FM23 Headline Features Revealed

[paddypower]

3 minutes ago, davehanson said:

Right, but to load the game your PC has to meet minimum requirements or it won't even load - correct? 

To load FM your PC has to be capable of running the 3D ME regardless of if you use it or you still use 2D. Doesn't matter how 'choppy' the 3D engine would run, just has to be that your machine can run it.

Now add in 'another' 3D ME - a much better one with much nicer graphics etc - your 10 year old laptop still has to be capable of running it before the game will load. See.

 

Either that or you are now asking SI to make and sell 2  different FM's with different ME's.

No that's not correct. The minimum requirements are recommendations, it doesn't suddenly brick your computer. I play games with hardware below the minimum all the time.

The devs just need to lock the option if you don't have the hardware to run it.  The game then cannot crash. Job done.

[Ferocious289]

6 minutes ago, davehanson said:

So you think spending 1.5k on a laptop is reasonable then? What about students? What about people on minimum wage - 1.5k is potentially more than a months income to someone. So, no I would not say that is reasonable.

 

 

Students get student loans worth over 3k and there are payment plan options where you can buy laptops in installements. Mimimum wage workers are not working in coal mines getting 20 shillings. The mimimum wage has increased in the uk to £10 per hour so they can expect to be earning over 20k annually.

A 1.5k laptop is a drop in the ocean. I'm sorry but there is no excuses, students and minimum wage workers can offord to buy the latest apple iphones but they can't afford to invest in a new laptop

[CFuller]

1 minute ago, davehanson said:

Right, but to load the game your PC has to meet minimum requirements or it won't even load - correct? 

Not always. I've played a few games where my PC didn't meet the minimum requirements and they still ran... fine, if only on the lowest graphics settings.

I suppose you could run a new(ish) FM on an older laptop that doesn't meet the requirements. You'd just need to play it on 2D with very few leagues loaded, and even then, processing might be an issue. I haven't dared to test this out on my laptop, though, so don't quote me on it.

[davehanson]

1 minute ago, Ferocious289 said:

Students get student loans worth over 3k and there are payment plan options where you can buy laptops in installements. Mimimum wage workers are not working in coal mines getting 20 shillings. The mimimum wage has increased in the uk to £10 per hour so they can expect to be earning over 20k annually.

A 1.5k laptop is a drop in the ocean. I'm sorry but there is no excuses, students and minimum wage workers can offord to buy the latest apple iphones but they can't afford to invest in a new laptop

Yes - £10 per hour minimum wage - so by the time you have taken tax etc off you are taking home exactly £1500 per month. You are advocating someone spend their entire months wages - when they are already on minimum wage - on a laptop? Or, even better, get up to their eyes in debt to fund it?

Are you giving the current government financial advice?

[davehanson]

2 minutes ago, CFuller said:

Not always. I've played a few games where my PC didn't meet the minimum requirements and they still ran... fine, if only on the lowest graphics settings.

I suppose you could run a new(ish) FM on an older laptop that doesn't meet the requirements. You'd just need to play it on 2D with very few leagues loaded, and even then, processing might be an issue. I haven't dared to test this out on my laptop, though, so don't quote me on it.

Okay, so in the majority of cases it needs to meet the minimum specs or you risk it not launching or crashing left, right and centre during the game. Perhaps should have put it that way.

[Ferocious289]

3 minutes ago, davehanson said:

Yes - £10 per hour minimum wage - so by the time you have taken tax etc off you are taking home exactly £1500 per month. You are advocating someone spend their entire months wages - when they are already on minimum wage - on a laptop? Or, even better, get up to their eyes in debt to fund it?

Are you giving the current government financial advice?

Explain to me how these hard done by mimimum wage workers and students are using the latest apple and samsung smart phones which cost over 1k yet are using potatoe laptops from 2010?

[santy001]

I don't particularly think this thread is the place for people to explain to you how money works and how people can choose to spend their money @Ferocious289. It's fine that you don't understand, it just doesn't add anything to the thread to have you keep pointing out all the ways in which you don't understand. Hopefully this draws a line under the matter and you can go back to mentioning how you won't spend the cost of the game on FM23. 

[aj6658]

7 minutes ago, Ferocious289 said:

Explain to me how these hard done by mimimum wage workers and students are using the latest apple and samsung smart phones which cost over 1k yet are using potatoe laptops from 2010?

eh? Sound like a tory...

