SI Skip FM10

[Wiggz]

I don't think moving the release date is necessarily the answer. What we need is more eyes on the game during the run in. The testers we had this year all did as much as anyone could expect but I think we simply needed more, and for enough time that we have a shot at fixing all the main issues for release.

Paul...by all means then...but with my "cynical" hat on, and given the fact that again my point has been that I think money is speaking louder than ever, is that going to be made a priorit at the expense of profit?? I certainly wouldn't sign off on that if my shareholding dividend (or naturalised other - depending on .co status) was to be dliuted based on this?

If more eyes on the ground will help then so be it...the "skip 10" idea was another way to achieve this.

[digsy11]

Paul...by all means then...but with my "cynical" hat on, and given the fact that again my point has been that I think money is speaking louder than ever, is that going to be made a priorit at the expense of profit?? I certainly wouldn't sign off on that if my shareholding dividend (or naturalised other - depending on .co status) was to be dliuted based on this?

If more eyes on the ground will help then so be it...the "skip 10" idea was another way to achieve this.

Why not put your name down in the Beta tester thread.

[Wiggz]

Why not put your name down in the Beta tester thread.

Ironically, I was doing that before nipping here when I saw an updated post

[Nomis07]

I don't think moving the release date is necessarily the answer. What we need is more eyes on the game during the run in. The testers we had this year all did as much as anyone could expect but I think we simply needed more, and for enough time that we have a shot at fixing all the main issues for release.

Why didn't you have more then?

[Matt ex SEGA]

Probably because last time we tried an extended Beta someone broke the T's and C's and dumped their copy up on the web for all to see...

[Nomis07]

Probably because last time we tried an extended Beta someone broke the T's and C's and dumped their copy up on the web for all to see...

Indeed, but it's not like anything has changed since this release. That happened pre 09 and it will have happened pre 10, so it doesn't really explain why it's acceptable for FM10 but not for FM09.

[Ranbir]

Probably because last time we tried an extended Beta someone broke the T's and C's and dumped their copy up on the web for all to see...

Stardock allow public testing to all that pre-order the game. They're the main fans you want locked in and they're the ones that will be most committed to help provide constructive feedback on the game - since they've pre-ordered and will want a good solid game.

My concern isn't skipping 10 or not. It is if 09 can still get some support. Surely match engine updates aren't too draining on resources?

[Matt ex SEGA]

Indeed, but it's not like anything has changed since this release. That happened pre 09 and it will have happened pre 10, so it doesn't really explain why it's acceptable for FM10 but not for FM09.

Don't get that comment. We don't want the game publicly available when it's not in appropriate condition to be played. If it's just spread far and wide it inevitably reaches consumers who don't understand it's a Beta and raises comments about product quality.

All of that said, I guess SI are looking at it again given PaulC's thread asking for testers at the top of the forum.

Stardock allow public testing to all that pre-order the game. They're the main fans you want locked in and they're the ones that will be most committed to help provide constructive feedback on the game - since they've pre-ordered and will want a good solid game.

My concern isn't skipping 10 or not. It is if 09 can still get some support. Surely match engine updates aren't too draining on resources?

Those players play the demo and provide feedback from there. We'll look for ways to deliver a public beta but if it can't be delivered securely it can do more harm than good...

There's been no comment to this point about whether there'll be further patches for 09, but SI traditionally have released one in Feb to coincide with new transfer data.

[Ranbir]

Thanks Matt.

But what if FM Live gets an update to the match engine in April. Could that also be offered to FM09? Just the latest ME version, nothing else is really necessary.

[Nomis07]

Don't get that comment. We don't want the game publicly available when it's not in appropriate condition to be played. If it's just spread far and wide it inevitably reaches consumers who don't understand it's a Beta and raises comments about product quality.

All of that said, I guess SI are looking at it again given PaulC's thread asking for testers at the top of the forum.

My original point was that SI should have had enough testers for 09, PaulC seemed to be saying that although the testing team made a great effort, there jsut weren't enough of them. Your response to that was that there couldn't be a beta test because of a previous incident, so I assumed the testing discussed at the top of the forum is a beta test, which begs the question, why was a beta test not ok for 09, but is ok for 10?

