FM25 and the future.

[endlessxcircle]

As we all know FM25 is going to be seeing a big shift with the new Unity match engine. With this being the case it seems appropriate to consider the future direction of the franchise itself moving forward. Now, I'll preface this with the fact I'm not playing FM24, invested very little time into both FM23 and FM22, and probably haven't really been truly invested since FM12, but up to then I've religiously played since CM 00/01. 

A lot of my "away time" and sheer struggle to get invested in more recent editions stems from the time commitment now required to be invested to garner worthwhile in-game progress and satisfaction. There's of course several reasons for this, age and life in general being two of the biggest impactors, but a big part of it is also the direction the game has taken with it's approach to realism and desire to be FIFA with it's 3D graphics. 

The game is not particularly user friendly when it comes to picking up as a new player, and it's awful for anyone who has limited free time or other IRL commitments - even if you know how to play. This is why I think with the upcoming changes to be had with FM25, it's a great time for SI to reevaluate not only what they want the direction of the franchise to head towards, but also to heavily consider what the wider player base would like to see. 

I know myself that I'd like to see a return to a more simplified experience similar to that of the earlier days of Football Manager, where it catered for a far wider audience. New players could get into the franchise easier, older players with more time constraints could still have meaningful saves with plenty of progression, and the overall game itself presenting and functioning in a less overwhelming, bloated and clunky manner. This has really been driven home by recently returning to CM 01/02 and to a degree CM 03/04. 

Whether all this is implemented into one single main game, or if a "classic mode" is reintroduced, I don't know, but I do think we're at a point in the franchise where decisions like this need to be made for the betterment of its future. Do SI and the people want the equivalent of Microsoft Flight Simulator, or do they want something that'll cater to a far wider spread of players? 

[phnompenhandy]

My humble opinion is that it's far too early to think about this. Unity has recently outraged developers, and the big sell of FM24 has turned out to be somewhat underwhelming now the game is out. I simply won't trust anything that's said, either officially or via opinions, until much closer to the launch, and even then I'll take it with a huge pinch of salt.

[Spallo]

Being a father of five children myself, I can see where you coming from. Although I have enough time to play and enjoying FM24 a lot so far (not at all disappointed) I do see the somewhat bloated features as a problem. 

There are some ways around it for the most part esp. with the staff responsibilities and there is at least one skin, that simplifies the experience (never used it myself). Unfortunatly that is which we have to live with I think, because the direction that SI has taken has proved very beneficial for them. So I think its quite the opposite from what you are saying. Today more people play FM and it is far more beginner-friendly than older titles or CM ever were - and lets be honest - maybe a tad easier too. Unity will not change this direction. Why should it? SI is financially extremly sucessful and the majority of players seem to like their approach. And better graphics are not a bad thing, if the ME is working fine. And FM24 is great in this regard - I would never go back to the old 2D style - there is simply no point in that imo.

So in the end - you are old and seem to like the old way of things with FM/CM. And thats completely fine  I do agree, that it would be great, If we could have a classic mode, that is catered around the old CM experience for a quick daily fix of being an manager  But FM/SI does very well without that, so yeah ....

[endlessxcircle]

4 hours ago, phnompenhandy said:

My humble opinion is that it's far too early to think about this. Unity has recently outraged developers, and the big sell of FM24 has turned out to be somewhat underwhelming now the game is out. I simply won't trust anything that's said, either officially or via opinions, until much closer to the launch, and even then I'll take it with a huge pinch of salt.

Maybe so, and there's obviously a lot of water that has to pass under the bridge first, but I do think it's an important conversation to have if we're to have the franchise move forward in an improved manner from where things stand now. Even if for whatever reason the Unity engine stuff gets scrapped, changed or whatever else, the game needs some serious adjustment to make it far more accessible. 

[endlessxcircle]

1 hour ago, Spallo said:

Being a father of five children myself, I can see where you coming from. Although I have enough time to play and enjoying FM24 a lot so far (not at all disappointed) I do see the somewhat bloated features as a problem. 

There are some ways around it for the most part esp. with the staff responsibilities and there is at least one skin, that simplifies the experience (never used it myself). Unfortunatly that is which we have to live with I think, because the direction that SI has taken has proved very beneficial for them. So I think its quite the opposite from what you are saying. Today more people play FM and it is far more beginner-friendly than older titles or CM ever were - and lets be honest - maybe a tad easier too. Unity will not change this direction. Why should it? SI is financially extremly sucessful and the majority of players seem to like their approach. And better graphics are not a bad thing, if the ME is working fine. And FM24 is great in this regard - I would never go back to the old 2D style - there is simply no point in that imo.

So in the end - you are old and seem to like the old way of things with FM/CM. And thats completely fine  I do agree, that it would be great, If we could have a classic mode, that is catered around the old CM experience for a quick daily fix of being an manager  But FM/SI does very well without that, so yeah ....

The argument that the current versions are more successful needs to be taken with a pinch of salt. While I understand the general sentiment behind such a statement, it's also not a surprise given the reach the game now has, a lot which was entirely created through the older games and built on through prior titles leading to now. Due to the nature of the game it's unlikely an older title will retain greater popularity over a present day release. 

Re today's edition being far more beginner friendly is entirely wide off the mark. Maybe if you have prior experience in the game and are returning to the franchise to play it isn't as difficult, but if you're a fresh player it's a far more overwhelming venture. The sheer amount of additional detail and information, combined with a cumbersome UI make it even an overwhelming experience for returning players who've had time away. And having had recent hands on experience with both old and new, there's honestly no comparison to make between which is easier to pick up and play. If you haven't gone back and played CM 01/02 or early day FM titles recently, I highly suggest you do and you'll quickly realise the difference is night and day.

I'm old enough without being "old", and it's not that I like the old way of CM/FM per se, it's that a lot of the charm those games provided has been lost with the direction the present day editions have taken. The old adage of "less is more" really needs to be applied more, because at some point, and it's happened already to a degree, it's going to begin to push players away or discourage new ones from taking it up. There needs to be a greater balance between casual ease of use and detailed complexity, whether that's though a single title or a return of a classic mode could be argued either way. 

PS: 2D style is the far superior match view. It lets you view the full-pitch, allowing full view of your tactics, and creates a much more immersive experience as it allows your imagination to be creative. 3D is a nice gimmick that's created more issues to solve because of poor animations, glitches, and other complications. Sure, it may look nice and give an additional touch of realism but it'll never surpass the sheer functionality that 2D provides/provided. Each to their own though of course. 

[Brother Ben]

In terms of a more simplified experience SI did this with FM Classic/Touch on the PC and decided not to continue with it.

Whilst I can't be sure exactly why they pulled it the likelihood is that not enough people were playing it to justify the development costs.

A lot of people on here were complaining at the time that FM was too complicated and/or had too many press conference interactions but when it was suggested that FM Classic/Touch would be perfect for them most said they did not want to play a "watered down" version.  So sadly SI can't win in this regard.

[forameuss]

4 hours ago, phnompenhandy said:

I simply won't trust anything that's said, either officially or via opinions, until much closer to the launch, and even then I'll take it with a huge pinch of salt.

