mikelfc8
-
Posts
476 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Articles
FAQs
Online Manual
Support: Blocks
Support: Games
Bug Tracker
SIGames Manual (beta)
Profiles
Posts posted by mikelfc8
-
-
1 hour ago, el_manayer said:
Since you were obviously ignored, I'll take the liberty of answering myself. Because I think part of the players (or users here) have a very naive perception about what a company is and do. So, let's first base my argumentation into some indisputable truths:
- SI is a company, and like every other company, the main goal is to make money and grow. Remember, if you lose 10 hardcore loyal players but get 100 new ones with the new product, it is a grown and a success. It would obviously prefer not to lose those 10, but still, grown and success.
- FM23 is not an individual product, but part of a saga that needs to be maintained. Thus, the end goal is to be a step forward within the saga itself.
- Although any FM is not a different product than its predecessor, you need to sell it. That means, you need to introduce new stuff, that you can announce and that you can use to attract players to each iteration. But, you also need to plan ahead for the next year. And the year after that. And so on. You will also need novelties in those years, changes that can be sold and that create the desire to get the new game in the player base.
If we think about all that above, you can answer your question pretty easily on why all these stuff have not being touched in this iteration. It is not that SI does not know about them, obviously they do, you play the game for half a season, and you notice most of the stuff people complain here about often and, sometimes, year after year. It is not done because they studied it and concluded that it is not the right thing to do from a commercial point of view. Reasons are varied:
- Resources optimization. Remember that we need novelties and shiny things to promote the game. Remember also that, even if the game is released yearly, part of the forces are divided updating the current game for about 6 months.
- Tuning a little bit a broken module does not sell. Instead, leaving the module broken as it is if it can not be completely overhauled it does, because when the overhaul happens the difference is huge and can be announced as a big thing. Thus, it would be extremely easy to do small touches and slightly alleviate the experience the players have with the broken modules, but it is not done because it is not convenient. Not because SI is not aware of them, but because they decided the best thing to do, from the company perspective, it is not to touch it. That's why we haven't got simple things that would enrich the experience, like a list to sort players for set pieces, or a decrease in the likelihood of broken interaction with players happening.
- Roadmap. I don't doubt, sooner or later, all those broken things are going to be overhauled. SI would decide when it is convenient and realistic to do so, based on manpower and commercial strategy.
We can maybe agree or not with the commercial decisions that are taken, but nothing is done at random. So that's why, when you ask about those things, you get no answer: because the answer is not nice nor popular. SI knows better than anyone the problems with the game, SI decides what needs to be solved each year and what they can realistically do, SI build a roadmap based on expected sales and SI do not make small changes that mean nothing to the end goal of keep selling the saga for more years to come. And that's why you have all those tweets of self-congratulation and success, but silence when talking about the broken stuff that are ignored year after year. Not because of lack of knowledge, but because of commercial decisions.
And this is not a critic, or a claim that we, as players, are nothing to the company, or anything like that. It is just a realistic look at this thread, the success of the game and the critics that we see year after year that appear to be ignored. I myself have been critic with the game before, and I thought I was not going to buy FM23 but, ultimately, I tried the demo and got the full game. And I honestly don't regret it. Because there is little doubt that the game is very good and the ME feels very good. That's why all those positive steam reviews and all those numbers that SI proudly announces. The saga advance at one step each year, which always feel smaller than the step before, and the little things that make the game annoying to most of us, are still there and will stay there, at least, until FM24. All decisions are taken from a commercial point of view, and it is extremely naive to think otherwise. If you buy the game year after year, you need either to accept the company vision about the game, or come here and get prepared to be ignored if you complain about anything that is not related with this year's iteration.
You may very well be correct, and I have always considered this scenario to be a possibility.
The significant factor is that speculation such as this will be rife until SI makes an effort to clarify their strategies.
The fact that my post (and many others like it) garnered no official acknowledgement suggests, however, that clarification and communication is not likely to be forthcoming around these issues, and that leaves me somewhat saddened.
The silence, for me at least, is the main issue.
2 -
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
3 hours ago, Neil Brock said:We're still very much checking in on all the feedback here and of course raised issues across the Bug Tracker. Work is going on in all areas, but appreciative that people within this thread are looking for Match Engine based news. We are as always continuing getting feedback from our private Dream Team group on any tweaks and changes we currently have in test. This of course isn't a quick process - as you all know you can't just play a couple of matches to get a feel for something like this, it does take time in order to analyse properly. We also know that information is key, so we are working on providing some more information on the ME which may help some people adapting to some of the new areas which have been evolved for FM23.
