate my experience and memories of teams I've managed, every year is a new adventure managing a football team. If FM moved onto a longer release cycle, that experience and yearly uniqueness would be lost and make the game more dull.

The way SI have re-arranged their development cycle to be more agile based I can see this having a bigger impact feature updates in the future.

Edited November 2, 2021 by Powermonger

[CARRERA]

I think YoY makes the most sense for a licensed sport simulation. It’s free for everyone to skip a game here and there if they feel there is not enough development. Database Updates for older Versions are available for free.

[Caketiger]

I understand the OP's point of view. I hate buying games which are unfinished or contain major bugs. I like playing lower leagues and there was a bug one year which made it hard to do that. I think the frustration grows when the same bugs have been reported year after year but do not seem to be addressed.

If the bugs make it unenjoyable to play, simply follow the advice that a few others have given above and don't buy the game every year. There probably aren't enough changes to the game for me and I haven't bought it for a few years now. May get tempted back into it this year but am sad to see Touch go.

[JordanMilly]

14 hours ago, FrazT said:

Commercially it makes no sense, so it wont happen.

Also, no, because the "live services" model, or subscriptions, are just an awful idea for any individual game.

[Iggy Hassan]

In answer to the OP...

No.

What they hell would I have to look forward to every November? Bonfire night?

[zakbrown96]

On 02/11/2021 at 17:47, Yuko said:

for me, the ideal release date would be early September

Not sure that’s a good idea with a well known EA sports game released in that month, October makes sense as the hype for that game will start to go down. 

[jeeshan2000]

One problem with annual release is i give up on playing the older version one or two months before the launch of the new. 

Summer transfers finish early September. Many teams have new players and you are tempted to start a new save to parallel your game with whats going on irl. 

But then you start wondering a new version is coming up soon, so why bother with a new save. 

Of course this is subjective and it does not have to happen this way. But a 2 year launch cycle will probably mean you may enjoy the existing version longer. 

[phnompenhandy]

My feeling is the OP (and Zealand) has identified an issue that needs discussing, but hasn't provided a satisfactory solution.

 

The core problem is a matter of diminishing returns. Like the smartphone, FM has arrived at a state where there are fewer and fewer big new features to build into the game. There is still a way to go in terms of upgrades - better stadia, FIFA-like animations, international management, sound - but year after year the 'new features' are getting less and less exciting and there is less and less reason to upgrade your version of FM. This year, the datahub is great, but that's about it, and Miles' attempts to gush over every new feature is wandering into the realms of parody. I can see a higher proportion of owners of FM21 deciding to keep playing that until the FM22 bugs are ironed out, maybe well into next year. I'm guessing next year's big feature will be the female leagues - that's discussed elsewhere, but I'm not sure how many extra sales it will actually generate.

[rusty217]

Firstly, anybody that thinks FM should use a subscription model deserves a slap. Nah, actually not even a slap, a kick in the shin and a punch in the face! Absolutely terrible idea for money grabbing scum companies only.

As for every 2-3 years, why? What "big" changes even are there? Personally I mostly care about new and improved editor stuff, but that's unlikely to ever happen regardless of how often the game releases, so I'll be disappointed either way. But for those of you that want stuff with an actual chance of happening, what even is there left that could be added?

Plus the idea of charging more for releasing left often would probably just backfire. Like, how much would you charge? £100 if it releases every year? FM ALWAYS has pretty big sales when it's close to a new version coming out, so when it's a choice between paying £100 for the brand new game, or like £10 for the 2-3 year old version... I'd take the old one every time and I very much doubt I'd be alone. Increasing the price just encourages people to wait for sales, and people know that FM will inevitably be on sale, with pretty significant discounts during the summer months too!

[rusty217]

4 hours ago, jeeshan2000 said:

One problem with annual release is i give up on playing the older version one or two months before the launch of the new. 

Summer transfers finish early September. Many teams have new players and you are tempted to start a new save to parallel your game with whats going on irl. 

But then you start wondering a new version is coming up soon, so why bother with a new save. 

Of course this is subjective and it does not have to happen this way. But a 2 year launch cycle will probably mean you may enjoy the existing version longer. 

That's entirely on you though. Nobody's forcing you to buy the new game. I've been buying every 2 years since FM18. Only buy the even numbered ones. I enjoy the existing version longer already, without being charged extra. I'm not even tempted by the new version either since I get attached to my save and my team.

[Fettucine_Alfredo]

That won't happen. Not enough money coming in.

[forameuss]

5 hours ago, phnompenhandy said:

and Miles' attempts to gush over every new feature is wandering into the realms of parody.

While I get that Miles isn't everyone's cup of Bovril, what exactly do you expect the public face of the studio to do?  Tell you that it's slim pickings this year?  

[thefmveteran86]

On 02/11/2021 at 11:55, DarJ said:

I want to start by saying that I’m in no way trying to tell SI what to do, this just to know peoples’ opinion on the topic after Zealand released a video yesterday saying they should adopt the subscription model which is a terrible idea in my opinion.