This, generally, is the sort of attitude that everyone should have.  The same people that are absolutely losing their minds over the product are probably the same people who were hyped to the nines prior to the release.  I said it prior to 24 getting released, but it didn't really matter what SI said, whether they promised nothing or promised the world.  It ultimately means nothing until you have your hands on the product and can judge for yourself.  Particularly when - unlike the vast majority of developers nowadays - it's a product that offers a free demo (although they've had issues with that too).  

It's a product of the new attitude people seem to have, where they're far happier to form their opinions based on what complete strangers think, rather than form their own.

[rp1966]

1 minute ago, Brother Ben said:

In terms of a more simplified experience SI did this with FM Classic/Touch on the PC and decided not to continue with it.

Whilst I can't be sure exactly why they pulled it the likelihood is that not enough people were playing it to justify the development costs.

A lot of people on here were complaining at the time that FM was too complicated and/or had too many press conference interactions but when it was suggested that FM Classic/Touch would be perfect for them most said they did not want to play a "watered down" version.  So sadly SI can't win in this regard.

The trouble with FM Classic/Touch was that one of the key things it 'watered down' was the database and the ability to customise the gameworld via the pre-game editor.  It was always a top request for FM Classic/Touch and was why many who preferred the more streamlined approach of FMC/FMT returned to the full-fat version.

As far as FM25 is concerned I would hope that it has been written in a much more modular fashion and that an FMC/FMT type experience can be provided as a game mode within the full game - should be possible with an appropriate skin reducing UI options and a bypass on the  unwanted (mainly interaction) modules by applying a neutral outcome to anything where the full game would go through the bypassed modules.

I can't see 2D being done away with - it's a useful diagnostic view when working out the way a tactic behaves, but the 'dotties' need to give it up if they think 3D isn't going to become an even bigger focus in FM25 - people want a match visualiser that looks like real football.

My main hope for FM25 (beyond not being the utter bugfest I'm expecting it to be) is that SI have worked out a new approach to the UI which reduces the depth of screen nesting that FM increasingly suffers from.  The SAS24 skin does a good job of providing access to lots of data from single screens by switching data in a panel and avoiding going down hierarchies of screens - maybe SI will have taken some ideas from there.

[SimonHoddle]

Trying to be FIFA! Loool. Have you seen the graphics??? But I do think the match is vital. It’s football - We should see a football match! And overall they’ve done quite a good job of replicating it. 

Miles should have been aware that the incremental change from 23-24 was inevitable with a revolution coming for 25. He must have  said this as a sales pitch to drum up a few more units. Either that or he’s unaware of his product. I’m plumping for option 1.

[forameuss]

2 minutes ago, SimonHoddle said:

 

Miles should have been aware that the incremental change from 23-24 was inevitable with a revolution coming for 25. He must have  said this as a sales pitch to drum up a few more units. Either that or he’s unaware of his product. I’m plumping for option 1.

I'm not sure what people were expecting them to say.  "Here lads, FM24 isn't going to be very good, I'd give it a swerve if I were you".  It's marketing.  Marketing often takes liberties, whether maliciously or in good faith.  It's why anything said prior to release means very little to me.  It's all just hot air until you actually have a product in your hands to form an opinion on.  The only actually interesting thing they said this year was announcing and hyping 25 before 24 was even out.  That said far more to me than anything else.

18 minutes ago, rp1966 said:

As far as FM25 is concerned I would hope that it has been written in a much more modular fashion

I could be wrong, of course, but I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of what's in 25 is existing code from previous versions.  They'll have to refactor a lot of areas, but the core stuff is likely going to stay the same.  I don't think a wholesale rewrite will really be on the cards, even with the years of build-up they seem to have had.  Visual presentation of matches will likely change.  The match engine will hopefully have a big opportunity of a rethink with the inclusion of women's football.  But a lot of the back-end core modules that make everything else play nice?  Put it this way, I wouldn't be surprised if 25 launches with the interactions module largely unchanged.  Which will be...fun.

The only certainty is that a lot of people are going to paint an unrealistic picture in their mind, hold them to that standard, and get raging as a result.  

[rp1966]

1 minute ago, forameuss said:

I could be wrong, of course, but I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of what's in 25 is existing code from previous versions.  They'll have to refactor a lot of areas, but the core stuff is likely going to stay the same.  I don't think a wholesale rewrite will really be on the cards, even with the years of build-up they seem to have had.  Visual presentation of matches will likely change.  The match engine will hopefully have a big opportunity of a rethink with the inclusion of women's football.  But a lot of the back-end core modules that make everything else play nice?  Put it this way, I wouldn't be surprised if 25 launches with the interactions module largely unchanged.  Which will be...fun.

The only certainty is that a lot of people are going to paint an unrealistic picture in their mind, hold them to that standard, and get raging as a result.  

I would certainly expect a lot of the logic to be carried over as is - it has had 20+ years of evolution to get where it is - but I would hope that  the process of moving that code across to Unity has forced them to clean up some of the accumulated technical debt (and associated long-term bugs) that must be there.  I guess we'll find out - I have pretty low expectations given the shift to a new platform, but I'm hoping it's going to mark a clear generational shift from FM24.

[ForTheLoveOfTheGame]

People want more depth, not less. Which is why FM Classic got dropped and the same reason FM Mobile is struggling too.

Less repetitive interactions would be good though. Would save a decent amount of time throughout a save.

[forameuss]

46 minutes ago, ForTheLoveOfTheGame said:

People want more depth, not less. Which is why FM Classic got dropped and the same reason FM Mobile is struggling too.

Less repetitive interactions would be good though. Would save a decent amount of time throughout a save.

"People" aren't one homogenous lump.  More choice is always going to be better as long as they can find a way to do it efficiently without taking attention away.

[bigmattb28]

I'd rather they make 'the most complete edition of FM' the actual most complete edition before FM25 comes out

[Jack Currie]

1 hour ago, ForTheLoveOfTheGame said:

People want more depth, not less. Which is why FM Classic got dropped and the same reason FM Mobile is struggling too.

Less repetitive interactions would be good though. Would save a decent amount of time throughout a save.

Completely agree with this. I feel as though the game is being watered down far too much and being made simplistic and easy.

[Wizard boy]

I’m expecting fm25 to be pretty similar to 24 but with the new engine. Happy to be proved wrong though. 

[dunk105]

What's wrong with improving the graphics? Our entire work culminates in matches themselves, so it can only be a good thing that work continues on both improving the match engine itself, and bringing a (hopefully) more realistic presentation of this. Its certainly not a case of SI "desiring to be FIFA" , as from both what they have said regarding this and seeing match engine improvements presentation is not the only reason for making this change.

Personally I'm very hopeful for next year, Im aware of this releases flaws but finding 24 hugely enjoyable despite them, much of that is from the match engine improvements such as player movement meaning we can mix roles we could never do before due to this such as wingers and wingbacks, particularly with little tweaks such as wingers being able to now cut inside, or choose which way they go.