Game stability is paramount for us, so our next minor update is most likely to primarily address issues on that front, but as the match team indicated at the point of release, our next major update is the current aim for anything on the match side. Plus focus on gameplay, competition/rule group, UI and all other areas across the game.
Given the nature of software development we can't put a specific date on that yet, but if you look at our update history in previous years, you could expect both of these to drop before the end of the year. Likewise we are investigating ways to allow people to opt in to look at some of our progress prior to a wider release, but that again is something that will take some time.
As always with these things, keep an eye on these forums for information and please do continue to raise any issues you come across via our Bug Tracker. We find it incredibly useful and very much appreciate anyone who takes the time to do so and provide relevant information (screenshots/saves etc). It really compliments the work our QA team do internally. Thanks.
In terms of communication, this is absolutely the right way to go in my opinion. Much appreciated.
Please consider offering similar statements on some of the historic issues that seem to have been ignored or neglected over multiple releases -
- set pieces
- international management
- stadium variation, suitability and design
- the step backwards in match graphics after FM17
- newgen faces
- squad screen custom view columns
- the functionality of the DoF
Amongst others.
If SI could manage to clarify their intentions regarding these issues it may go a long way to assuage the notion that players who are very loyal to this game are shouting into the abyss, and it may well help to bolster the enormous amount of goodwill that I'm sure the vast proportion of the player base harbours towards the game and the team behind it.
Thanks again
38 -
1 hour ago, Daveincid said:
Of course it also affects clubs but this would be again a db-issue. If you only load the european top nations, a lot of young players in Nations slightly below (Portugal, Netherlands, Austria, Turkey and so on) won't develop the same (especially their reputation) as when you have the leagues loaded. Those won't be that much in the focus of the big Nations which also leads to a higher average age in the top leagues. As I wrote: If you want the simulation to be as realistic as possible, you need to load a lot of leagues. In my simulations with all leagues loaded, the avg. age in all clubs looks pretty good. (still the top Nations need a boost, as I wrote)
Isn't this a deeper problem?
Should there be any database setting in the game in which players loaded and/or generated don't develop properly? Idealistic, I know.
And, furthermore, one thing that has always irked me is - why is there no clear explanation of how the choices you make at set-up effect your long-term game?
Whilst the in-game mechanics can benefit from some mystery in certain areas, surely game set-up should be comprehensively explained.
Questions for SI, not you Dave, love your work to address these issues.
6 -
3 hours ago, Tonton_Zola said:
Yeah I think it’s the sheer mystery of some of this stuff that has begun to grate.
Making that office screen better, or creating 12 different variants of it, should literally take a day max? I mean, if it’s not integrated into a wider three dimensional environment experience, why not just take 12 royalty free photographs (or illustrator graphical renders) of different offices from different locations…perhaps scaled against size and location?
If you want a graphical style, no problem, I could do this in 10 minutes using DALL E if I wanted?
I am pushing the point, but WHY (along with so many other graphical irritations) does this stuff not get changed? It begins to border on an elaborate practical joke.
The bolded part. I couldn't have said it any better.
4 -
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
Lots of people have varying and different priorities when playing this game. They are all equally valid.
There is much speculation and guesswork about why certain elements are the way they are.
None of that is necessarily rooted in truth.
But it is inevitable when communication becomes, as it has, a bit one-sided.
This forum specifically asks for bug reports and suggestions for the future. It can seem as though they are being reported to a brick wall. I don't believe that is necessarily the case.
Please SI, open the lines of communication a bit more. Especially around glaring issues like set pieces and newgen faces.
A little explanation would go a long way.
11 -
Anticipation? Acceleration?
0 -
16 hours ago, vikeologist said:
I always assumed it was because you can only fine a player once a week. I think that sometimes you can't fine all the lower performances, but I'm unaware of any occasion where I could warn but not fine.
Just had Luis Diaz get a 6.5 but the option to fine him was not there. His last fine was over a month ago, so it doesn't seem to be related to fining only once a week, at least in this instance.
I was able to warn him about his performance - 'our forwards were feeding off scraps etc.'
0 -
18 minutes ago, 2feet said:
I think you can only disciplaine when the score is 6.4 or below.
If a player hovers around 6.5 and 6.6, you can only criticise recent form which only seems to boost the average by 0.1 or 0.2.
It seems to vary a bit with 6.5. Sometimes you can discipline and sometimes you can only warn.
I wonder if it it has something to do with the micro-increments that we cannot see in the match engine calculations - 6.51389 vs 6.57984 - or something similar to that?
0 -
One way is to fine him for poor match performances.
Poor performance fines -
6.5 - Warning
6.4 - 1 day fine
6.3 - 1 day fine
6.2 or below - 1 week fine.