Maybe i'm getting my wires crossed and the future test isn't a beta test and I picked you up wrong, but that just brings me back to my initial question, why weren't there enough people testing 09?

[mufc-paton]

I am very pleased with the game, patches have sorted many things out. The ME is great and 3D is a nice addition. Will need to buy some RAM soon though lol

[Matt ex SEGA]

My original point was that SI should have had enough testers for 09, PaulC seemed to be saying that although the testing team made a great effort, there jsut weren't enough of them. Your response to that was that there couldn't be a beta test because of a previous incident, so I assumed the testing discussed at the top of the forum is a beta test, which begs the question, why was a beta test not ok for 09, but is ok for 10?

Maybe i'm getting my wires crossed and the future test isn't a beta test and I picked you up wrong, but that just brings me back to my initial question, why weren't there enough people testing 09?

I think PaulC would like people to help with a further patch, having read his post again? Or perhaps they have a plan to Beta test FM10 - a priority shift that means potential for leaks a less important issue than getting more eyes on the game - not spoken to Paul so don't know.

Not enough testers for 09 - no idea, not my bag. I didn't know there weren't.

[blade79]

My original point was that SI should have had enough testers for 09, PaulC seemed to be saying that although the testing team made a great effort, there jsut weren't enough of them. Your response to that was that there couldn't be a beta test because of a previous incident, so I assumed the testing discussed at the top of the forum is a beta test, which begs the question, why was a beta test not ok for 09, but is ok for 10?

Maybe i'm getting my wires crossed and the future test isn't a beta test and I picked you up wrong, but that just brings me back to my initial question, why weren't there enough people testing 09?

i assume that SI did not put the beta test into place for 09 because they did not believe they had a secure enough process.

if you read above you will see that they did one before which did not go according to plan because of one individual. if i remember well at that time the beta testers found loads of bugs that were eliminated from the game before the release of the demo (and the beta lasted only for one phase)

on your second point, how do you know how many people are enough for the testing. given that the ME was tested on FM live i would assume that they underestimated the testing time they needed

[Lyvean]

Don't get that comment. We don't want the game publicly available when it's not in appropriate condition to be played.

You don't want the game to be publicly available when it's not in an appropriate condition but you are ok with releasing it when it's not in an appropriate condition?

The problem is much deeper than simple testing and finding bugs and it has to do with ability and mentality.

Hell, there are bugs in FM that haven't been fixed for years. What FM needs is time, new people in the development team (especially people from this forum as far as the design process goes) and more money behind it.

You have a gem in your hands and you continue making progress in the least needed areas. This is -at last- becoming evident by some of this year's review scores too, mainly the one in PC Gamer. You can continue trying to sidestep the disappointing state the series has succumbed to but if you want a better product -a revitalization- you better start listening more to what your fanbase is saying.

[Nomis07]

i assume that SI did not put the beta test into place for 09 because they did not believe they had a secure enough process.

if you read above you will see that they did one before which did not go according to plan because of one individual. if i remember well at that time the beta testers found loads of bugs that were eliminated from the game before the release of the demo (and the beta lasted only for one phase)

on your second point, how do you know how many people are enough for the testing. given that the ME was tested on FM live i would assume that they underestimated the testing time they needed

I think people are getting confused by the posts above, i'm not advocating beta testing, I couldn't care how they test the game. My question was, why weren't there enough testers for 09? Of course I don't know how many is enough and I was unaware that there weren't enough until PaulC said;

The testers we had this year all did as much as anyone could expect but I think we simply needed more

So far nobody has answered that.

[Lyvean]

I think people are getting confused by the posts above, i'm not advocating beta testing, I couldn't care how they test the game. My question was, why weren't there enough testers for 09? Of course I don't know how many is enough and I was unaware that there weren't enough until PaulC said;

I am not sure that testing is the main problem here. There are decision made which are completely wrong or poorly thought out in the design process that make the game so irrational. Sometimes I get the impression that the game is made by people who know very little about football. FM is also a game that can't seem able to reflect any kind football other than the English one. You can't see technical gifted football or defensive football like in Spain or Italy. All the teams perform almost the same way.