You're just chatting BS now - Wanna prove that all these minimum wage workers have iPhones e.c.t 

And even if they did, they spread the cost over a contract. Anything similar with laptops is far more expensive 

 

[Piperita]

It all depends on what you want from a game. I have a small laptop museum at home by now. But my budget laptop (210€ on offer, 300€ normal) from 2012 still runs a lot of modern games well enough on low settings and is still my current go-to machine. I have over 200 hours on CK3 on it for example (although to be fair, 10 are probably just loading a save ^^) and most turn-based games (AOW3, CIV) make no problems at all. Even though that laptop is absolutely out of date and should not be able to run such games. But a tiny bit of patience and some lower settings and it still works for a lot of games.  It's been ten year, so at normal cost 30€/year or 2.5€/month. Which is an absolutely fair prize for thousands of hours of entertainment and all the other thigns that can be done on it and for that monthly cost I can expect an upgrade once a decade. Or even two if one has some standards, unlike me ^^

My 11 year old gaming beast (2000€ back then) still runs quite well, even for more intensive games. It is roughly is on par with a current 500-600€ machine (only that those machines have a quarter of the weight and are way quieter). I guess on lower settings and for more casual games I could easily get another five years out of it, probably even eight to ten if I stretched. I don't expect anyone who is more casual to make such purchases for essentially one game but for those there are those budget models.

Someone said earlier something like "The specs only say your system can run it, not how well". For more casual gamers 300 bucks can last eternities, only the detail settings suffer towards the end. A look towards used or refurbished gears could add even more years. Why? Modern games that are more than just "look at that graphic!" are programmed really well and get the most out of the hardware. As long as some base requirements are met so that it can run at all, it *will* run. Just not exactly in a way most people would call "fluid".

I don't know the stats of FM-players and who plays on old potatoes (said 2012 model isn't even the worst one I used) and I really hope there are preparations made for when the balance shifts. Because I can foresee it going quite quickly someyear in the future.

[DementedHammer]

1 hour ago, dino88 said:

when is the beta anticipated to come out? tuesday?

Probably. (As Monday is a public holiday over here!) 

[(sic)]

53 minutes ago, davehanson said:

If we are using FIFA as an example, which seems to be the way people want FM to go, a dual core wont run it, so it would rule them out - you are not able to make the graphical settings that wide in any game.

 

And the argument is irrelevant. SI will know exactly what % of their customers are using what hardware. They obviously know that by improving graphics they would potentially loose a lot of players so have decided not to do it.

We're using FIFA MANAGER as an example, not FIFA. A lot of us who are talking about graphics have specifically said we DO NOT need the graphics to be on FIFA's level. Nobody's asking for modern AAA game system requirements.

Just an improvement to where the game doesn't look like it came out in 2001.

 

This whole discussion contributes to nothing anyways, and we've been going in circles for 20 pages now.
My concern is that at some point, the game simply won't be able to progress forward in any meaningful way, due to relying on users that use bad laptops. Some would argue that's already the case.
A lot of future innovation will require more processing power, maybe faster SSDs, better graphics, and all of that means system requirements will go up. If you want to create a realistic representation of football, in terms of AI, ME, Graphics, you need to innovate and raise the requirements. The question is, do SI want to create a realistic game, or are they fine with its current state? It remains to be seen in a few years, and I'm hopeful they have some big things coming in FM24. So it's not all about graphics.

I myself still use a PC that I've built 7 years ago. Even then it wasn't any sort of a high-end system, it was a midrange system that I could afford spending money on (It was less than 800eur), that was able to run every game at that time. Nowadays, I probably can't run the latest high-end games, and I'm fine with that. I'm playing games that don't require high-end systems anyways, though having one would certainly help to improve both visuals and performance. I can only imagine what sorts of systems people use, if there's such a pushback against rising the requirements.

Another important point, is that you won't need to buy a new PC/Laptop every year in order to play the game. Nobody's asking for that either. But at some point the game has to "level up" and evolve, and that means the hardware that's required to run the game needs to be better. Imagine if in 10 years time, the game still requires the same old hardware that it does now. 

[Aim_Less]

Summarizing the discussion so far  many of us are not happy with lack of new features and the lack of visual improvements .a handful of new animations are not worthwhile improvements .
A small improvement to scouting is not good enough
It seems SI decided to just not care this year and so far everything being conveyed by SI wise shows lack of care in providing a good game , you want news on  the game better sign up for FMC .
Its not like we have anything to show but better signup for that mailing list so sega can sell more of our data ....
Priorities are clearly not in the right place 

Edited October 18, 2022 by Aim_Less

[davehanson]

10 minutes ago, (sic) said:

We're using FIFA MANAGER as an example, not FIFA. A lot of us who are talking about graphics have specifically said we DO NOT need the graphics to be on FIFA's level. Nobody's asking for modern AAA game system requirements.