2 week fines can causes happiness issues.
Treat each fine as an isolated case. Players don't remember previous fines.If the player responds well he can get a bump in determination and/or work rate
1 -
Same here. With scouts too.
0 -
40 minutes ago, SimonHoddle said:
I get what you’re saying but kind of disagree. A RPM makes things happen anywhere. He can be very deep, receiving the ball as an out ball and then playing a short but highly intelligent pass to a player in space, controls the middle and links up front…without ever being a goal scorer. I think Modric is prime RPM.
you’re right - if you watch the Amazon series All or Nothing the managers never say I want you to be an RPM or DLF or terraquistra etc. but I think that’s a work around for FM. IRL they’ll coach the players tactical position on the training ground but that’s impossible to replicate so we need ultra defined roles.Spot on. I think this is key to understanding the more 'gamey' aspects of FM.
We don't have access to hours on a training pitch and, more significantly, we don't have the massive resource of human communication and language to interact with our players and discuss ideas.
Just compare the player interaction system with actual human communication and the issue is obvious.
SI has to compensate for that somehow.
0 -
I've got Trent excelling at Liverpool as an rpm
0 -
Agree with this 100%. I recently suggested a similar approach.
1 -
If you're on Steam it may help to verify the game files?
https://help.steampowered.com/en/faqs/view/0C48-FCBD-DA71-93EB
0 -
The DoF should also have some grasp of work permit rules.
0 -
I have to agree with this suggestion.
It seems unlikely that players in the real world only get to experience this extra rehab if the manager remembers to initiate it?
2 -
Agreed.
I'd also like to be able to say - 'we've had a busy schedule, and we've been rotating you to keep you fit for the most important games'.
3 -
Agreed. The feature can't really be trusted at the moment.
I've put in a feature request to that effect, here
0 -
It would make the Director of Football much more effective if we could meet with him early on and set up some policy guidelines.
Things like -
If he is allowed to initiate transfers
- ignore/consider scout and analyst reports before initiating transfers for players (e.g. don't sign players, C- or lower players, only sign players B or above, set a minimum knowledge level before transfer etc.).
- sign/son't sign unscouted players
- ignore/adhere to board requirements on recruitment
- only bid for players with certain attributes, personalities, home-grown status or reputations
If he is allowed to negotiate contracts
- set a wage structure and stick to it
- don't promise more playing time than the manager can accommodate
- don't promise loans to players the manager wants to keep at the club or U18s (not sure if setting them to unavailable for loan already does this?)
- set a minimum/maximum contract length
There are probably lots of other things I've not thought of, but these are all based on issues I've had during gameplay.
3 -
No responses. Looks like a feature request is needed then.
0 -
11 minutes ago, Rashidi said:
Well the keeper fluffed his very first shot against in the Serie A so I guess it was nerves because he produced some outstanding matches in the next few. He was rated 7.6 even when we lost one game. Overall though he was solid between the sticks against Atalanta whom we destroyed 3-0.
Really happy with our keeper signing. Stands tall when needed, Loads of solid reflex saves and is already just behind Mike Maignan and Onana as the most effective keepers in Serie A.
And, no you cant access previous season chalkboard stats from within the game. If you want to keep them you need to export them before Jun 23 out to an excel spreadsheet. Personally i am > 50 years and my days of using excel sheets for playing FM died in the days of CM. I don't want to play FM with an excel spreadsheet. Its actually pretty easy to export and keep them in an excel spreadsheet.I'm with you on that, spreadsheets seem too much like work.
it's a shame the game doesn't retain the information, it could tell some interesting tales.
The keeper sounds excellent, but there's never any accounting for first night nerves.
0 -
1 hour ago, Marko1989 said:
Nope, making ambition 1 would ruin his development
Yep, good point.
I watched a Zealand test which seemed to indicate that ambition has very little effect on development, but I'm taking that with a pinch of salt.
0 -
@RashidiThat keeper certainly vindicates the approach. Did you expect it to be so successful so immediately?
This may be a daft question, but can you access stats from previous seasons?
0 -
Am I right in thinking there is no way to insist that the DoF only offers a set amount of playing time when renewing squad players' contracts?
Also, when asking him to renew youth players contracts, can I tell him not to promise them loans?
If I can't fulfill the promises he makes to my players then giving him the reponsibility is a big problem.
0
Issues with Recruitment Focus
in Football Manager General Discussion
Posted · Edited by mikelfc8
Does the game or do SI offer clear instructions for how each setting is supposed to work?
If so, then do they work as expected?
If there are no clear instructions, why not?