themadsheep2001

As ive said, the brevity, language and location makes it feel like legal. And that will trump just about everything. I might completely wrong on that but thats my immediate instinct.

This is all hindsight though. And not a realistic way of working (assuming this is the issue) you've to trust the process youre working with and include caveats where possible. If they have been done by the third party making errors having done due digilience, I'm personally not going to hold them to account if its not their fault (again if thats the issue - this could all be irrelevant). The brevity and language in the statement suggests thats as much as they can say for now either way.

Think youve both missed the point here. If you've been given the information something is done or will be done, and the information changes after the fact, there's not a lot you can do. They can't work in hindsight

Sign offs can change. Anyone who has worked in licensing can tell you that. Especially if you're at the mercy of the other party, and they havent got their ducks in a row. Licensing is notoriously expensive, extremely slow, complicated, prone to change and potentially litigious, and that's at the best of times

Going to suggest the fact that its written that way and on the Sega website means thats likely all they can say at the moment.

The very first post mentions updates in the near future and to expect to hear from them on this very soon

Problem can also be what you're allowed to say. Having had to deal with licensing issues in my current job, nothing more frustrating than not being able to talk about stuff that might not be your fault but getting the blame for it. Not saying thats the case here but it wouldn't surprise me.

All of you cut the sniping out now, otherwise its thread bans. If you're unhappy with something, use the report tool. Thanks

The data has to be locked for a release. This always been the case. It doesnt change when a future update is times.

Then you can leave SI to work through then. You dont need to rant in there, and i suggest you dont, thanks.

We do try and read it. Which is why we're very much not interested in ranters. As SI have to wade through it to read the useful constructive critical feedback. We'd rather not boot people but we absolutely will

It's for constructive feedback. Not for sniping, thanks.

Closing the thread before it gets worse than it already has.

There's a few of you in here who have taken to either sniping at SI or at each other. Please dont do it or we will remove you from the thread. Thanks

Just to pick up on the bold as you rightly point to it, whoever posted it as a fundamental misunderstanding of CA and points attributions. Its not a deep dive by any means tbh. And the post itself isnt particularly useful to SI as a complete representation EDIT: @Jack Joyce you beat me to it

Enough. If people resort to insults then the discussion is over

Right, this thread is supposed to be light hearted fun. We're having to deal and delete far too much nonsense in here. If it continues, we'll close the thread.

I dont think you know what a straw man argument is. The context here is whether GPT can offer working well thought out tactics from prompts. It cannot, thus it fails at being a useful tool for FM. You can echo all you like, but its been repeatedly demonstrated it offers up flawed tactics.

"It doesnt think or come up with its own ideas" - thats precisely the problem. "The concept of prompting is to get clear, relevant information back" again it doesn't give back clear relevant information. Thus it fails at its task here I'm not the only person to have pointed it out, but you seem intent on ignoring this so i will spell it out clearly, since you still havent grasped it It cannot advise clearly, since the tactics it offers up are inherently flawed. Because it cannot actually properly filter out good information from bad well enough. And since it has no connection to the game it has no true context to place its data around. In terms of FM usage it is still rubbish. Thankfully SI haven't put it anywhere near FM and thats a good thing.

There are no better prompts, the software isnt smart enough, doesn't sort through whether information it dregdes up is good enough and doesn't understand FM in any context. Nothing has changed since the topic was started in this regards.

Exactly. If people actually want this to be good, they need to accept where its rubbish so it can improve, not stick tneir fingers in their ears. In terms of FM, its still not good enough to be anywhere near the game.

SI have already said they have no plans for a subscription.

SI have actually said, they looked at a subscription model among other things and that it isnt in their plans.

Lets cut the bickering out please. Suggestions and wants are entirely subjective to that person and dont need critiquing by others

Not sure whether it was preplanned or something they took from how well the FM25 post went down, but i like it a lot.