Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

No! I am Spartacus

Members
  • Content Count

    1,872
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About No! I am Spartacus

  • Rank
    Part-Timer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Haha, interesting. I get picked up on being patronising whilst fighting against a tide of being patronised- with even you criticising my post without obviously reading it through (hence why I commented on responses when people have potential issues. You just can't post much constructive criticism in here without someone one blindly defending. Take a step back, look at a similar thread, no wonder they escalate into people becoming frustrated/annoyed) SI have never referred to an issue regarding this point actually- unless you are able to provide a link, which I have never seen but I'm open to new discoveries. As far as it being a bug, is it? I don't know- that is why I mentioned it. I guess it is more 'Online game' specific rather than the comparatively insular single player, but 700+ seasons does seem like a pretty decent test. As I'm not the host, difficult to provide a bug report- and he is one of the aforementioned frustrated posters, to the point where he doesn't bother coming on anymore. Oh well, another venture onto the forums that feels futile- queue sarcastic remarks that will go uncommented on...
  2. And I still disagree. If you read my posts you'll see the point Alex has stated doesn't actually relate to my post. At no stage have I said the game is designed to favour the CPU. That doesn't mean that it can't occur without design, however- the marking issue is a case in point. Look, I appreciate some people just don't like other customers highlighting potential issues but blind love is not healthy.
  3. I was merely responding to the vague response I got. I'd like to think that adjustments I make have some impact- be them either positive or negative. Otherwise what is the point. I appreciate the game is random in real life, but this isn't real life (I think some people tend to forget that). It is essentially a set of spread sheets made into an incredibly realistic & addictive game that thousands of people love & enjoy. As the game is programmed (unlike real life) I'd imagine SI might have some sort of idea what the real answer is rather than broad stroked guesses from all and sundry. I don't expect them to reply- they generally don't- but perhaps others might have had the same thoughts and adding them here might highlight an area in issue... thereby interesting SI to look at it. All that said, clearly you like the game and I'd suggest that, because we are all reading/posting in here, we are all in the same boat of wanting the game to be the best it can be. Which is why I hate people spouting totally negative and unproductive statements like 'if you do not enjoy it, do not play it'. There is a HUGE difference in not liking a game (in which case, most sane people wouldn't bother coming here, let alone posting) and wanting it to be better/trying to understand it & thinking your experience might be shared to assist in helping that process. Just because people offer a negative angle, doesn't mean they don't like the game. It is time this was understood by more on these forums rather than an almost immediate jump to the defence of the game without any attempt at understanding people frustrations or angle.
  4. Not entirely sure what your point is? Are you just saying that everything is random so what we do makes no difference? I appreciate there would be different results on occasions, but offering an answer that is essentially saying 'everything is random' isn't too helpful.
  5. Hmmmm, some people are desperate to defend the faith. The Ass Man just follows 'your' instructions. Nothing more, nothing less. 'Your' tactics being applied in a game. That isn't letting the Ass Man loose with his view on how games should be managed, it is proxy management- 'if a game occurs then apply this tactic & nothing more' etc. That isn't a benefit to a human because, as already stated, the results are totally unfavourable.
  6. I'd tend to agree with this. Whether or not you look at the editor or not (the idea that you shouldn't is disingenuous, tbh), I made this kind of suggestion several years ago during FML, citing players like Stuart Pearce, Paul Mariner, Ian Wright, Les Ferdinand, even Chris Smalling at a push, who all started in the lower leagues/non-league & were late developers. No one saw their potential at a young age, and then they became top Div 1(Prem in new money) standard players (and all Internationals). Having an absolute limit to their potential just means a rush for 4-5* youths, and ignore the rest (aside from the odd 3.5* that the scout under-rated). It just feels that a little work in this area could add an additional dimension to the game. I keep seeing it stated, but disagree totally. Just because you don't want to believe it, doesn't make it so. Not entirely linked to Saloth's post but a prime example is the paradox in not actually playing games: I leave my online game team in the 'safe' hands of (what the attributes indicate) is a quality Ass man, and instructions to stick to my tactics (which it also indicates he likes). The results compared to when I AM online are not favourable, often to the extent where I might miss 10 games that night and end up losing 5 or 6. Then return the next night and back to winning ways. Approximately 90 seasons of online games over the last 2 years, multiplied by an average of 8 managers in each season (all desperate not to miss nights because they know the negative impact on the results), plus talking to other clans to confirm it isn't just us, is a pretty good sample. That's an approx. 720 season test- Of course, there have been people queuing up to deny this in the past, but then some people still think the world is only 6000 years old too. Bless 'em. Contrast this with when people say they have tested tactics on holiday mode (sped through them). Often I see the argument that this isn't a proper test. Either an Ass Man is a reasonable replacement for you, or he isn't. Yes, you won't be able to issue 'shouts', but I don't often in game anyway- and generally do well regardless. CPU does have an advantage if the human isn't there. Thoroughly tested into fact, to be frank.
