Jump to content

Martini1991

Members+
  • Posts

    80
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Martini1991

  1. 5 minutes ago, sidslayer said:

    It’s how the game deals with a tactical issue. It looks awful, your world class ST missing 1v1’s, but it’s how the game deals with your tactic not being right.

    In my experience. In my view. My opinion. I altered my tactic. My ST started scoring more 1v1’s.

    Again it’s not pretty. It’s just a fact from my reality of FM20.

     

    You've been talking in absolutes, now you're saying in your opinion.

    In *my* opinion, if what you're suggesting is true, then that to me is a broken simulation game as it fails to portray things anywhere close to accurate.

    I however don't think you're correct which is why SI are saying they're improving conversion rates still.

  2. 9 hours ago, Gee_Simpson said:

    Don't want to go trudging through each page, just want to find out the general consensus. Is the Beta ME superior to the older official build or is it worse? 

    It allows my team to play the way I want, but then I'm getting stuffed with 1v1's.

    This is at least to me better than the previous ME where I felt like the team wasn't even playing to my tactics.

  3. 5 hours ago, Neil Brock said:

    This area is being worked on and tweaked as we speak to get them in line with real life statistics. Records show that on average there are roughly between 2.5-3 goals per game over a season, so this is the range we're looking at with the correct proportion going to attacking players. Thanks. 

     

    I don't understand the point of trying to match statistics.

    It kind of feels like limitations are being artificially introduced. Which would explain why we've got a legion of world class saves being performed daily in the ME.

  4. I'm enjoying the beta match engine a lot more than I was previously.

    I've got the team playing the way I want to, which is far and away the biggest improvement.

     

    But conversion rate still seems pretty poor.

    Any time I manage to get a one on one situation where my striker is in on goal, I know they're going to fail to score. But how would PKM's help that? They aren't going to score every time, so I can't give a PKM of every opportunity surely?

     

    And then there's golden opportunities that the keepers are able to consistently save.

     

    I've ended up basically playing a mini game with myself keeping Middlesbrough in the championship and making profit. I've got 240M in the bank. Although that's probably going to increase as I've got a keeper to sell for 15M.

     

    I've got strikers that would walk in the a lot of teams in the PL that can't score goals etc lol.

     

  5. 2 minutes ago, Neil Brock said:

    When we have any information in regards to anything we'll post it on these forums, however as a general rule we don't pre-announce hotfixes or updates due to the unpredictable nature of software development.  

    Thanks.

    This can also be read as "We think the match engine is okay and won't be releasing an update any time soon".

    If anything you've amplified my concern, and now I just feel like I'm stuck with a game I want to enjoy, but find impossible to.

     

  6. 1 hour ago, Neil Brock said:

    We do new nightly builds pretty much every day for testing, so wouldn't use that as a indicator of anything.

     

    Is there at least any news of any possible new patches coming though to address the concerns? I mean right now I've no idea what the state of play is yet you've basically publicly acknowledged public concern, yet nothing has happened on that front yet.  Am I going to receive an update to a game I currently perceive as broken anytime soon or not?

    I'll reiterate, as it stands right now you've lost my future custom.

     

  7. 7 minutes ago, KUBI said:

    Steam is the retailer, Sega is the publisher, so the money from the retailer (a percentage) goes to Sega and they pay the creators. Most people react very surprised if they know what creators in the end receive. Not only for games, but also for books, songs etc. And this is not a one person creator, this is a company.

    I did entirely forget about Sega, my bad, it's Sega whom is getting my money from Valve (Minus Valve's cut). Which changes the dynamic, it's Sega whom IMO have sold me the product, and SI have delivered that product through Sega.

    Either way, I'm unable to get a refund through any "conventional channel", I've just got a broken product.

  8. 10 minutes ago, CFuller said:

    It's no use asking on the forums for a refund from the developers. They didn't sell the game to you.

    If you want a refund, go back to where you bought the game from and ask there (though if you've already played a lot of hours, you'll likely be out of luck).

    I won't be able to get a refund from Steam with me just asking, they're not exactly renown for their customer service.

