Stop milking the FM-franchise with new versions every year!!

[Ackter]

Two wrongs don't make a right?

No software is bug-free, but doesn't the botched nature of FM11 worry you? The need for a release patch, then two further major patches and the game still has glaring bugs, and two minor patches to fixed a botched DRM?

The vast majority of games get a release day patch now. You expect too much with how it all realistically works.

[Ackter]

thats not the point, the games are never finished when they are released and it takes 6 months and 2 or 3 patches to get it working.

If they were released every other year, the games would be released in full working order.

However the revenue would drop so for me, the best thing to do is take a year out and make sure the following game is perfect for release in the build up to the new season. By the time FM comes out, the buzz of the new season has gone.

No they wouldn't - they'd still require 3 patches until SI were happy with it. The added time does not make any difference. They won't implement one year's worth of code if they have two years to work in.

[charlo116]

Why? They might not be milking casual FM-players like me, but I think they milk the community. Just like Sims with its expansion packs and Valve with new releases of Left 4 Dead only a year apart.

But if you're not buying each game then surely its not up to you to decide whos being milked? Personally i buy each yearly release and i'm more than happy to fork out for each version because i think its worth it. If anyone thought buying each new release wasn't worth it then they wouldn't buy it. Obviuosly SEGA feel like there's enough people buying each years version to make it worthwhile so i'm not sure there's much of a case here.

[milnerpoint]

That the game actually has bugs, but you never saw it?

I hope you're actually not arguing that it's OK for games to have bugs as long as a single person isn't aware of them...

if your not aware of them how can you call them bugs?

[Alan A Wadge]

each company needs regular income otherwise they won't overcome their economies of scale. Don't forget their overheads remain there whether they issue a game or not!

[Herter]

if your not aware of them how can you call them bugs?

well it is still a bug.. - however I agree with you.. some bugs dont affect any important area and therefore are not important to get fixed. I'm sure there are lots and lots of small bugs that arent visible to us and perhaps never will be fixed, or at least not any time soon.. Whats the point in spending ressources to fix such bugs, when bigger and badder bugs exist.

[Lem]

Because i believe that the people who work for SI care enough about the game and our enjoyment of it to make the best game possible. Many of them play the game themselves and therefore have a personal investment in it. How does less income encourage them to improve a game? Do you honestly think the tight bastards round here will pay even a tenner for an update when they can make or dwnld for free from somewhere?

Less people purchasing the game shows dissatisfaction, it would suggest something is wrong and they need to "up their game". If people just buy it regardless then there's no incentive for the company to change anything or produce anything better.

Well I'm sure there's a lot of people that don't buy the game at all when it's available for free somewhere - but I would imagine if most of them thought it was worth the price they'd say "hey, I'm going to buy this game so they make it next year".

[milnerpoint]

can you please show me the evidence that less people are buying this game, from memory FM11 sold more copies than FM10, hardly a sign of dissatisfaction is it? Just because you and a few forum posters are throwing their dummy out doesnt mean everyone feels the same way.

[Lem]

Do you realise there is no such thing as bug free software?

Some software is more buggy than others, and some more obviously so - 3 patches is probably about standard for a game these days so it doesn't really hold as a positive argument, especially when most only require minor fixes. This game is also in the situation that they stop working on it relatively quickly, regardless of how buggy it remains as it's a seasonal product and a new one will be out to rake in the cash.

But then some games companies rely on the "I'll buy it regardless" attitude and people casually dismissing bugs because "games are more complicated these days".

[Lem]

can you please show me the evidence that less people are buying this game, from memory FM11 sold more copies than FM10, hardly a sign of dissatisfaction is it? Just because you and a few forum posters are throwing their dummy out doesnt mean everyone feels the same way.

I didn't say less people actually bought the game, I was explaining how it encourages improvement instead of blindly buying the game.

I used to be a huge fan of the games, so it's interesting to be on the other side of the fence and see how hardcore fans throw insults at those who disagree.

[Scab]

I'm personally not really interested in SI's financial business to be honest, they can work that out themselves. I just want a new game every year for the new features and tweaks. To me, those are simply worth the price.