Just an improvement to where the game doesn't look like it came out in 2001.

 

This whole discussion contributes to nothing anyways, and we've been going in circles for 20 pages now.
My concern is that at some point, the game simply won't be able to progress forward in any meaningful way, due to relying on users that use bad laptops. Some would argue that's already the case.
A lot of future innovation will require more processing power, maybe faster SSDs, better graphics, and all of that means system requirements will go up. If you want to create a realistic representation of football, in terms of AI, ME, Graphics, you need to innovate and raise the requirements. The question is, do SI want to create a realistic game, or are they fine with its current state? It remains to be seen in a few years, and I'm hopeful they have some big things coming in FM24. So it's not all about graphics.

I myself still use a PC that I've built 7 years ago. Even then it wasn't any sort of a high-end system, it was a midrange system that I could afford spending money on (It was less than 800eur), that was able to run every game at that time. Nowadays, I probably can't run the latest high-end games, and I'm fine with that. I'm playing games that don't require high-end systems anyways, though having one would certainly help to improve both visuals and performance. I can only imagine what sorts of systems people use, if there's such a pushback against rising the requirements.

Another important point, is that you won't need to buy a new PC/Laptop every year in order to play the game. Nobody's asking for that either. But at some point the game has to "level up" and evolve, and that means the hardware that's required to run the game needs to be better. Imagine if in 10 years time, the game still requires the same old hardware that it does now. 

I have no issue with that and I agree wholeheartedly. However, some person stating that 1.5k isn't much money and every working person should be able to afford it is what I took exception to. 

And with regards to FIFA/FIFA manager - fair enough. I have not paid much attention to it to be honest. From my own point of view I couldn't give a stuff about graphics. What I mean by that is IMO the graphical representation of the ME in 3D is so bad that I still play on 2D - I would rather my imagination and DOTS do the work than the animation in 3D. Again, just from my point of view, they could make it look like FIFA and I would still use 2D - until they stop supporting that.

And it isn't because I can't - I have a really good PC and a laptop, I just prefer the 2D.

[Dagenham_Dave]

5 minutes ago, Aim_Less said:

It seems SI decided to just not care this year 

Awful comment. 

[(sic)]

4 minutes ago, davehanson said:

I have no issue with that and I agree wholeheartedly. However, some person stating that 1.5k isn't much money and every working person should be able to afford it is what I took exception to. 

And with regards to FIFA/FIFA manager - fair enough. I have not paid much attention to it to be honest. From my own point of view I couldn't give a stuff about graphics. What I mean by that is IMO the graphical representation of the ME in 3D is so bad that I still play on 2D - I would rather my imagination and DOTS do the work than the animation in 3D. Again, just from my point of view, they could make it look like FIFA and I would still use 2D - until they stop supporting that.

And it isn't because I can't - I have a really good PC and a laptop, I just prefer the 2D.

Spending 1.5k is ridiculous. If anyone wants to buy a "gaming" system, they should never buy a laptop in the first place. Also, you can get a decent laptop for much cheaper.

That's the thing though. They obviously care about visual representation of the game. Hence why they introduced the 3D mode, and why they've made a brand new animation engine last year. But everything about it is just bad for a game in 2022. Animations definitely seem to be better and better, but without textures, lighting, etc. to support that, many of us will continue to play on 2D - because the game still looks bad in 3D.

My PC is more than capable of running 3D with max settings, but 3D is horrible. I prefer 2D view anyways, because I can easily see what's going on. But having a decent 3D match representation would definitely encourage me to use it more, at least for highlights, if not for the whole match.

[Aim_Less]

7 minutes ago, Dagenham_Dave said:

Awful comment. 

Your free to disagree , awful? i am sorry but i calling things has they are clear for everyone to see.
Compare this pre release season to previous ones. the number of new features , improvements , communication from SI and participation on discussion threads . 
I have been playing FM since 2005 every year non stop and CM before that , accepting an inferior product for sake of tradition is not on my list of fun stuff to do .
 