Edited November 30, 2023 by dunk105

[forameuss]

7 minutes ago, dunk105 said:

What's wrong with improving the graphics? Our entire work culminates in matches themselves, so it can only be a good thing that work continues on both improving the match engine itself, and bringing a (hopefully) more realistic presentation of this. Its certainly not a case of SI "desiring to be FIFA" , as from both what they have said regarding this and seeing match engine improvements presentation is not the only reason for making this change.

Personally I'm very hopeful for next year, Im aware of this releases flaws but finding 24 hugely enjoyable despite them, much of that is from the match engine improvements such as player movement meaning we can mix roles we could never do before due to this such as wingers and wingbacks, particularly with little tweaks such as wingers being able to now cut inside, or choose which way they go.

Two things.  One, it (potentially) goes against the clear strategy SI have to maximise their player base.  The more oomph a system needs for the game, the less people that are able to buy the game.  They've said before that people would be surprised at just how poor some of the systems people play on are, and SI have all those numbers.  Of course you can try and cater to all sides, but then it becomes a question of priorities.

Two, the reason EA can give the kind of presentation they do is because a game of FIFA is basically just a sequence of poorly strung together canned animations vaguely resembling a football match.  This is probably equal parts intention (the game is always going to be a bit more "arcadey") and incompetence (I mean...look at it), but the match engine is relatively rudimentary, so you can sculpt sequences to play that out and concentrate on it looking as good as it can be.  Getting that same presentation from a much more complex ME would be a much, much bigger task.  And I'd argue that if we're going down the scales route of cost vs benefit, I'm not convinced all that effort would really be worth it in the long run.  I'd rather the money and resources that got sunk into that was spread better around the entire game.  I'd take them regressing to text-only if it meant that they had great strides across the rest of the game.  A pretty match isn't going to be much salve to the wounds if player interactions are still dreadful, and the game remains incredibly sterile.

[SPE3D]

6 hours ago, endlessxcircle said:

PS: 2D style is the far superior match view. It lets you view the full-pitch, allowing full view of your tactics, and creates a much more immersive experience as it allows your imagination to be creative. 3D is a nice gimmick that's created more issues to solve because of poor animations, glitches, and other complications. Sure, it may look nice and give an additional touch of realism but it'll never surpass the sheer functionality that 2D provides/provided. Each to their own though of course. 

The current match engine is the best match engine they have ever come up with and with the move to unity, 3D and much better graphics are here to stay and rightly so.

[eXistenZ]

FM23: Miles issued an apology on how this version isnt up to scratch with what they envisioned and they want to move forward

FM24: Miles issues an apology on how they "dropped the ball" and that they want to move forward.

 

Have a wild guess at what FM25 will be

[Dagenham_Dave]

47 minutes ago, eXistenZ said:

Have a wild guess at what FM25 will be

A game that people will scream and shout about regardless of how good or bad it is. 

So, just like all the previous ones. 

[endlessxcircle]

9 hours ago, SPE3D said:

The current match engine is the best match engine they have ever come up with and with the move to unity, 3D and much better graphics are here to stay and rightly so.

Never said 3D graphics needed to go in fairness. What I did state was that it's a bit of a gimmick to draw people in and create something more visually enticing, as such it also creates wider problems because you're going to get people complain about things like the fluidity, the animations, the way certain skills or sequences are played out, etc. We've seen all of that happen already, and it'll continue to happen until it's "perfected". 

My personal preference is 2D, even through I grew up on text only and have used 3D in the past, I always return to the 2D style because it's smoother, provides wider tactical overview and details, and I enjoy the imaginative element it provides that's entirely lost in 3D because you see exactly what happens. That's just me.

I just think the wider aspect of the game itself needs far more attention and it shouldn't have to come at the cost of more emphasis being put onto the 3D side of things. There needs to be a better balance between how it's been handled.

 

Edited December 1, 2023 by endlessxcircle

[SimonHoddle]

17 hours ago, forameuss said:

Two things.  One, it (potentially) goes against the clear strategy SI have to maximise their player base.  The more oomph a system needs for the game, the less people that are able to buy the game.  They've said before that people would be surprised at just how poor some of the systems people play on are, and SI have all those numbers.  Of course you can try and cater to all sides, but then it becomes a question of priorities.

Two, the reason EA can give the kind of presentation they do is because a game of FIFA is basically just a sequence of poorly strung together canned animations vaguely resembling a football match.  This is probably equal parts intention (the game is always going to be a bit more "arcadey") and incompetence (I mean...look at it), but the match engine is relatively rudimentary, so you can sculpt sequences to play that out and concentrate on it looking as good as it can be.  Getting that same presentation from a much more complex ME would be a much, much bigger task.  And I'd argue that if we're going down the scales route of cost vs benefit, I'm not convinced all that effort would really be worth it in the long run.  I'd rather the money and resources that got sunk into that was spread better around the entire game.  I'd take them regressing to text-only if it meant that they had great strides across the rest of the game.  A pretty match isn't going to be much salve to the wounds if player interactions are still dreadful, and the game remains incredibly sterile.

Wow. You’d be happy to revert to text only. I mean you can watch as text only anyway.

im a football fan and therefore quite like watching football. The thought of this game going backwards makes me shiver. In all fairness the developers do a pretty good job of replicating football and that’s to be commended. I don’t want to read some pointless text saying my fb is crossing the ball in when actually he’s been block tackled, I want to see it happen.

I’m sorry but Anyone asking a football game, which has developed to the point of a realistic match, to remove the actual football is not a football fan. You want spreadsheets and data but not the beautiful game!?

[forameuss]

2 hours ago, SimonHoddle said:

Wow. You’d be happy to revert to text only. I mean you can watch as text only anyway.

im a football fan and therefore quite like watching football. The thought of this game going backwards makes me shiver. In all fairness the developers do a pretty good job of replicating football and that’s to be commended. I don’t want to read some pointless text saying my fb is crossing the ball in when actually he’s been block tackled, I want to see it happen.

I’m sorry but Anyone asking a football game, which has developed to the point of a realistic match, to remove the actual football is not a football fan. You want spreadsheets and data but not the beautiful game!?

That's what you took from that post?  Completely discounting the part after it?  Think you need to stop the harrumphing over half a sentence and actually finish reading it.

But in case you can't get past it again, I'll ask a direct question relating to it.  Would you be happy if all other systems in the game were essentially frozen and not progressed, but you got a slick match presentation?  If so, good for you, but I wouldn't.  There are so, so many bigger issues with the game than how it looks, and the whole point that you seem to have missed is that given those problems, I would be happy in the hypothetical for the visual side to regress if it meant that the rest of the game was brought up to an acceptable level.  That better?

Edited December 1, 2023 by forameuss

[SimonHoddle]

5 hours ago, forameuss said:

That's what you took from that post?  Completely discounting the part after it?  Think you need to stop the harrumphing over half a sentence and actually finish reading it.

