Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

opel80uk

Members
  • Content Count

    19
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About opel80uk

  • Rank
    Amateur

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Great thread! Can I ask, all the times you attended interviews, did they come about because you applied, or were you approached by them first?
  2. I'll have to check when I get home about who I bought, as I can't remember (they were young players) but Brown was sold to Torino, Lustig to Malaga and Kouassi to Fiorentina.
  3. Started a Celtic save on the latest patch (19.3.1). Bought and sold some players in the first window. Of the ones I bought, some joined straight away, but some are joining on the 01/01/19, despite the transfer window being open for both teams. This is the case with both cash buys, and also players signed via compensation. Likewise, I sold Lustig, Brown and Kouassi, all within the Transfer windows for both me and the buying club, and as cash transfers. Lustig & Kouassi joined their new clubs straight away but Brown isn't leaving till 01/0/19 for some reason.
  4. There are those that it doesn’t bother, those that it doesn’t matter to, and those that will just simply say whatever SI do is fantastic/great. That doesn’t mean that a product isn’t ‘broken’, for want of a better word. I think, and this is only my opinion, that the general consensus is that the game broken. That was always the way the series was going to head when SI continually use the paying public as their testers. What I would suggest to the OP is do what I do and, in the future, do not buy the game till it is properly patched in Feb/March. That way, you still get a years worth of game, and, if enough people do it, it may encourage SI to not release a, generally considered IMO, sub optimal product.
  5. An absolutely exceptional post but, unfortunately, I fear that you have simply wasted your time writing that. There are those on this forum that, no matter how obvious or factually correct the point is, will simply counter argue in defense of the game. It’s been that way since I first read these forums, going back God knows when.
  6. Actually, that's not really an accurate analogy. It's more like a builder saying he's finished a job and getting paid for it. Then, when the people who paid for the job ask him when he's going to come back to tidy up a few lose ends that he left unfinished, the builder telling them 'soon'.
  7. Yeah? Did you see who it was that told me about the PM's, and how he's been asked to tone down his defending of the game? How's that working out?
  8. You're reminded, by the mods, in the forum? I must've missed those posts. I stand corrected.
  9. he's spamming?! Yes, if you say so. You're the Moderator after all. Although I'd be interested how many times those that have spammed arguing that the game isn't flawed have been advised that they too are spamming when they churn out the same thing over and over defending the game. That's rhetorical, in case you were wondering.
  10. I don't need to do anything because 1) I'm not deciding how the forum should be moderated, unless you can point me to where I was? and 2) I'm not a moderator. On the other hand, you are, so if there is a limit on the amount of times someone is able to post related feedback (Or repeat things like a parrot, as you so diplomatically put it) it should be made clear that is the case. In a way, I have a touch of sympathy for you moderators. On one hand, this is an official SI Forum, so a degree of trying to argue against the tide of opinion about the games flaws is to be expected, even if it does appear to border on the sycophantic; a Courtesan doesn’t get to where they do without some false platitudes. But that sympathy dissipates rather quickly when you see the ridiculous lengths some of you will go to argue black is white, and when someone, who has paid good money for a product, is decried as a parrot for providing feedback. The £30, or whatever he paid for the game, should entitle him to repeat it, if he so wishes.
  11. This is a feedback thread, is it not? Do you think scott MUFC's post does not constitute feedback? Or is there a prerequisite to post in the bugs forum as well? Just so we know.
  12. We all know that there are people on this forums that will defend the game, SI etc, no matter how ridiculous what they are saying may sound to the rest of us, or how much it goes against what the majority of posters are saying. They will pedantically say ‘Ah, but that real life example you provided is slightly different in that……’. The Tore Andre Flo example was a good one, bought for over 8M (when the world record at the time was 46M), and released on a free at the end of the season (albeit at the end of the season as opposed to 3 months – I say the time difference is fairly academic). So my question isn’t to the likes of Milnerpoint, et al, who have expressed their view, which I should have added above that they are perfectly entitled to, but to SI directly; Do the SI team see the fact that the likes of Willian or Van Ginkel have no interest shown in them when offered for free at the start of the game as a flaw, or do they see that as the transfer system working as it should be? At least then those of us who do see it as a flaw will know that it is not something being looked at. Many thanks
×
×
  • Create New...