Edited October 18, 2022 by Aim_Less

[santy001]

I think even if SI came out and said today they were moving to Unreal Engine 5 and had some amazing looking snippets from the visual side it would still take years to go live on the game. The Witcher 4 is being built in Unreal Engine is it not and CDProjektRed have said that is going to take a long time to transition when they can build from the ground up with it in mind. Moving an existing code for the ME into a new graphical engine will have a lot of challenges. 

The fact you could plan that move, spend 2/3/4 years working on it and find ultimately the ME just cannot work with it, or will take a few years more to get right and it sends you back to square one is probably a very real reason not to announce such a thing. 

[Dagenham_Dave]

1 minute ago, Aim_Less said:

accepting an inferior product for sake of tradition is not on my list of fun stuff to do 
 

Lucky you to have played the game already. 

[ImDaWeasel]

I mean, I get it with the content creators. They ain't getting paid by SI obviously, silly to think that. But they are making money from the game through their content, some exclusively as their main job ie Zealand.

So when a new FM rolls around, this is peak season for them which drives up their views on their channels/twitch etc, which in turn generates more income. Turning people off the game in an alpha preview is not in their best interests.

It's all upto you really. For me it's a very solid no for this year. There was hope that more was under the hood this year than the marathon "headline features" video shown but for me that isn't the case.

I'll happily continue playing FM22 and let this year be the first one missed for about 25 years.

[Aim_Less]

1 minute ago, santy001 said:

I think even if SI came out and said today they were moving to Unreal Engine 5 and had some amazing looking snippets from the visual side it would still take years to go live on the game. The Witcher 4 is being built in Unreal Engine is it not and CDProjektRed have said that is going to take a long time to transition when they can build from the ground up with it in mind. Moving an existing code for the ME into a new graphical engine will have a lot of challenges. 

that is absolutely true , but something needs too be done on the visual side , animations can be imported for other engines , Unreal is overkill  ( and not exactly easy to work with ) but something more manageable would be Unity for example. 
No need to reinvent the wheel but clearly no substancial effort is being made here 

[Dagenham_Dave]

Just now, Aim_Less said:

No need to reinvent the wheel but clearly no substancial effort is being made here 

It's clear you have a complete misunderstanding of the game's match engine. For there to even be the graphical representation of it that exists right now is something of a miracle. 

The graphical improvements that CAN be made are more aesthetic, like improving the lighting, the stadiums, the pitch textures, the ball, etc, as these were arguably better in older versions. As for how the match plays out, I still find it surprising that they have even managed a 3d representation of it at all. Trying to marry that up with more modern graphics/animations would be an absolute nightmare, I reckon. 

[DMaster2]

6 ore fa, CFuller ha scritto:

I have a laptop from 2010. It was a high-end 21st-century gaming laptop at the time, but it cannot run FM22, let alone modern games (I now only use it for non-gaming stuff).

Anyway... I think your comment just smells of snobbery and entitlement.

You might have an ultra-modern gaming PC - or at least be in a position where you can upgrade to one - but not all of us are as fortunate. Not all of us can afford to invest in new hardware or PCs on an annual or even biennial basis.

Also, I'm pretty sure a sizeable chunk of the community bought their laptop just to play FM. Even if they could afford to upgrade, they likely wouldn't want or need to. You might be happy to freeze out those customers so the game can look prettier for you, but SI will look at the bigger picture, and they may not want to take that risk until they feel the investment is worth it.

Calling those customers "cheap skates" or selfish or calling SI's decision to cater to them a "scam" is totally uncalled for. They are not the problem.

They invented graphic options and settings 30 years ago man...

[Aim_Less]

10 minutes ago, Dagenham_Dave said:

It's clear you have a complete misunderstanding of the game's match engine. For there to even be the graphical representation of it that exists right now is something of a miracle. 

The graphical improvements that CAN be made are more aesthetic, like improving the lighting, the stadiums, the pitch textures, the ball, etc, as these were arguably better in older versions. As for how the match plays out, I still find it surprising that they have even managed a 3d representation of it at all. Trying to marry that up with more modern graphics/animations would be an absolute nightmare, I reckon. 

I do and calling representation a miracle? are you serious right now? has much has the match engine on fifa manager sucked ( well its EA so minimum effort is a thing ) representation can be made so much better . no one here is asking for real faces or and all that jazz .
But something that actually looks like football playing and not toys on on the pitch would be nice.

 

Quote

like improving the lighting, the stadiums, the pitch textures, the ball, etc, as these were arguably better in older versions.

so if they were better in older versions wheres the improvement ?

 

Quote

modern graphics/animations would be an absolute nightmare, I reckon. 