That is why I insist that the main problem is not bugs but the approach to decision making in order to create -at least- a semi realistic game.

[Nomis07]

FM is also a game that can't seem able to reflect any kind football other than the English one. You can't see technical gifted football or defensive football like in Spain or Italy. All the teams perform almost the same way.

To do that properly would require a serious amount of default tactics assigned to each team, and where does it stop? It's not ok to just assign the top teams with realistic tactics, you would have to do it for every team or the old biase argument would surface again. Imagine the research that would have to go into that and the amount of data involved that would, yet again, bump up processing needs etc.

[cynet]

I don't think moving the release date is necessarily the answer. What we need is more eyes on the game during the run in. The testers we had this year all did as much as anyone could expect but I think we simply needed more, and for enough time that we have a shot at fixing all the main issues for release.

So with this admission your actually agreeing that FM09 was a disaster and that you did not have the time or the resources to complete what was required to make the game more playable and not playable as most of us have discovered.

Instead of releasing FM10 why not bring out a add on extension to FM09 and give the game a break so you can develop more and get it right as 10 months between each release is just not enough or good enough.

[Lyvean]

To do that properly would require a serious amount of default tactics assigned to each team, and where does it stop? It's not ok to just assign the top teams with realistic tactics, you would have to do it for every team or the old biase argument would surface again. Imagine the research that would have to go into that and the amount of data involved that would, yet again, bump up processing needs etc.

Not necessarily. Football in some countries can be easily modeled with general tendencies applied, tendencies that the football there is famous for. But that would not apply to all the leagues around the world. Some of them would just use some general tendencies in lack of quality teams/players in the league. Maybe some would be bumped up in the "hard tackling" tendencies or defensive tendencies but in general only the most famous leagues, the ones that have an identity in real life, would be modeled with detail. Of course, these tendencies would be suppressed from time to time according to match needs but in general it would be easy to differentiate, for example, Real Madrid from some league C team in the way they move in the pitch or string together passes, etc. You can't see any of that now. A really bad team is mostly distinguished from a great one because the latter can simply convert more chances.

There is a way to implement proper logical stuff to make the game feel like football. But that would mean extra time to develop and vision.

It has to happen sometime because the series is dying a slow and evident death.

[berwick-the-unbeatable]

Firstly, FM 09, patched up, is so far the best installment of Football Manager so far in my opinion. It is a brilliant game. However, due to the things such as the injury bug, the installation problems ect, I believe this will go down as one of the ingnored ones, simply because of the fans it could of lost at the beginning. If this was to happen, I would have to say it's easily the most underrated.

Secondly, if SI and Sega were to come to a decision to put the game back until 2010, which I don't agree with at all by the way, this would mean massive expectations. Not only would players expect the game to be perfect straight away, but there are then bound to be rumours flying about that a massive new feature was coming. An alternative for FM10 to have less bugs (Lets be honest, Bug Free is impossible), is to simply forget about adding new features, and concentrate on improving the current ones. This would have less fianancial drain on the companies, and still keep customers happy. It's not the hardest idea to come up with, but it's certainly one that makes alot of sense.

[Lyvean]

Firstly, FM 09, patched up, is so far the best installment of Football Manager so far in my opinion. It is a brilliant game. However, due to the things such as the injury bug, the installation problems ect, I believe this will go down as one of the ingnored ones, simply because of the fans it could of lost at the beginning. If this was to happen, I would have to say it's easily the most underrated.

It really isn't though. The game breaking unbalances of missing 1 on 1s, the defenders problem, manager reputation bug, transfer system not working logically, training remaining vague, press conferences poorly thought out, lack of proper distinguishable teams and leagues, the paranoid emphasis on tactical micromanagement, the release on a free bug of the most gifted young players and other small or bigger bugs really show the state of the game.