  7. Oh dear... prepare yourself for a barrage of slap downs because 'they' haven't experienced it. :-)
  8. I will agree that single doesn't play the same as online. No point arguing, it factually doesn't. After a number of seasons tactics become warped, don't work the same as in early single player and add in the oddity of humans and the game becomes completely different. There may not have been changes in the last update (mores the pity, tbh, with several fixes needed & agreed by SI), but often the online version feels like it gets forgotten.
  9. I was offering an opinion on a reply that is just assumption the game is the same as real life. As a public forum for registered users, and as I wasn't being rude, I would have thought the exchanging of ideas was the whole point of being part of that forum and trying to ensure correct answers are given is also important (the job for Mods, perhaps?) It may have been food for thought, but real life is not always reflected in FM (it is a computer game, after all), so vocalising the point, seeing if others have that issue, finding many do (I know I have the same issue), and then armed with that knowledge referring to the bug forum seems like a great use of this forum. As a member of the forum, if I'm not allowed to politely respond to others posts, what are we doing here exactly? I'll be frank, if a moderator, I would be looking to cultivate that kind of thought process, not passively accepting the regiment of 'FM defenders' that post on these forums every single day defending anything 'Football Manager'. It is great that people love the game so much, but why the hell do they think people are willing to take time to post about potential issues? Because they love the game as well, perhaps? Because they would like areas improved? There are some areas where people inanely moan without foundation, and they need guiding, but too often there are people defending the game with nothing but their FM bible to metaphorically slap people round the head with. I understand the fact this is a pro-FM forum (it's why we are here, after all), but the moderating should apply to the rose-tinted as well as the overtly negative. No one suggested SI aren't looking to improve the game, to not do so would be poor business management and counter productive, but thanks for that info.
  10. Actually, you gave the poster real life reasons why it doesn't appear, not FM2014 reasons. If you spent less time replying to as many posts as possible defending the game, the game itself might actually improve more quickly. The guy posted a valid query, and was jumped upon just 32 minutes later... and with no basic reference to certain knowledge on the game. It isn't helpful, and was possibly giving incorrect information. All, apparently, in the major desperation of saying it isn't an issue... as ever.
  11. I don't accept any of the issues illustrated in the OP's comments... until he displays his tactics
  12. And on they come... the normal defenders of the faith. Tiresome. As far as mentioning it on here, Forameuss... it is a discussion thread. So guess what.... it gets discussed. I appreciate you would only like to hear positive things, but even when someone tries to be constructive it is actually you that invades the thread with a negative put down. To Panpardus... where did I exaggerate? I offer my opinion, advise what we have found, even supply 2 clips suffered within a few games of one another... exaggerated where, exactly? Where wasn't I constructive? Fair play to Alex to explain his thoughts, but again, without wording (like many comments seen on the forums) I assumed it was another 'See, it happens in real life, so must be okay' kind of response. I apologise to Alex if it wasn't.
  13. It is easy to quote such a mistake is because it is so rare- like Nayim lobbing Seaman from the halfwayline, Ronnie Rosenthal missing 'that' open goal & Paul Robinson miskicking -v- Croatia when McClaren was England manager. All memorable (in a 'wtf are you doing' type way) because it doesn't happen dozens of times a season at a top level of football- and is even relatively rare in decent Sunday League football. Just last night, in a network game, a mate of mine had these 2: http://gyazo.com/f6cb6fbd6ca2e948373ab3864ce6d24e -&- http://gyazo.com/22cd1d3266e09e8f45d52c753af6111b . That is as Man U in around season 2024. Top team, top keeper. I stopped regularly watching the pixels moving illogically around the screen last year for this very reason, it was that or stop playing entirely through annoyance. I'm sure the normal calls for 'raise it as a bug' are made but here is the issue. A mistake is mentioned here and one of the SI testing team is clearly saying with his post that 'It happens, it is not an issue'... what else could be interpreted by the dismissal of Dixon's OG clip? Someone (somewhere) pertinently posted in the main (currently) 45 page 14.2.2 discussion points that a large part of the issue with the game, as it stands, is the lack of correlation between the stats, the game 'film & real life. I find myself swearing at the screen much less now I only have to see the game (in network) when I'm playing one of the other humans (as they still watch the highlights). It is liberating to see the other 8 in our group getting frustrated by countless errors whilst my ignorance in this instance really is beneficial. It is all very well 'The Bretheren' invading each thread and defending the FM2014/13/12/etc faith, claiming the issues are either unfounded, because of tactics or just not an issue, but they miss the point. The reason people post is because they feel it is an issue and/or because they care. If one of the testers is just dismissing the frustrations so readily though, what hope for improvement?
×
×
  • Create New...