Not every person who is unsatisfied with the game will visit these forums, in fact most will not. It doesn't mean those people aren't frustrated or think it's unsatisfactory either. It could be in the Steam top 1, it wouldn't make an iota of difference of how poor this game is in it's current state. The whole situation has to be looked contextually (in terms of this is a long-running franchise, not a standalone game), and this includes you saying 'individuals posting the same 2-3 issues'. I mean, it's the dedicated feedback thread. Are we just not supposed to post here now as people are reporting the same issue? With all due respect, I find bringing up the total number of players quite disingenuous. I won't use the word 'majority', but there is definitely a silent portion who people on here seem to be disregarding. Using your logic, look at the posts constructively criticising the game in this thread are highly upvoted, those defending it have few to no upvotes. Does that not count for anything now?
I've been buying FM most years since 2009, and there are still some problems that were present back then that still have not been fixed. The Oceana Champions League has been broken for lord knows how many years, the Asian Games are broken, weather hasn't changed in years despite frequently being reported as being incorrect. Player interaction for at least two editions was broken and was only finally fixed to an acceptable standard last year. Mac support is absolutely woeful. Regens genuinely looked better on FM12. That's not even touching on the ME. After ten years of play it is unsatisfactory.
It may have been said hundreds of times before but that is because it seems to be falling on deaf ears. At this point in the franchise, it is totally unfathomable to most as to how the game can be released in the state it was (especially the ME). Every year now the ME is only really widely viewed as satisfactory by forum users (the hardcore players) by the March patch. How is this acceptable? I understand that it's a coding nightmare but this happens every year now, and as someone else has suggested, the oversight of obvious bugs points to the use of aggregate testing, which in FM now just doesn't cut the mustard. Woodwork hits, CCCs, 'getting FM'd' - they may look fine in aggregate testing, but the reality is that it's broken. Woodwork in particular - I've personally done tests myself and reported back on these forums, but is anything ever done? No. That's why people post about the same issues over and over again - because to me it seems like they're falling on deaf ears. It is a management simulator, so when the ME isn't up to scratch the entire game is compromised. I just think suggesting ways to exploit the ME in it's current state is a bit tone deaf, I don't want to come off as personally attacking anyone.
No doubt the same people will come back and argue the price, but for a game with an RRP of £40, I will double down and say it is unsatisfactory - especially given that SI now is not some bedroom studio, has years of expertise and we are 35 (?) years into the franchise. To release a game this far in with an ME that sometimes barely resembles football, and worse, barely runs on my laptop despite meeting all system requirements and then receiving little help, is unacceptable.
I am not personally attacking anyone who works or volunteers for the company, I am just trying to explain the frustration. In my humble opinion, SI would greatly diffuse the frustration by looking at some of their methods both in testing and user communication. Keeping users up to date on release of a patch would do wonders, I feel and placate some of the - admittedly occasionally vitriolic - criticism.