What is needed is time, money and some fresh blood to create something new.

[Nomis07]

What is needed is time, money and some fresh blood to create something new.

Surely you've just put the final nail in the coffin of the "skip FM10" argument.

[Lyvean]

Surely you've just put the final nail in the coffin of the "skip FM10" argument.

SEGA is a big publisher and they should look to expand and maintain the series, the best of its kind, to top form. A publisher always puts money to the table and sometimes they take risks, expanding the development of a yearly release to 2 years in order to create something of high quality, a new era of a product. If SEGA does not want to make the series reach the next level, I really can't understand why they bothered in the first place with publishing rights.

[Matt ex SEGA]

You don't want the game to be publicly available when it's not in an appropriate condition but you are ok with releasing it when it's not in an appropriate condition?

No, I didn't say that. Personally, I don't have a problem with this year's game. The one issue that is a showstopper in my view, I was unaware of prior to launch (Serie C Bug).

So with this admission your actually agreeing that FM09 was a disaster and that you did not have the time or the resources to complete what was required to make the game more playable and not playable as most of us have discovered.

I don't think PaulC has, or would, admit that at all. Don't put words in his mouth, just read what he said.

SEGA is a big publisher and they should look to expand and maintain the series, the best of its kind, to top form. A publisher always puts money to the table and sometimes they take risks, expanding the development of a yearly release to 2 years in order to create something of high quality, a new era of a product. If SEGA does not want to make the series reach the next level, I really can't understand why they bothered in the first place with publishing rights.

It's up to SI to determine what they need to do to "take the franchise to the next level". Personally, I think the addition of 3D has done that. If they want to ask for a year off, it'd be their shout to request and justify it - but I don't believe that that's a view that they support, much less have asked SEGA about.

[Lyvean]

No, I didn't say that. Personally, I don't have a problem with this year's game. The one issue that is a showstopper in my view, I was unaware of prior to launch (Serie C Bug).

I can understand that view but there are many problems with the game, showstopper problems that not even the second patch solved. SI is of course aware of those, along with those bugs that haven't been fixed for some time now. I am happy that you are happy but there is no denying the disappointing state the game is in.

It's up to SI to determine what they need to do to "take the franchise to the next level". Personally, I think the addition of 3D has done that. If they want to ask for a year off, it'd be their shout to request and justify it - but I don't believe that that's a view that they support, much less have asked SEGA about.

3D didn't take the series to the next level. It does not work properly or -at least- logically. Also, the 3D engine is just an aesthetic addition that is really nothing new. Taking it to the next level would be actually making it work or a) creating some believable manager AI, b) creating some believable transfer AI, c) creating a training module that actually makes sense, d) creating an environment that can actually show the difference between top and bottom teams, e) making the 1 on 1 chances realistic as they should be and many more.

The above are things that have been asked for many years so I don't think a 3D engine is much of a "next level" feature. The 2D was.

[Matt ex SEGA]

You say Tomatoe, I say Tomato. We're just matching opinions - just because we disagree, doesn't make one or other of us right or wrong.

You're in the right place - post your constructive feedback, if possible register to test in the sticky at the top of the forum.

[Klassens]

The top on my list that I feel confused about SI is——why made the game so unMODable?

IMO the current function of the Pregame Editor is so limited that make it very tough for we users to create/change the in-game world

I understand you have licencing issues that limited you pretty much (for example J league issue), so why not let the user to extend it?At least make it easier when users are trying to do it. You don't have to bear any responsibility for that, do you?

So please......make more elements editable instead of hardcode it in fm.exe.

[berwick-the-unbeatable]

It really isn't though. The game breaking unbalances of missing 1 on 1s, the defenders problem, manager reputation bug, transfer system not working logically, training remaining vague, press conferences poorly thought out, lack of proper distinguishable teams and leagues, the paranoid emphasis on tactical micromanagement, the release on a free bug of the most gifted young players and other small or bigger bugs really show the state of the game.