Personally, I think the game should be released every 3 years and within those 3 years they could sell database updates after every transfers window for like £5 as an add on.

The 3 years period gives them enough time to work on new big features for the next game and build up excitement while releasing little updates throughout the course of the year to fix bugs and improve little issues with the game.

The problem with this tho is that as far as I’m aware SI have to renew the license for the leagues every year so they will have to get change that and maybe pay for 3 years license but that in turn will make them increase the price of the game to make up for the 2 years where they don’t sell anything. They will also have to make agreements with fan sites that uploaded databases and make sure they no longer make databases with the updated squad after every transfer window since they will be selling those themselves as an add on.

The problem with releasing the game every year is that you don’t have enough time to make big changes and the consumers would feel like it’s just basically the same game with an updated database and annoying bugs. This way after the game is released, the have time to keep improving it and also work on the big exciting features.

This is just my 2 cents on the matter 

No, just no 100%

[duesouth]

3 hours ago, Fettucine_Alfredo said:

That won't happen. Not enough money coming in.

This - plus a "when's the beta coming?" thread only every 3 years would be no fun at all.

[grade]

I also agree, that two or three year gap between releases is a no go. Subscriptions is good for streaming, if you have 1 or 2, not 15 different things, but I'm against it in apps (looking at you Adobe).

The year release works for SI, they should stick to it. That said, I doubt if SI hasn't already study all other alternative economics and development plans to try maximise their profits further than what they have now. If one of those plans did maximise their profits and benefit them in their game development, they would have switch to that a few years ago.

If the news by Mile , they are breaking pre-order sales this year, is any indication then this yearly release model is working for them. Also don't worry, with Touch cancellation all resources will be focus on what games will remain. And if any of the Xbox or Switch version is below what SI expect sales should be, they will go the same route as Stadia version, Touch version, Live version and Linux version... cancellation.

 

Edited November 4, 2021 by grade

[thefmveteran86]

11 minutes ago, duesouth said:

This - plus a "when's the beta coming?" thread only every 3 years would be no fun at all.

That's true

[Woolly]

Having played since the very early days (when it was Championship manager) I can honestly say going to a 2-3 year cycle isn't going to work. That sort of thing may work with a management game using non-real players but the whole thing with the FM series isn't about the graphics/game play it's about the chance to manage real players (all be it data relating to real players) and get some inkling of real management. We all get a kick out of managing players we know about or teams we have heard of even if we don't know any of the players. Yearly releases allows that and takes into account the unexpected happening (ie Rashford appearing from virtually nowhere, the rapid demise of certain players/clubs etc). The yearly hype about the new release is part and parcel as are the gameplay bugs (moving to a 2-3 year pattern won't stop bugs if anything it may mean more bugs).

Don't forget that games development doesn't come cheap yes lengthening the gap between games will mean the money flow is less consistent after all who wants to buy a game which is 2 years old when there are other franchises still releasing yearly for similar types of game? 

Edited November 4, 2021 by Woolly

[MrPompey]

Absolutely Not

For commercial reasons it wont happen, look at all the sports games currently in the market that have an annual release. If this happened every 3 years then from a financial perspective you would only get 1 years worth of development updates every 3 years

From a gamer perspective you want to play a new game version every season that has the current transfer / league positional / player attribute / owners etc etc that happen for the start of each new season. Footbal irl is a new season each year, thats why the game has to follow it.

HOWEVER If I continue this logic then if every person bought 2 versions of the game instead of one perhaps we could get twice the development in each release

[gunner86]

I'd happily move to a subscription based game under the proviso that:

1. I can pay yearly (around £25-30 ought to do it

2. Annual database updates, with follow ups for January transfer window activity

3. Every year they chuck in a few new features - doesn't have to be anything big necessarily, just a bit of progress - and make refinements to the ME

4. Annual refreshes to the UI - again not always major, just keep it fresh and help integrate those new features - they could also change the year in the title to show the year of the starting season for new saves

[Daveincid]

vor 4 Minuten schrieb gunner86:

I'd happily move to a subscription based game under the proviso that:

1. I can pay yearly (around £25-30 ought to do it

2. Annual database updates, with follow ups for January transfer window activity

3. Every year they chuck in a few new features - doesn't have to be anything big necessarily, just a bit of progress - and make refinements to the ME

4. Annual refreshes to the UI - again not always major, just keep it fresh and help integrate those new features - they could also change the year in the title to show the year of the starting season for new saves

which is actually exactly the current model, or do I miss something?^^

[gunner86]

6 minutes ago, Daveincid said:

which is actually exactly the current model, or do I miss something?^^

No, you didn’t miss a thing 

 

[Daveincid]

vor 2 Minuten schrieb gunner86:

No, you didn’t miss a thing 

 

 why is irony and sarcasm for me so hard to understand

[JPChenet]

On 03/11/2021 at 11:37, JordanMillward_1 said:

Also, no, because the "live services" model, or subscriptions, are just an awful idea for any individual game.

Apart from iRacing 🤫😁