But in case you can't get past it again, I'll ask a direct question relating to it.  Would you be happy if all other systems in the game were essentially frozen and not progressed, but you got a slick match presentation?  If so, good for you, but I wouldn't.  There are so, so many bigger issues with the game than how it looks, and the whole point that you seem to have missed is that given those problems, I would be happy in the hypothetical for the visual side to regress if it meant that the rest of the game was brought up to an acceptable level.  That better?

Sorry if i misinterpreted the bit where you said ‘I’d take them regressing to text only’. What I read from that is you’d be ok with them regressing to text only. Doh!

I would like an even spread of development - all areas to receive due consideration and player interaction etc to improve incrementally. I assume next year will be a Great Leap Forward and not before time. But I will always argue the most important part of a football game should be the match and the more accurate that looks (graphically) and the more realistically it plays (ME) that will ultimately define a football game.

And considering the amount of work that’s already gone into a pretty strong ME I’m not sure if you’re right in saying everything else will suffer at the MEs expense. IMO, and it ain’t worth that much, the amount of time it will take to create a realistic player interactions is vast. Question for you @forameuss what would great player interactions look like for you? Do you want an individual personality for every player on database or does it come down to a few more options for questions on a drop down menu? Think about how difficult the likes of GTA find it to create genuinely real interactions and think about the investment that goes into their games which really focus on interactions. I think you’re asking for something which would be incredibly time consuming. So if it’s a guns vs butter debate writ as ME vs other parts of game, I choose ME. 

also. I’m really not being aggressive about this. Sometimes the written word comes out stronger than intended. I respect your opinions and it’s important SI hear all sides. I just get worried when anyone starts talking about compromising the match - which they did graphically after 2017 and it was bloody awful for years. 

Edited December 1, 2023 by SimonHoddle

[forameuss]

7 minutes ago, SimonHoddle said:

Sorry if i misinterpreted the bit where you said ‘I’d take them regressing to text only’. What I read from that is you’d be ok with them regressing to text only. Doh!

I would like an even spread of development - all areas to receive due consideration and player interaction etc to improve incrementally. I assume next year will be a Great Leap Forward and not before time. But I will always argue the most important part of a football game should be the match and the more accurate that looks (graphically) and the more realistically it plays (ME) that will ultimately define a football game.

Fair enough, a misunderstanding.

It was all a hypothetical, obviously a proper spread of development is the ideal, if not always the reality.  Every single person is going to have a different idea about what the priority should be, and the vast majority of those are going to be rendered irrelevant because the only real one that matters is SI's opinion.  As for "the match", you're conflating two areas.  The Match Engine - as in how it plays - is probably the most important part of the game.  It's the most complex, and ultimately everything in the game hangs off of that in some way or another.  But how it looks is separate in a lot of ways, and for me that's the bit I put very little importance in.  The text only hypothetical still works in that case if the ME driving what is happening is still being improved on.

11 minutes ago, SimonHoddle said:

And considering the amount of work that’s already gone into a pretty strong ME I’m not sure if you’re right in saying everything else will suffer at the MEs expense. IMO, and it ain’t worth that much, the amount of time it will take to create a realistic player interactions is vast. Question for you @forameuss what would great player interactions look like for you? Do you want an individual personality for every player on database or does it come down to a few more options for questions on a drop down menu? Think about how difficult the likes of GTA find it to create genuinely real interactions and think about the investment that goes into their games which really focus on interactions. I think you’re asking for something which would be incredibly time consuming. So if it’s a guns vs butter debate writ as ME vs other parts of game, I choose ME. 

I don't think I ever said "everything else will suffer at the ME's expense".  The ME has its own team.  I think you're taking my hypothetical too literally.  Again, I'm separating the two parts of the match engine.  

As for the player interactions question, then yes, we need to tend towards interactions actually having context and a sense of being more than just a wild swing of decisions sitting inside an impenetrable iron box.  Step 1 would be getting rid of the "wild swing" element and not having players act mental.  Step 2 would be taking a big step and building in context.  Simplifying it of course, but none of that is particularly easy.  None of the things needing improved are.  But it's still necessary.  And far more important, in my opinion, than a match looking prettier.

At the end of the day, look at the "headline" features that have been promised in the past few years.  25 is a special case, but outside of that, how often do we get one generational leap in a module, let alone in multiple?  I don't think the "taking resources away" argument is hollow, and it probably holds more weight here than it should.

[endlessxcircle]

9 hours ago, SimonHoddle said:

I would like an even spread of development - all areas to receive due consideration and player interaction etc to improve incrementally. I assume next year will be a Great Leap Forward and not before time. But I will always argue the most important part of a football game should be the match and the more accurate that looks (graphically) and the more realistically it plays (ME) that will ultimately define a football game.

On this for a moment.

Wouldn't it make more sense to put the majority of the time, attention, and focus into developing the fundamental components that the game itself virtually lives and dies by, and having them function in the most optimal manner possible? The big three that've always been at the forefront of the franchise and make it what it is - tactics, recruitment and development. 

What use is having visually stunning graphics if the fundamentals lag behind and ruin the general playability? We all know the game can function, and arguably also thrive, without a 3D component.

The more the franchise heads towards trying to produce the football equivalent of Microsoft Flight Simulator the finer the margins become, to the point where bugs become more game breaking. 

Can't help but feel this is a good time to re-evaluate for the franchise and actually have the developers and such earn their keep for once. 

[SimonHoddle]

16 hours ago, endlessxcircle said:

On this for a moment.

Wouldn't it make more sense to put the majority of the time, attention, and focus into developing the fundamental components that the game itself virtually lives and dies by, and having them function in the most optimal manner possible? The big three that've always been at the forefront of the franchise and make it what it is - tactics, recruitment and development. 

What use is having visually stunning graphics if the fundamentals lag behind and ruin the general playability? We all know the game can function, and arguably also thrive, without a 3D component.

The more the franchise heads towards trying to produce the football equivalent of Microsoft Flight Simulator the finer the margins become, to the point where bugs become more game breaking. 

Can't help but feel this is a good time to re-evaluate for the franchise and actually have the developers and such earn their keep for once. 

Haha. I think they do earn their keep!

the above discussion really does highlight the pressure on SI. so many opinions and requests. You’re completely right about the more accurate the ME gets, the bigger the gaps seem. But I don’t know what you mean saying the game thrives without a 3D engine. Sales have more than doubled in the last few years with a 3D engine and, according to you, poor fundamentals. 

It would be interesting to hear what a real life football manager describes as the key parts of management. I bet training comes top. But how do you replicate training in a computer game? When championship manager and football manager split, CM did visuals for training to give a feel for it. That game died. Would a RL FM say player interaction is vitally important? Not sure, you hear many players say the manager hardly talks to me. Communication is delegated.

So complex for SI. all areas should be invested in and improved but please remember a football game should have a football match as its jewel in the crown…IMO

[qwerty22]

On 30/11/2023 at 19:50, eXistenZ said:

FM23: Miles issued an apology on how this version isnt up to scratch with what they envisioned and they want to move forward

FM24: Miles issues an apology on how they "dropped the ball" and that they want to move forward.