1 on 1's firstly. There was a stat that came out just a couple of years ago. I think they watched 10000 clips of 1-on-1s and found that just 36% were scored. I don't know about the defender problem, the managers reputation is a small problem, transfer system isn't bad, Press Conferences aren't bad, but they are ridiculously basic, to say theres a lack of leagues and teams imo is laughable, if you wish to be a successful manager in the game, then you should be looking to do management like that.

[Lyvean]

1 on 1's firstly. There was a stat that came out just a couple of years ago. I think they watched 10000 clips of 1-on-1s and found that just 36% were scored. I don't know about the defender problem, the managers reputation is a small problem, transfer system isn't bad, Press Conferences aren't bad, but they are ridiculously basic, to say theres a lack of leagues and teams imo is laughable, if you wish to be a successful manager in the game, then you should be looking to do management like that.

a) It's not the convert chance to goal of the 1 on 1s, it's the amount of them. No game in real life has 5 or 6 clear cut 1 on 1s that are all missed. Don't try to defend the paranoia please.

b) If you haven't seen the defenders not marking and letting the opposite players come in their half all the time then I think you are playing a different game. Wingers in particulary have a field day in every match, always finding space no matter what. SI has tried to counter this like the 1 on 1 situation, and now crosses hit the defenders many times during a match, when it is clear that they can cross without a problem.

c) Transfer system is ridiculous. Bojan and others like him get released for example at the end of the season, Manchester City and other teams spend and lose money without any logic behind it (just to mention some basic mistakes).

d) Press conferences are bad because they ask the same questions over and over again, without taking into account many things that have happened in your team. Also, after I won the league no press conference was held after the match, which clearly shows how random placed are in the design process.

e) I didn't say there is a lack of leagues and teams. I said that there is not much distinguishable difference between styles of football and quality playing vs bad playing. All teams play the same way. This is actually one of the things that FM must fix if it wants to get to the next level.

[Ilich]

The game is released to a public testing team each year.

Sorry, but i can´t believe it.

At least for this year`s game I supposse the beta testers didn`t changed the tactics during a match...or they will for sure notice the 13 players bug. Or perhaps they haven't played in spanish league or they would have noticed the reserve team manager buying players. Or maybe they never played with the italian C league activated so they never realice about the game crashing. Or (i'm only guessing) they never played in a different lenguage from english so they didn't realice about the unplayable english reserve league...

I hope SI to take notice of this year's mess and do things better. And i hope they will use non-english testers so they could do a complete product for everyone.

Cheers

PS. Please forgive my english.

[woody2goody]

Please! LMA has lifeless and pointless playing/passing.

I agree LMA has always been the best for 3D match engines, but it seriously had many flaws, especially the ball being kicked out all the time.

I did however enjoy the dugout view.

I used to be a tester on previous FM's (Sydney666) and they (SI) did do a pretty good job of testing back then, however I only experienced patch testing, not pre-release testing.

In my opinion, FM isnt really like other stand alone games that gets released every few years, its more like an MMO (and im not talking about FM live) where it constantly evolves. Instead of monthly fees, we end up paying 60-90 bucks every october/november.

Anyway as stated, I purchased FM for the 1st time in 2 years. I was extreemly dissapointed with last few years releases that always seemed virtually identical. I played them, either BETA or at a friends place and never liked the added features. This year i was suckered into the 3D engine, which was said to have been "highly tested in FM Live" - but apparently that wasnt the case!

A good post, and an even better user name I bought him for Inter on Pro Evo he's quality. Is he any good on FM?

[Fabregas1987]

People need to stop crying !

FM09 is awesome !

[Booth]

I think you have to look at the 3d engine as a helpful guide for you too see how your team plays rather than as a pretty graphical representation of football so you can clearly see that the 36 yr old center back u signed IS too slow for league one as he gets skinned by some talentless 19 yr old.

game rox tbh and so far ive only managed Cheltenham (18th + 9th)

[Almondo]

Ok i've read this topic for the past couple of days now and feel the need to have my say.

Firstly having only played 08 and 09 I have to say that 09 is a better game than 08 even with all it's flaws.

secondly since both Paulc and Matt_sega have been posting in here it's seemed as though some posters have aimed their grievances straight at them.