SI is not a new studio they have been doing this for years . its not a  nightmare its not impossible its a matter of work being put into it. there's talent out there if no one  at SI has the know how .
I work with Unity on a daily basis so i am  not pulling things out of were the sun does not shine.

 

Quote

Lucky you to have played the game already. 

Show me an instance where football manager differ so much in scale from the trailers and features when it was released .

Edited October 18, 2022 by Aim_Less

[(sic)]

35 minutes ago, santy001 said:

I think even if SI came out and said today they were moving to Unreal Engine 5 and had some amazing looking snippets from the visual side it would still take years to go live on the game. The Witcher 4 is being built in Unreal Engine is it not and CDProjektRed have said that is going to take a long time to transition when they can build from the ground up with it in mind. Moving an existing code for the ME into a new graphical engine will have a lot of challenges. 

The fact you could plan that move, spend 2/3/4 years working on it and find ultimately the ME just cannot work with it, or will take a few years more to get right and it sends you back to square one is probably a very real reason not to announce such a thing. 

Which is why we're hoping they've already started working on that stuff behind the scenes. Or if they haven't, that they will consider it after seeing the feedback. I'm casually optimistic.

You are absolutely right though, and many people do seem to miss that point. Transferring stuff to a new engine isn't easy, and it requires some time. Which is why they should've started doing it already, so that in the near future (2-3 years) we have a brand new game, with a brand new engine to support it. Again, communication would've done wonders here. Just saying we're planning on doing that, don't expect it anytime soon, would've been amazing. Just like what they've done with Women's Football.

Edited October 18, 2022 by (sic)

[Mars_Blackmon]

3 hours ago, Ferocious289 said:

Here's an indepth video on the new match engine graphics and aminations and dont want to be a negative nancy but geniunely looks exactly the same as fm22 graphically. The ball bobbles more and finishing looks a bit more cleaner, other than that I don't see what could not have been added during a patch

 

Don’t get me wrong, I’m excited about the match engine “fixes” but I find it hard to believe that they couldn’t be put in a patch. The “inaccuracies” that was introduced last year were non existent but now they are being highlighted for FM23 and branded as “chaotic midfield”. It also goes without question that the ME is worked on every year so it wasn’t really needed to be mentioned as a Feature lol. 
 

Are we really calling the ability to play a useful defensive tactic a feature? 
 

if the current highlighted features were just hanging in the background and they only announced a revamp set piece creator and a road to the World Cup, the tone around here would have been different.

Edited October 18, 2022 by Mars_Blackmon

[Marko1989]

I must say that I am now actually impressed how they don't care about the details, the tactic screen is same for years. How hard is to make some changes, add some textures, or anything so we don't have to look at the same UI for years. This is impressive level of laziness

 

2021       

                                                  

 

         


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2022

       

 

2023

                                                          

[Ferocious289]

36 minutes ago, Mars_Blackmon said:

Don’t get me wrong, I’m excited about the match engine “fixes” but I find it hard to believe that they couldn’t be put in a patch. The “inaccuracies” that was introduced last year were non existent but now they are being highlighted for FM23 and branded as “chaotic midfield”. It also goes without question that the ME is worked on every year so it wasn’t really needed to be mentioned as a Feature lol. 
 

Are we really calling the ability to play a useful defensive tactic a feature? 
 

if the current highlighted features were just hanging in the background and they only announced a revamp set piece creator and a road to the World Cup, the tone around here would have been different.

 

It's all shocking stuff. What's also concerning is that the gk's are already OP in fm22 to the point it is very hard to tell the difference between a lower league gk and an elite level goalkeeper due to the fact they are all capable of consistently putting out world class save after save and now they are focusing in on boosting them even more so there is even more variations for them to make super saves.

[GreenTriangle]

12 minutes ago, Ferocious289 said:

It's all shocking stuff. What's also concerning is that the gk's are already OP in fm22 to the point it is very hard to tell the difference between a lower league gk and an elite level goalkeeper due to the fact they are all capable of consistently putting out world class save after save and now they are focusing in on boosting them even more so there is even more variations for them to make super saves.