 

Have a wild guess at what FM25 will be

microtransactions 

Edited December 2, 2023 by qwerty22

[endlessxcircle]

6 hours ago, SimonHoddle said:

Haha. I think they do earn their keep!

the above discussion really does highlight the pressure on SI. so many opinions and requests. You’re completely right about the more accurate the ME gets, the bigger the gaps seem. But I don’t know what you mean saying the game thrives without a 3D engine. Sales have more than doubled in the last few years with a 3D engine and, according to you, poor fundamentals. 

It would be interesting to hear what a real life football manager describes as the key parts of management. I bet training comes top. But how do you replicate training in a computer game? When championship manager and football manager split, CM did visuals for training to give a feel for it. That game died. Would a RL FM say player interaction is vitally important? Not sure, you hear many players say the manager hardly talks to me. Communication is delegated.

So complex for SI. all areas should be invested in and improved but please remember a football game should have a football match as its jewel in the crown…IMO

Sales are somewhat of a skewed marker to be using to justify the popularity of a game like Football Manager. It's always likely, and I'm sure history probably showcases this if you go back, but sales of each new release top the prior editions in most cases. The gaming landscape has also massively changed since the first initial FM release and what it's like now, particularly with social media and technology being more accessible to a wider spread of people. The premise of the game would still sell with or without a 3D engine, just as it once did. Which is my point, it's not a necessity for the game to function, to sell, or to be enjoyed, even if many do appreciate it. 

I'd imagine a real life manager would be surprised by just how much non managing related matters the Football Manager games allows the user to control. Realistically, Football Manager the game is more about being a combination of various roles within the football world itself such as owner, director of football, scout, etc on top of being a manager. As much as SI may strive to provide realism it's never going to fully replicate real life management in the same way. And hey, if a real life manager said player interaction isn't a vital component I'm all for it, particularly as someone that finds it one of the most tedious components of the modern editions lol.

All areas should be invested in, but there are areas that also require greater priority over others until they function in an efficient and optimal manner. If this was FIFA I'd agree, but it's a management game within the football world, one that, as stated before, thrived for years on end without a 3D visual of matches. It shouldn't be the focal point of the game, not until the actual fundamental management related components are humming along well. When the core of the game works as intended, then by all means focus on the 3D side of things. But putting the attention into the 3D side first while the functionality of the core experience lags is entirely backwards IMO. 

[SuperMeppen]

Like the OP, my last real involvement with the FM franchise was back in FM12 (which I started playing again for a bit earlier in the year), though I did try playing FM21 but it was just so full of bloat and stuff that was just not enjoyable. And even on a decent PC it took so long to get through - it took hours to get through a game week, and I never messed with tactics or training. I think it says something that CM01/02 still has such an active community around it.

I think, in truth, this franchise was lost to me a long time ago and is never coming back. SI are locked-in to providing at least the same amount of depth currently, and stuffing in further features that don't really add much other than even more bloat (in my opinion etc).

[alian62]

On 02/12/2023 at 08:31, endlessxcircle said:

On this for a moment.

Wouldn't it make more sense to put the majority of the time, attention, and focus into developing the fundamental components that the game itself virtually lives and dies by, and having them function in the most optimal manner possible? The big three that've always been at the forefront of the franchise and make it what it is - tactics, recruitment and development. 

What use is having visually stunning graphics if the fundamentals lag behind and ruin the general playability? We all know the game can function, and arguably also thrive, without a 3D component.

The more the franchise heads towards trying to produce the football equivalent of Microsoft Flight Simulator the finer the margins become, to the point where bugs become more game breaking. 

Can't help but feel this is a good time to re-evaluate for the franchise and actually have the developers and such earn their keep for once. 

Sort of agree but in today's world of having this game on Xbox , PS5 etc the graphics have become important and they have to be good to project the game to new players . Think we have long past the results being pasted in Text formats and 2D and that just doesn't cut it in this day and age.  I have always said having poor graphics is like a movie with a silly ending . It ruins the whole movie !! . You do all the work as a manager to then see it played out with bad graphics is well,  a disappointment . But yes a lot more work to be done internally with fundamental components.  And personally I'm getting a bit miffed with these promises that never happen . 

[endlessxcircle]

3 hours ago, alian62 said:

Sort of agree but in today's world of having this game on Xbox , PS5 etc the graphics have become important and they have to be good to project the game to new players . Think we have long past the results being pasted in Text formats and 2D and that just doesn't cut it in this day and age.  I have always said having poor graphics is like a movie with a silly ending . It ruins the whole movie !! . You do all the work as a manager to then see it played out with bad graphics is well,  a disappointment . But yes a lot more work to be done internally with fundamental components.  And personally I'm getting a bit miffed with these promises that never happen . 

How much of the market is held by Xbox and PS5 players? I get needing, or wanting, to attract players on other platforms, but the main market is held by those who traditionally play the game on a PC/Laptop. Surely if you're playing on a console like the above, and you're wanting a visual football match, you'd play FIFA or whatever it's called now. As for text and 2D formats not cutting it in this day and age, that's certainly untrue to a degree. Full text commentary is probably used little by most, but there's still a solid core of players who retain preference for the 2D matches - I myself am one of those. Much like I've said before on it, 2D still provides the best tactical overview for seeing everything that's going on in a match. It's great for making any necessary tweaks and adjustments. And personally, I also enjoy both the imaginative component it creates and the hit of nostalgia. 

While I don't quite agree with your analogy, I understand thee is obviously a demand for the 3D side of things. I just don't believe it should be at the forefront of priorities, or marketed as being a primary component of the game. It's the cherry on top of the cake, not the cake itself. Without the latter being strong, the former is kinda redundant no matter how good it may taste (or in a 3D sense, look).

[alian62]

2 minutes ago, endlessxcircle said:

How much of the market is held by Xbox and PS5 players? I get needing, or wanting, to attract players on other platforms, but the main market is held by those who traditionally play the game on a PC/Laptop. Surely if you're playing on a console like the above, and you're wanting a visual football match, you'd play FIFA or whatever it's called now. As for text and 2D formats not cutting it in this day and age, that's certainly untrue to a degree. Full text commentary is probably used little by most, but there's still a solid core of players who retain preference for the 2D matches - I myself am one of those. Much like I've said before on it, 2D still provides the best tactical overview for seeing everything that's going on in a match. It's great for making any necessary tweaks and adjustments. And personally, I also enjoy both the imaginative component it creates and the hit of nostalgia. 

While I don't quite agree with your analogy, I understand thee is obviously a demand for the 3D side of things. I just don't believe it should be at the forefront of priorities, or marketed as being a primary component of the game. It's the cherry on top of the cake, not the cake itself. Without the latter being strong, the former is kinda redundant no matter how good it may taste (or in a 3D sense, look).