I agree that a game shouldn't be released with bugs but you just have to look at the developers who develop games for PS3 and XBox 360. Some of these just release a game that seems not to have been tested with the mentality of oh well if it's got bugs in we can always patch through PS3 and Xbox's online systems.

SI released the demo of 09 which is the same code as the full game and through comments on these forums managed to release a patch on the same day that the game was released. Even though they did this I don't think that many people realise that SI are working their butts off to create a game that is enjoyable to all.

I don't think it would be a god idea to skip FM10. As someone has already said this would be tantamount to suicide as a lot of fans of the game would expect the next game to be perfect and have no problems in it which is not realistic. So come on everyone get off SI's back and thank them for the hard work they put in to create a game and then the patches for it when they realise the amount of problems in the game due to us on the forums.

[g@mb!t]

I don't think its a good idea....thats why SI are doing so much beta testing.....i don't think it will happen again....i'm sure the next FM will be excellent since the match engeine will be even better.....though i do agree that 09 wasn't that great....i belive the best FM till now was 07....

[Swindon69]

I simply waited until Dec to buy the game - it meant the worst issues were picked up by the patches and I only paid £19.99 for it.

[JonPaulWild]

I have given in and bought FM 2009 and it is a decent made software/game. However, I don't think it's worth the hype it was given.

However, it has various flaws such as the training module (coach side especially) and the sliders need removing from the game tactics screen in a coding and cosmetic perspective. We need more tactical options like 'cut inside' for various players.

What has astonished me most of all was the hype given to this game by Miles Jacobson. We've seen the You Tube videos and as the position he is in it is entirely natural for him to promote / hype this game. But it was over hyped IMO and gets peoples' expectations way over the top and when the game is released and people see flaws they maybe more disappointed.

I'd go as far as saying instead of adding many new and additional features that Fm10 should really focus on overhauling the current code and changing things such as the training modules and so on.

[ChipK]

I would rather have a radically new FM11 (with a few new and exiting bugs of course) and no FM10, than a recycled version of FM09 called FM10 (with the bugs of course. Some new and some old and familiar) and then a recycled version of FM10 called FM11 the year after (with recycled bugs too).

No new and exiting features has been added since 2D IMO, and thats a few years ago. I wouldn't expect a bug-free FM11 if SI skipped FM10, but I would expect something special, something worth the extra wait.

But I don't think it would happen

[Lyvean]

Ok i've read this topic for the past couple of days now and feel the need to have my say.

I agree that a game shouldn't be released with bugs but you just have to look at the developers who develop games for PS3 and XBox 360. Some of these just release a game that seems not to have been tested with the mentality of oh well if it's got bugs in we can always patch through PS3 and Xbox's online systems.

No game in the consoles ships with so many of its main mechanisms not working. And if it does, it happens very seldom. FM does it every year.

SI released the demo of 09 which is the same code as the full game and through comments on these forums managed to release a patch on the same day that the game was released. Even though they did this I don't think that many people realise that SI are working their butts off to create a game that is enjoyable to all.

If they are working their ass off and they still release a game with so many inconsistencies and bugs -even after 2 patches- then they must be doing something wrong, don't they? Who cares if they work their ass off? It's their job to produce a product as good as possible. Some bugs here and there are of course acceptable but not bugs and unbalances like these.

I don't think it would be a god idea to skip FM10. As someone has already said this would be tantamount to suicide as a lot of fans of the game would expect the next game to be perfect and have no problems in it which is not realistic. So come on everyone get off SI's back and thank them for the hard work they put in to create a game and then the patches for it when they realise the amount of problems in the game due to us on the forums.

No one expects a perfect product. But if you release a football management game -the most realistic one- some realism is expected from the fans. Taking the time to rework the game can only be a good thing because, as far as the main areas of the game go, the game simply does not work as intended to offer a quality experience.

[Krondor]

Why would SI/Sega release that confidential information to you?