The ratio shots on target / shots is higher in FM (40-45%) than in real life (30-35%). However, the number of goals scored is kept at a realistic level. Consequence: 1) better goalkeepers than IRL and 2) more clear chances missed by strikers than IRL

[TheAwesomeGem]

On 15/10/2022 at 13:15, Piperita said:

For me the pass completion itself isn't the problem. Higher up the pitch or for risky playmakers/aggressive wingers it is absolutely fine. I think the base reason is general number inflation. Players run a lot more in game (I am at about 20 kilometres more per game than the most running intensive teams in the BL). They usually have a lot more touches (the amount of 100+ per game is insane!). They play more passes (naturally with more possession). But the amount of shots/chances is comparable to real life. Thus a player still has about the same amount of "risky" passes forwards but if they fail, they have a lot more "safe" passes added to keep their passing success amazingly high.

If the amount of needless "safety passes" were reduced and the general amount of touches/chance were more akin to real life, the completion rates would look better. Right now there is too little general risk and more "padding" in gameplay. If we focus purely on the passing percentages per safe/medium safe/risky pass, it should look about right but the composition between the pass types is biased towards more safe options. Especially because the worse teams in the league play extra safe and with no risk and essentially just wait until quality beats them whereas in real life they more often than not take extra risks to make quick transitions forwards (good ol' hoofball!).

That's very well put. It annoys me when teams such as Burnley gets 87% passing completion and all they do is play the ball safely backwards the entire match and anytime there is pressure, they pass the ball around reactively. I hope "passing" stat has more influence to this as well as "composure" to make it feel less robotic.

[alian62]

2 hours ago, Mars_Blackmon said:

Don’t get me wrong, I’m excited about the match engine “fixes” but I find it hard to believe that they couldn’t be put in a patch. The “inaccuracies” that was introduced last year were non existent but now they are being highlighted for FM23 and branded as “chaotic midfield”. It also goes without question that the ME is worked on every year so it wasn’t really needed to be mentioned as a Feature lol. 
 

Are we really calling the ability to play a useful defensive tactic a feature? 
 

if the current highlighted features were just hanging in the background and they only announced a revamp set piece creator and a road to the World Cup, the tone around here would have been different.

Why did the keeper at 4.05 kick the ball out  to the sideline when clearly he could of picked it up . This game obviously still has issues with the match engine because no goalkeeper would of done thet but instead just picked it up ?

[Powermonger]

2 hours ago, Marko1989 said:

I must say that I am now actually impressed how they don't care about the details, the tactic screen is same for years. How hard is to make some changes, add some textures, or anything so we don't have to look at the same UI for years. This is impressive level of laziness.                                                         

To be fair, many screens need a refresh (finances, squad list, squad depth, player comparisons, home page, club info, etc) which have not see any meaningful changes for years. These old screens are so uninspiring and lacking of flair, they really make FM feel dated. 
 

I haven’t ready anything to say the Squad Planner replaces the Squad Depth, but the Squad Depth screen could be used for so much more and presented far better but it has always felt like an idea cobbled together and not refined and expanded upon. 

[Choi seung won]

Has the match engine really improved in youtubers' fm23 videos?

In particular, the movement of the inside and inverted wingers is important.

Is there a dribble or an in-play play?

[phnompenhandy]

I just watched the video of influencer Hood Gaming analysing the effect of the new Supporters' Profile feature. He wants to see if it is dynamic.

He plays one season and notes that the percentage of casual supporters decreased 1% and core supporters increased 1%. He described this as "massive".

Um, okay, but does the mere fact that the %age changes make the feature 'dynamic'? I mean, surely the key point is whether it affects the game in any way. Does it? How does fluctuating %ages of categories of supporters affect your experience as a manager?

The 'bigger picture' should remain unaltered - as in real life, if you win games you're good; if you keep losing games, your job is in jeopardy. But within that, in real life, different sets of supporters and different natures of boards do have an effect on how patient a club is with a struggling manager. So how is this reflected in this new feature? I don't think we can know if it has any effect until the full game is out and a good few seasons have been played. One season won't tell you anything, especially as he got promoted in that season. For the video to be useful, he should have taken a club like Everton and done poorly with them to see what the Supporters' Profile tab threw up.

 

[Wavelberry]

We''ll know in about 2 weeks when the first small club to big club guyse are in the top divisions. I am hoping it's really dynamic and changes as it should but, well, y'know...

[phnompenhandy]

11 minutes ago, Wavelberry said:

We''ll know in about 2 weeks when the first small club to big club guyse are in the top divisions. I am hoping it's really dynamic and changes as it should but, well, y'know...

Yeah, it's commonly the case that 'new features' are pretty much just cosmetic in their first iteration, then gradually become more effective over further editions.

 

 

Also, I commented on the video analysing low blocks, saying he just shows the goals he scores with Burnley, and not examples of his low block frustrating opponents. His reply is that they are restricted in what they can show in their videos. I thought that rather curious.