They have really only just started doing Xbox and PS5 so it will egt bigger and with the new UNITY engine its going to explode . But they cant sacrifice one for another 

[SimonHoddle]

6 hours ago, endlessxcircle said:

Sales are somewhat of a skewed marker to be using to justify the popularity of a game like Football Manager. It's always likely, and I'm sure history probably showcases this if you go back, but sales of each new release top the prior editions in most cases. The gaming landscape has also massively changed since the first initial FM release and what it's like now, particularly with social media and technology being more accessible to a wider spread of people. The premise of the game would still sell with or without a 3D engine, just as it once did. Which is my point, it's not a necessity for the game to function, to sell, or to be enjoyed, even if many do appreciate it. 

I'd imagine a real life manager would be surprised by just how much non managing related matters the Football Manager games allows the user to control. Realistically, Football Manager the game is more about being a combination of various roles within the football world itself such as owner, director of football, scout, etc on top of being a manager. As much as SI may strive to provide realism it's never going to fully replicate real life management in the same way. And hey, if a real life manager said player interaction isn't a vital component I'm all for it, particularly as someone that finds it one of the most tedious components of the modern editions lol.

All areas should be invested in, but there are areas that also require greater priority over others until they function in an efficient and optimal manner. If this was FIFA I'd agree, but it's a management game within the football world, one that, as stated before, thrived for years on end without a 3D visual of matches. It shouldn't be the focal point of the game, not until the actual fundamental management related components are humming along well. When the core of the game works as intended, then by all means focus on the 3D side of things. But putting the attention into the 3D side first while the functionality of the core experience lags is entirely backwards IMO. 

Yh I do think you’re being very speculative when you say it thrived for years so would thrive again without 3D. The genie is out of the bottle. You see  the viscerally angry comments on this forum about the time SI severely reduced match graphics quality from 17 to 18, which really does show how important match graphics are to many players.

Maybe we need a poll???

[SimonHoddle]

1 hour ago, endlessxcircle said:

How much of the market is held by Xbox and PS5 players? I get needing, or wanting, to attract players on other platforms, but the main market is held by those who traditionally play the game on a PC/Laptop. Surely if you're playing on a console like the above, and you're wanting a visual football match, you'd play FIFA or whatever it's called now. As for text and 2D formats not cutting it in this day and age, that's certainly untrue to a degree. Full text commentary is probably used little by most, but there's still a solid core of players who retain preference for the 2D matches - I myself am one of those. Much like I've said before on it, 2D still provides the best tactical overview for seeing everything that's going on in a match. It's great for making any necessary tweaks and adjustments. And personally, I also enjoy both the imaginative component it creates and the hit of nostalgia. 

While I don't quite agree with your analogy, I understand thee is obviously a demand for the 3D side of things. I just don't believe it should be at the forefront of priorities, or marketed as being a primary component of the game. It's the cherry on top of the cake, not the cake itself. Without the latter being strong, the former is kinda redundant no matter how good it may taste (or in a 3D sense, look).

I love how much debate this has created! I do respect your opinion but….It is an utter fallacy to say if you enjoy playing on Xbox you should play fifa instead. They are two very distinct games. People keep saying if you like 3 D graphics you like FIFA. My son plays fifa, I can’t stand it. It’s an arcade game about making you the player’s. FM has never tried to be anything like this. SI has simply recognised that, surprise surprise, showing a football match in a game about football increases realism. And guess why they do it…..market research tells them this will shift more units. In the mid 2020s the thought of reverting to a text only game would be a sad reflection on their abilities to create a realistic football management game.

[endlessxcircle]

2 hours ago, SimonHoddle said:

Yh I do think you’re being very speculative when you say it thrived for years so would thrive again without 3D. The genie is out of the bottle. You see  the viscerally angry comments on this forum about the time SI severely reduced match graphics quality from 17 to 18, which really does show how important match graphics are to many players.

Maybe we need a poll???

I suppose that may hinge on how the rest of the game functions, and of course what people value the most when it comes to playing. I think if the games foundations were executed flawlessly, or near enough, most players wouldn't mind if the ME was 2D only. I could see maybe some of the newer players, and by new I'm talking those who've really only experienced FM in its 3D state, might find it a bit more of a struggle. However, us older players who've either played with text only, or largely grew up on the 2D versions, wouldn't have much of an issue at all. The fact we'd be getting a more polished game as whole would far outweigh a lack of 3D. 

You raise a good point about the angry comments seen about the match graphic quality, but this kinda highlights my exact point of why 3D is, to a degree, a hinderance. We're never going to get a perfect 3D engine, and because it's 3D and players can view matches in a manner similar to that of watching actual football, it allows for finger margins, an increase in problems, and inevitably complaints. Maybe it doesn't happen with every release, but it'll only take one to get it wrong or have problems and it'll open a can of worms.

A poll would be interesting, but also wouldn't tell us anything we didn't already know either. I say that because FM itself caters for a very specific age demographic these days, I wouldn't expect a 15 or 16 year old kid to prefer 2D when they've known nothing but 3D. Where as older players who have experience with text or 2D have kinda been squeezed out in more recent years, this is largely down to the time constraints of adulthood not meshing well with a franchise that's become more bloated and therefore time consuming to make progress through. I'd fully expect 3D to come out on top. 

Again though, not saying 3D doesn't have a place. It just shouldn't be what the game itself revolves around.

 

 

[endlessxcircle]

2 hours ago, SimonHoddle said:

I love how much debate this has created! I do respect your opinion but….It is an utter fallacy to say if you enjoy playing on Xbox you should play fifa instead. They are two very distinct games. People keep saying if you like 3 D graphics you like FIFA. My son plays fifa, I can’t stand it. It’s an arcade game about making you the player’s. FM has never tried to be anything like this. SI has simply recognised that, surprise surprise, showing a football match in a game about football increases realism. And guess why they do it…..market research tells them this will shift more units. In the mid 2020s the thought of reverting to a text only game would be a sad reflection on their abilities to create a realistic football management game.

I want the debate, I want people to actually voice themselves (constructively of course), and for hopefully SI to take a bit of notice. At the end of the day I want to see a better game, as I'm sure we all do. There's been a long term problem with this community continuing to voice their displeasure yet still turn around and hand over money for products that quite honestly just aren't up or par or as promised. Then hang for updates and bug fixes for weeks, if not months, just to amend issues that shouldn't have even made release.

With the upcoming switch to Unity, I think this is a really good time to re-evaluate where the game is at, what we want, and what the best way to approach that is. 

Again, you're basing what I said seemingly on the notion that I want 3D removed entirely, I don't. All I'm asking is for the attention to be moved away from this until SI actually produce a game where its fundamental components work efficiently and effectively. There's no point having a pretty looking 3D match to view if everything that a player needs to do before even getting to a match day is cumbersome, or broken altogether. 

Put it like this. Would you be satisfied with an FM game that had Cyberpunk like graphics, yet had fundamental issues when it comes to core elements with player recruitment, injuries, broken leagues, player registration, UI, etc? 

I don't think you would. I think like most of us you'd much prefer to have an FM title with faultless (or near enough) fundamentals, a cleaner more user-friendly UI, and everything that's promised on the tin to work as advised, even if that means a 2D engine for the time being. 

I know which one appeals to me more.

[enigmatic]

4 hours ago, endlessxcircle said:

You raise a good point about the angry comments seen about the match graphic quality, but this kinda highlights my exact point of why 3D is, to a degree, a hinderance. We're never going to get a perfect 3D engine...