Agree, by doing that SI/SEGA will also have to explain considerations behind going from alpha to production stage in LESS THAN A MONTH. So no wonder, why we have a patch for demo(!?), two patches fro Mac, first patch on a release date, second patch with outstanding issues and a need for the third patch...

Bottom line - SI/SEGA knowingly released an unfinished product and now are trying to fix it at loyal customers' TIME AND EXPENSE.

[Kris]

Agree, by doing that SI/SEGA will also have to explain considerations behind going from alpha to production stage in LESS THAN A MONTH. So no wonder, why we have a patch for demo(!?), two patches fro Mac, first patch on a release date, second patch with outstanding issues and a need for the third patch...

Bottom line - SI/SEGA knowingly released an unfinished product and now are trying to fix it at loyal customers' TIME AND EXPENSE.

No, they dont need to release that information because its confidential and you would have no idea of the development cycle and timeline behind it so it would serve no useful purpose.

Your last statement is fairly libelous btw

[andyinuk]

No, they dont need to release that information because its confidential and you would have no idea of the development cycle and timeline behind it so it would serve no useful purpose.

Your last statement is fairly libelous btw

I do love Krondor's claim that FM09 goes from alpha to production in "LESS THAN A MONTH" while seemingly have no clue about the actual date of FM's alpha delivery

[Kickballz]

If they release fm10 with hardly any new features and instead concentrate on fixing the existing bugs and adding polish then people are going to feel conned for paying for the same game, particularly since they can argue that fm10 will then be what fm09 should have been.

But if they release fm10 with loads of new features then there will be a whole batch of new bugs and it will be fm09 all over again with endless complaining about a broken game.

No win situation.

[Jamadinho]

do wat cm did

[steviejay]

My personal opinion is that SI should skip a FM10 version and take the next year or so developing a bug free FM11 to avoid any problems like 09. I dont believe that skipping 10 will be such a huge loss for SI as most people will just be getting into a bug free 09 by that time. The point im trying to make is the next FM has to be something special because the damage done by 09 has caused significant decreases in the fanbase, fans dont want to have to download patch after patch of fixes and if a bug free release day FM11 was available then im sure that fans of the game will go crazy for it. I understand that lots at bugs are hard to find but the major ones should be fixed before release.

SI you guys do a great job but next one could make or break the series after 09 so please take your time, develop something you can be proud of and not something that causes more headaches than you deserve.

Thanks

I'd say no. I understand where you're coming form but to skip a year wouldn't guarantee that it would be bug free. You can't exhaustively test a system and the lost revenue from missing an instalment would make spending all that money on testing the game to death even less appealing.

[M.U.F.C....TSVR]

what about FM08? I had it, done one season and it kept crashing to desktop when i went onto my squad. I had all the patches installed and everything. In the end i gave up and bought FIFA manager and CM. FIFA was aload of ******* ****, but fun. CM was ok but i wanted FM08. I havent had any issues YET here tho and i have no patch installed! So SI, bring on 2010!!

[Ljuba82]

I don't think moving the release date is necessarily the answer. What we need is more eyes on the game during the run in. The testers we had this year all did as much as anyone could expect but I think we simply needed more, and for enough time that we have a shot at fixing all the main issues for release.

One thing I don't understand is why year after year same bugs appear in game?

For example in 2nd patch for FM 2007 you fixed issue for buying players on 24 months clause, then in original FM2008 you have same bug...

Also...why don't you stick to one ME and improve it year after year instead of releasing new, very buggy and unrealistic ME each year?

[Nomis07]

Also...why don't you stick to one ME and improve it year after year instead of releasing new, very buggy and unrealistic ME each year?

How can you stick to the same one, but improve it and not release a new one? :confused:

[Ljuba82]

How can you stick to the same one, but improve it and not release a new one? :confused:

Code for ME 2009 was written from the scratch. So, completely new ME.

My point is that it would be better for FM2010 if proggramers continue they work from 9.0.3 patch instead of writing completely new code...

[Neji]

Code for ME 2009 was written from the scratch. So, completely new ME.

Who told you that?