[Tonton_Zola]

8 hours ago, ImDaWeasel said:

I mean, I get it with the content creators. They ain't getting paid by SI obviously, silly to think that. But they are making money from the game through their content, some exclusively as their main job ie Zealand.

So when a new FM rolls around, this is peak season for them which drives up their views on their channels/twitch etc, which in turn generates more income. Turning people off the game in an alpha preview is not in their best interests.

It's all upto you really. For me it's a very solid no for this year. There was hope that more was under the hood this year than the marathon "headline features" video shown but for me that isn't the case.

I'll happily continue playing FM22 and let this year be the first one missed for about 25 years.

Of course many of the content creators are paid by SI.

it’s called a modern marketing strategy.

ten years ago you bought billboards, today you pay micro-influencers to make stuff.

[janrzm]

I've watched all the videos.

I'm excited for the scouting/recruitment overhaul, it looks way better. I'm not certain the DOF has been addressed in terms of them suggesting players that don't align with your club vison or wage structure etc. It would seem a shame to have overhauled recruitment and forgotten one of the head figures in that. 

Also the scouting screen, massive improvement. I wish they'd go a step further by tagging your scouts locations on the map and breaking countries down into regions but I realise I'm probably in a minority on that.

In terms of the supporter profile, it did look dynamic to a point which is promising. I'm excited by the reference to "social media following" and I'm hoping this is a gateway to seeing that represented in the financials at some future date in relation to clubs and individual players. I definitely has the ability to make clubs feel less generic if its been done right and gets built on. 

Ball movement on the ground looks much improved to me. I always felt it's movement was always more like an ice hockey puck than a ball so I'm happy with that.

In the Clayts video he discusses the manager timeline and rather embarrassingly shows a couple of his own homemade ones on photoshop which I have to say look infinitely better than the new in game version. Something like that which you could either save a digital copy of or even get printed would be a great feature to me. I have had some incredible saves over the years and they are now nothing but distant memories which is a shame given the amount of hours invested......I have feature requested this a few years ago, alas...... 

Edited October 19, 2022 by janrzm

[ImDaWeasel]

1 hour ago, phnompenhandy said:

I just watched the video of influencer Hood Gaming analysing the effect of the new Supporters' Profile feature. He wants to see if it is dynamic.

He plays one season and notes that the percentage of casual supporters decreased 1% and core supporters increased 1%. He described this as "massive".

Um, okay, but does the mere fact that the %age changes make the feature 'dynamic'? I mean, surely the key point is whether it affects the game in any way. Does it? How does fluctuating %ages of categories of supporters affect your experience as a manager?

The 'bigger picture' should remain unaltered - as in real life, if you win games you're good; if you keep losing games, your job is in jeopardy. But within that, in real life, different sets of supporters and different natures of boards do have an effect on how patient a club is with a struggling manager. So how is this reflected in this new feature? I don't think we can know if it has any effect until the full game is out and a good few seasons have been played. One season won't tell you anything, especially as he got promoted in that season. For the video to be useful, he should have taken a club like Everton and done poorly with them to see what the Supporters' Profile tab threw up.

 

It's as dynamic as the youth rating.

[ImDaWeasel]

24 minutes ago, Tonton_Zola said:

Of course many of the content creators are paid by SI.

it’s called a modern marketing strategy.

ten years ago you bought billboards, today you pay micro-influencers to make stuff.

They ain't.

[rp1966]

1 hour ago, janrzm said:

In the Clayts video he discusses the manager timeline and rather embarrassingly shows a couple of his own homemade ones on photoshop which I have to say look infinitely better than the new in game version. Something like that which you could either save a digital copy of or even get printed would be a great feature to me. I have had some incredible saves over the years and they are now nothing but distant memories which is a shame given the amount of hours invested......I have feature requested this a few years ago, alas...... 

The thing about the timeline is ... it's a really nice touch and if it had gone unannounced and we'd just discovered it in game I think people would have a better reaction to it.  As a highlighted feature, though, it just makes SI look like they're really stretching to find something to announce.

Edited October 19, 2022 by rp1966

[Wavelberry]

35 minutes ago, ImDaWeasel said:

It's as dynamic as the youth rating.

Aye, that's what I suspected. Ach well.

[santy001]

1 hour ago, Tonton_Zola said:

Of course many of the content creators are paid by SI.

it’s called a modern marketing strategy.

ten years ago you bought billboards, today you pay micro-influencers to make stuff.