This argument works better in reverse. Getting a 3D engine which is cosmetically better than the current one is trivially easy with the right resources, and getting better motion captured animations is realistically achievable with today's technology.

On the other hand ensuring "the games foundations were achieved flawlessly or near enough" is an impossible goal even with infinite development resource and processing power, because nobody agrees what perfect (or even "a bit better" is). If we look at the most regular requests for improvements on the forums, people want:

The transfer market to involve AI clubs building their squads smartly without loads of superfluous players and pointless signings, but also for them to compete aggressively for players and unwanted players to find buyers as soon as offered out at a bargain price. Also for it not to be too easy to mop up all the wonderkids from poorer leagues but their clubs shouldn't make unrealistically high fee demands and those players shouldn't want to stay at smaller clubs on lower wages or demand regular starts before they're good enough to deserve them. 

Tactics should be easier to learn but also much more flexible but also more difficult not to exploit that flexibility to destroy the AI, and clubs should exactly hit their real world levels playing football that's recognisably their style but also adapt to your tactical changes to be harder to beat and copy the most successful tactics and use their players' individual characteristics more effectively, and the effectiveness of stuff like gegenpressing should be much more dependent on attributes but also the game shouldn't overrate physical attributes or work rate. Overall it should play more like real world football and be harder but also play more like the particularly easy and unrealistic FM17...

So the choice of what to expend extra resources on improving is between "make a 3D engine using the same tech everyone else does" or "make it squarer but also more circular".

Then you've got to take into account "Better 3D" sells extra copies to pay back it's extra development costs in numbers which "Even GrouchyForumUser agrees this incarnation of the transfer market plays better" wouldn't do...

[grade]

The match and tactics and database side, is absolutly brilliant (I hope the new graphic engine, will further the experience on that regards), but the rest of the game is a hard slog, my view is simply a waste of time. Thank God, that SI put a feature that you can delegate these useless mechanics. You may wonder why? Quite easily, me doing them or not is the exact same outcome. I win seasons with top teams, doing them or not. I struggle in lower leagues doing them or not.

There is negative side to this and felt it especially this year. Reading the new features (aside from match and graphical engines improvements), it was just meh... just meh... Sure there is certain value in them, but it continues with the sacrafice of speed and game side of FM. I really felt so numb, reading the blogs, it didn't spark anything (no jory or anger). The communication from "Miles" a few months back I had more hope for this game, then when features were announced.

For FM25, I do expect the new graphic engine to be mind blowing, but for the rest of the game it will remain to be snooze fest, just... meh!

 

[WizbaII]

I don't understand this discussion. FM have gone to a lot of trouble to enable different playstyles from those who like to watch every second of their game to those who want to watch the game in 5 min to those who want to simulate the match in 5 seconds. What is the point of this discussion? If the point is to suggest that FM 12 is better than FM 24 or 25, then I disagree.

[SimonHoddle]

12 hours ago, endlessxcircle said:

I suppose that may hinge on how the rest of the game functions, and of course what people value the most when it comes to playing. I think if the games foundations were executed flawlessly, or near enough, most players wouldn't mind if the ME was 2D only. I could see maybe some of the newer players, and by new I'm talking those who've really only experienced FM in its 3D state, might find it a bit more of a struggle. However, us older players who've either played with text only, or largely grew up on the 2D versions, wouldn't have much of an issue at all. The fact we'd be getting a more polished game as whole would far outweigh a lack of 3D. 

You raise a good point about the angry comments seen about the match graphic quality, but this kinda highlights my exact point of why 3D is, to a degree, a hinderance. We're never going to get a perfect 3D engine, and because it's 3D and players can view matches in a manner similar to that of watching actual football, it allows for finger margins, an increase in problems, and inevitably complaints. Maybe it doesn't happen with every release, but it'll only take one to get it wrong or have problems and it'll open a can of worms.

A poll would be interesting, but also wouldn't tell us anything we didn't already know either. I say that because FM itself caters for a very specific age demographic these days, I wouldn't expect a 15 or 16 year old kid to prefer 2D when they've known nothing but 3D. Where as older players who have experience with text or 2D have kinda been squeezed out in more recent years, this is largely down to the time constraints of adulthood not meshing well with a franchise that's become more bloated and therefore time consuming to make progress through. I'd fully expect 3D to come out on top. 

Again though, not saying 3D doesn't have a place. It just shouldn't be what the game itself revolves around.

 

 

I think it’s been answered below but the reply to your comment above that you will never get perfect ME is easily translated to every other part of the game. You’ll never get a perfect anything, so why prioritise eg transfers as they will be almost impossible to perfect, or training, or interaction etc etc

i really respect your arguments though and can see you truly care for the game. I think our opinions just prove how difficult it is for SI to please us punters! And believe me I’ve been frequently at the front of the queue doling out criticism of recent versions quality.

[grade]

3 hours ago, WizbaII said:

I don't understand this discussion. FM have gone to a lot of trouble to enable different playstyles from those who like to watch every second of their game to those who want to watch the game in 5 min to those who want to simulate the match in 5 seconds. What is the point of this discussion? If the point is to suggest that FM 12 is better than FM 24 or 25, then I disagree.

In my personal opinion, I just defend, this overprotective, laser focus on the reality side of FM, while at the same time, just leaving the game side of FM, is the wrong way to do it.

So yes, you can put all the bells and whistles to the game, if doesn't deliver the right balance between the two, yes for me the old games will be superior, the newly shiny FM.

[busngabb]

On 30/11/2023 at 03:50, endlessxcircle said:

As we all know FM25 is going to be seeing a big shift with the new Unity match engine. With this being the case it seems appropriate to consider the future direction of the franchise itself moving forward. Now, I'll preface this with the fact I'm not playing FM24, invested very little time into both FM23 and FM22, and probably haven't really been truly invested since FM12, but up to then I've religiously played since CM 00/01. 

A lot of my "away time" and sheer struggle to get invested in more recent editions stems from the time commitment now required to be invested to garner worthwhile in-game progress and satisfaction. There's of course several reasons for this, age and life in general being two of the biggest impactors, but a big part of it is also the direction the game has taken with it's approach to realism and desire to be FIFA with it's 3D graphics. 

The game is not particularly user friendly when it comes to picking up as a new player, and it's awful for anyone who has limited free time or other IRL commitments - even if you know how to play. This is why I think with the upcoming changes to be had with FM25, it's a great time for SI to reevaluate not only what they want the direction of the franchise to head towards, but also to heavily consider what the wider player base would like to see. 

I know myself that I'd like to see a return to a more simplified experience similar to that of the earlier days of Football Manager, where it catered for a far wider audience. New players could get into the franchise easier, older players with more time constraints could still have meaningful saves with plenty of progression, and the overall game itself presenting and functioning in a less overwhelming, bloated and clunky manner. This has really been driven home by recently returning to CM 01/02 and to a degree CM 03/04. 