    It's a very weak argument to be saying that the developer didn't sell me the game though and all you're doing is helping to enable a mentality that will help to erode customer protections. It's their product, Steam is merely the medium. Valve aren't keeping all the money, it's going to SI. Hell, I'd be willing  to lose Valve's cut in the refund so I'd be getting my money back from SI that I paid to SI through Steam.

  9. 4 minutes ago, Federico said:

    I think the public beta forum is allowed to users who pre-ordered the game, please correct me if I'm wrong.

    Also about testing: the fact that you're spotting bad behaviours in the ME or anything else, doesn't automatically mean it hasn't been spotted during the process, so you have to differentiate between what has been spotted and it's viable, in short terms, to be fixed immediately. There is stuff that requires multiple phases and days before being ready to be tested, let alone released. It's not your case but in my opinion there's a lot of confusion about how all the mechanism around FM works.

    We're no longer in the pre release, it's the release people are unhappy about, with the same 1 v 1 issues that were raised during that pre release beta.

    I've no access to a public beta that's ahead of the "stable" release so fail to see the relevance of its existence now.

  10. Just now, HUNT3R said:

    Yes. I mean technical issues that prevent someone from actually playing. As you say, it's often something that a limited amount of people experience. 

    I'd rather have that game breaking bug than a broken ME, I could have made another save and enjoyed the game.

    As an aside, I don't consider Neil's update to be acceptable as a consumer (And nothing that's said in defense of Neil et al will change that, it's my right as a consumer to be unhappy with a product) and if offered a refund I'd take it.

  11. 7 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

    That's different though. You said:

    And in cases like that, with technical, game-breaking issues, people do get invited. Apart from those cases, SI will look to the bugs forum, as I've mentioned. So, yes, everyone is well aware of users who contribute.

    I don't quite get what you mean by it being different.

    In that specific bug I had it would have been very unique to a few people that went as far as I did in the game, whereas the current ME issues are pretty widespread. Do you mean different in that context?

    Or do you mean different in the context that there's a group of "elite" users whom are external and get passed builds after internal test and also beta test things? Rather that me getting a build to fix a specific game breaking bug?

     

    None of those will be of any comfort to people like myself whom consider ourselves owners of a broken game.

  12. 8 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

    SI do this already. If someone has a record of being helpful in the bugs forum and reporting issues there, they're going to be a candidate to be invited to the private beta test. 

    Well, I know they've already done this because I've literally been in one of the beta's before (And mentioned as such), however because of how ME dominated this feedback thread (And the bug forum since beta) is it's obvious that right now there is an issue and the status quo isn't working. Given the issue at hand is one that's existed in the "open beta" I'm disappointed that there's no open beta of the newer builds as right now there's people who feel they've got a broken product they've spent money on.

    In the context of how I worded my post, I'm more expecting an open post from an SI employers requesting users to apply to be part of one of these beta's that might alleviate their concerns about the ME. I'm yet to see that, and thus to me (Which is the caveat really, what you find suitable doesn't mean I find it suitable, doesn't make anyone right or wrong though) the current situation is untenable and unacceptable as a customer of a broken product.

    I reiterate, right now I've spent ~£40 on a game that's been broken 16% throughout its life cycle and by this thread it "Might" get fixed. Do you think that's acceptable?

  13. 2 hours ago, glosoli said:

    I've started to use upfront players with "Likes to round the keeper" trait. First, I've added that trait to my strikers via in-game editor to see the results. It definitely helped me to create more goals from 1v1 situations. Now, I've started to look players with that certain trait. Not a definitive fix to the issue by any chance, but it's something.

     

    The answer shouldn't be "work arounds".

  14. It's also made me rethink buying the next iteration quite so soon.

    In fact I'd pre-ordered like the last 4 iterations as I get them as a B-day present from my GF, and while I've got 160 hours in FM20 a lot of that has just been utter frustration and trying to persevere.

    At this point I'd prefer being issued a refund and I may buy the game at a later date, but that's not likely to be an option.

×
×
  • Create New...