It would be pretty stupid to pay content creators who have built their core audience on FM. You don't really have to advertise FM to FM players through FM content creators. Blizzard haven't ever really had to look to do that with someone like Asmongold and JoshStrifeHayes pointed out ArenaNet recently did it with him, someone who regularly talks about the positives of Guild Wars 2 and how silly it was because he just put their name as sponsors to a video he was already making about Guild Wars 2.

Reality is it would be far smarter to chuck some cash at someone like The Spiffing Brit let him find a couple of exploits in the game, or even let him know a couple that are going to be fixed come release and get a video out of that. 

[aj6658]

9 hours ago, Mars_Blackmon said:

Don’t get me wrong, I’m excited about the match engine “fixes” but I find it hard to believe that they couldn’t be put in a patch. The “inaccuracies” that was introduced last year were non existent but now they are being highlighted for FM23 and branded as “chaotic midfield”. It also goes without question that the ME is worked on every year so it wasn’t really needed to be mentioned as a Feature lol. 
 

Are we really calling the ability to play a useful defensive tactic a feature? 
 

if the current highlighted features were just hanging in the background and they only announced a revamp set piece creator and a road to the World Cup, the tone around here would have been different.

Yeah agree with the "inaccuracies". It was supposed to be the big thing last year where players knew their sprint capacity so if you over press youre gonna lose accuracy. Seems they added it last year but fixed it this year 

Ive mentioned it before, they are very much in a Tik Tok Tok cirle - Tik = adding a new feature, Tik = refining 

[alian62]

1 hour ago, santy001 said:

It would be pretty stupid to pay content creators who have built their core audience on FM. You don't really have to advertise FM to FM players through FM content creators. Blizzard haven't ever really had to look to do that with someone like Asmongold and JoshStrifeHayes pointed out ArenaNet recently did it with him, someone who regularly talks about the positives of Guild Wars 2 and how silly it was because he just put their name as sponsors to a video he was already making about Guild Wars 2.

Reality is it would be far smarter to chuck some cash at someone like The Spiffing Brit let him find a couple of exploits in the game, or even let him know a couple that are going to be fixed come release and get a video out of that. 

Well if they are not paid they are thrown a nice lunch . But its all about promoting isnt it so the nicer the lunch the better the review . Personally think reviews should be done 3 months into a game to see where it sits with its customers

[themadsheep2001]

14 minutes ago, alian62 said:

Well if they are not paid they are thrown a nice lunch . But its all about promoting isnt it so the nicer the lunch the better the review . Personally think reviews should be done 3 months into a game to see where it sits with its customers

They were given sandwiches. So hardly bought by lunches...

[FCP_Football]

12 hours ago, Ferocious289 said:

Students get student loans worth over 3k and there are payment plan options where you can buy laptops in installements. Mimimum wage workers are not working in coal mines getting 20 shillings. The mimimum wage has increased in the uk to £10 per hour so they can expect to be earning over 20k annually.

A 1.5k laptop is a drop in the ocean. I'm sorry but there is no excuses, students and minimum wage workers can offord to buy the latest apple iphones but they can't afford to invest in a new laptop

How out of touch are you?. You're forgetting rent is average 600 a month, then bills, food, 1500 is nothing a month. You sound like a Tory.

I built myself a gaming PC, but know I'm lucky to be able to afford it. Not everyone has that luxury.

 

[Powermonger]

16 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

They were given sandwiches. So hardly bought by lunches...

Were they prawn sandwiches 🥪? 

Edited October 19, 2022 by Powermonger

[themadsheep2001]

3 minutes ago, Powermonger said:

Were they prawn sandwiches 🥪? 

If they weren't then SI missed a massive trick here

[Daveincid]

vor 17 Minuten schrieb themadsheep2001:

They were given sandwiches. So hardly bought by lunches...

I've heard that the bread-culture in UK isn't that great, so the game might be even better as they told us in the videos? 

[(sic)]

1 hour ago, santy001 said:

Blizzard haven't ever really had to look to do that with someone like Asmongold and JoshStrifeHayes pointed out ArenaNet recently did it with him, someone who regularly talks about the positives of Guild Wars 2 and how silly it was because he just put their name as sponsors to a video he was already making about Guild Wars 2.

 

That's because ArenaNet are incompetent when it comes to marketing, trust me I know it  They hardly market their game at all, and when they do it's either badly done or hilariously badly done.

With good marketing, that game would be a lot more popular than it currently is.