Whether all this is implemented into one single main game, or if a "classic mode" is reintroduced, I don't know, but I do think we're at a point in the franchise where decisions like this need to be made for the betterment of its future. Do SI and the people want the equivalent of Microsoft Flight Simulator, or do they want something that'll cater to a far wider spread of players? 

I think the removal of FM Classic/Touch or whatever it was called on PC was a mistake. There should definitely be an option to strip the game back to just transfers, matches, coaches and contracts as it's clearly what a lot of people want. There is some of that with the mobile version, but they wrapped that in the ridiculous Netflix subscription model so a lot won't play it. For me there should be three game modes. FM Classic (Features similar to early FM/late CM titles), FM Core (The default FM version that the majority of players use) and FM Hardcore (The core game, but with more realistic pressure on managers, more difficult squad building, less influence and power available to the manager and more tactical difficulty).

As for FM25, I've said before the decision was brave and totally necessary. FM was a franchise in decline, each iteration was too similar to the previous one and the features being added were largely of low value. Having the new engine for games and the new UI is long overdue. It has needed this for probably 5 years now and it's so good to see them taking the risk like this. If anything, if they wanted to be more like FIFA, they could simply have kept the same engine, UI and graphics and just rolled out a yearly update with little to no effort like EA does. Whilst there are a lot of hardcore FM fans who'll claim the visuals aren't important, they are. A fresh, impressive new UI and engine will draw fans in from other titles, like FIFA, growing the game. It'll increase immersion as well, making the game feel that bit more real. Watching your generic players jerk around, teleport and move unrealistically also makes it harder to see what's going on. I'm awful at the game tactically and I think a lot of that is because the game currently just isn't good at making it obvious where you are succeeding or failing tactically because the animation and graphics are so bad.

[alian62]

38 minutes ago, busngabb said:

I think the removal of FM Classic/Touch or whatever it was called on PC was a mistake. There should definitely be an option to strip the game back to just transfers, matches, coaches and contracts as it's clearly what a lot of people want. There is some of that with the mobile version, but they wrapped that in the ridiculous Netflix subscription model so a lot won't play it. For me there should be three game modes. FM Classic (Features similar to early FM/late CM titles), FM Core (The default FM version that the majority of players use) and FM Hardcore (The core game, but with more realistic pressure on managers, more difficult squad building, less influence and power available to the manager and more tactical difficulty).

As for FM25, I've said before the decision was brave and totally necessary. FM was a franchise in decline, each iteration was too similar to the previous one and the features being added were largely of low value. Having the new engine for games and the new UI is long overdue. It has needed this for probably 5 years now and it's so good to see them taking the risk like this. If anything, if they wanted to be more like FIFA, they could simply have kept the same engine, UI and graphics and just rolled out a yearly update with little to no effort like EA does. Whilst there are a lot of hardcore FM fans who'll claim the visuals aren't important, they are. A fresh, impressive new UI and engine will draw fans in from other titles, like FIFA, growing the game. It'll increase immersion as well, making the game feel that bit more real. Watching your generic players jerk around, teleport and move unrealistically also makes it harder to see what's going on. I'm awful at the game tactically and I think a lot of that is because the game currently just isn't good at making it obvious where you are succeeding or failing tactically because the animation and graphics are so bad.

Hardly a Franchise is decline ?? Record sales for FM23 so you can't say that

[busngabb]

4 hours ago, alian62 said:

Hardly a Franchise is decline ?? Record sales for FM23 so you can't say that

Commercially no. Covid no doubt helped significantly as people stayed at home and got bored and refound FM and Gamepass opened it up to a lot of new players too. But in terms of the development of the game and it's improvement arc, it had definitely stopped improving. You could compare a 7 or 8 year old version of the game to the current one and you would be hard pressed to find any material differences. If anything it got worse graphically every year until this year as well. This is what makes FM25's new engine and UI so brave and ambitious. They didn't have to do it, they could have cashed in for a few more years. But they've pushed to improve and I'm all for that.

Edited December 5, 2023 by busngabb

[Dagenham_Dave]

On 03/12/2023 at 14:17, enigmatic said:

Getting a 3D engine which is cosmetically better than the current one is trivially easy with the right resources

 

What most people tend to forget with this is, yes, it might be 'trivially easy' to make the game look 'cosmetically better', but this big upscale in cosmetics still has to deal with the millions of calculations per second that the match engine is based on. It's not FIFA with it's limited palette of build up play and movement (honestly the ME is night and day between the two). To be able to marry FM's ME with FIFA's graphics might be the dream, but that's never happening for a long, long time. 

In short, it's nowhere near 'trivially easy' to make it look so much better cosmetically, even with the right resources. 

[grade]

5 hours ago, busngabb said:

I think the removal of FM Classic/Touch or whatever it was called on PC was a mistake. There should definitely be an option to strip the game back to just transfers, matches, coaches and contracts as it's clearly what a lot of people want. There is some of that with the mobile version, but they wrapped that in the ridiculous Netflix subscription model so a lot won't play it. For me there should be three game modes. FM Classic (Features similar to early FM/late CM titles), FM Core (The default FM version that the majority of players use) and FM Hardcore (The core game, but with more realistic pressure on managers, more difficult squad building, less influence and power available to the manager and more tactical difficulty).

As for FM25, I've said before the decision was brave and totally necessary. FM was a franchise in decline, each iteration was too similar to the previous one and the features being added were largely of low value. Having the new engine for games and the new UI is long overdue. It has needed this for probably 5 years now and it's so good to see them taking the risk like this. If anything, if they wanted to be more like FIFA, they could simply have kept the same engine, UI and graphics and just rolled out a yearly update with little to no effort like EA does. Whilst there are a lot of hardcore FM fans who'll claim the visuals aren't important, they are. A fresh, impressive new UI and engine will draw fans in from other titles, like FIFA, growing the game. It'll increase immersion as well, making the game feel that bit more real. Watching your generic players jerk around, teleport and move unrealistically also makes it harder to see what's going on. I'm awful at the game tactically and I think a lot of that is because the game currently just isn't good at making it obvious where you are succeeding or failing tactically because the animation and graphics are so bad.

I agree that ending FM Classic was a mistake.

Not sure if making three different games is the way to go, but I wish that there was a way to adapt FM has FM classic with the click of a button. What I'm saying is the same game, but it removes (or hides) most of the fluff and makes the season even faster... However not sure there is interest in that by the customers because from the SI part of things, you can simply forget about it.

In terms of evolution, I disagree, there was evolution, but I think it was an evolution in the wrong direction.

[Cometdude]

Far too early to speculate. There are some very, very good games made with unity and there are some very very bad games.

 

Personally a prettier version of the current 3D would be great but not if it comes at the expense of loading or processing times.

[busngabb]

52 minutes ago, grade said:

I agree that ending FM Classic was a mistake.

Not sure if making three different games is the way to go,

 

Sounds a lot, but really isn't. The Classic would just be the core game with sections removed and their impact removed. The Hardcore mode is just the core game but with more realistic restrictions on squad building and ramped up sliders/impacts of doing things right/wrong tactically etc.