Bugs have been a problem the last couple of versions, but nothing's been so fundamentally flawed that I want to wait a whole nother year between releases.

[pigfacemonkeyman]

can you please show me the evidence that less people are buying this game, from memory FM11 sold more copies than FM10, hardly a sign of dissatisfaction is it? Just because you and a few forum posters are throwing their dummy out doesnt mean everyone feels the same way.

It's a pity you see it as an 'us and them' thing, do you not think it possible there are more than two opinions to choose from? Do you think it is not possible to love this game and yet criticise certain aspects of it?

If you are interested, there are one or two other 'dummy spitters' here>http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/266323-Falling-out-of-love-with-the-game

[Lem]

thats not the point, the games are never finished when they are released and it takes 6 months and 2 or 3 patches to get it working.

If they were released every other year, the games would be released in full working order.

However the revenue would drop so for me, the best thing to do is take a year out and make sure the following game is perfect for release in the build up to the new season. By the time FM comes out, the buzz of the new season has gone.

Agreed, they obviously are short on time and with bugs hanging over them from the previous year they never seem to catch up. There was a saying a few years back "If you want FM, wait til the January patch".

[milnerpoint]

It's a pity you see it as an 'us and them' thing, do you not think it possible there are more than two opinions to choose from? Do you think it is not possible to love this game and yet criticise certain aspects of it?

If you are interested, there are one or two other 'dummy spitters' here>http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/266323-Falling-out-of-love-with-the-game

Dont bring that thread, which is actually a good discussion, down to the level of this one. Crouchy isnt spitting the dummy out at all.

[milnerpoint]

I didn't say less people actually bought the game, I was explaining how it encourages improvement instead of blindly buying the game.

I used to be a huge fan of the games, so it's interesting to be on the other side of the fence and see how hardcore fans throw insults at those who disagree.

Im hardly throwing insults at you, im asking you to prove that FM is losing customers, like you claimed and that releasing a game every two years would both increase sales and increase quality, you've yet to show either.

[Cougar2010]

I didn't say less people actually bought the game, I was explaining how it encourages improvement instead of blindly buying the game.

I used to be a huge fan of the games, so it's interesting to be on the other side of the fence and see how hardcore fans throw insults at those who disagree.

In general I would agree but I don't believe this is the case with SI.

From an outside point of view they keep staff well, the staff that post on the forums have demonstrated a genuine passion for the game over the years and therefore I don't believe its a case of them not caring about bugs etc.

I am confident that as a company they attempt to make FM as bug free as possible on release unfortunately the type of industry they are in and the depth that FM has to it means its a thankless task.

I'm personally not really interested in SI's financial business to be honest, they can work that out themselves. I just want a new game every year for the new features and tweaks. To me, those are simply worth the price.

Bugs have been a problem the last couple of versions, but nothing's been so fundamentally flawed that I want to wait a whole nother year between releases.

From whats been posted on forums by SI each version sees less bugs than any previous version in terms of quantity so they are improving year on year.

The problem is in the last few years the internet has made users more aware of bugs which they may not have been aware of in the past coupled with a few problem bugs that get blown out of proportion by some users which has led to the "This game is unplayable" threads we see.

[pigfacemonkeyman]

Dont bring that thread, which is actually a good discussion, down to the level of this one. Crouchy isnt spitting the dummy out at all.

Another selective, over-dramatic statement designed to belittle an argument and gather in allies. Crouchy? If you mean crouchaldinho, I don't recall mentioning him at all. A thread is a thread, your opinion that one is of a higher level than another is meaningless. There are many dissatisfied customers posting on this site and as customers they have the right to complain about the product, and there are many satisfied customers who don't post complaints. Are you an SI customer who is satisfied 100% of the time and doesn't have any complaints?

[Danielos]

I find it a little strange that so many here first hail the game for its longevity and that you can play it for hundreds of hours and at the same time seems to get so bored with it that they need an entirely new game every year. If you walk into a second-hand store or e-Bay you find countless numbers of older versions of FM (and other yearly games like FIFA and NHL). It seems like a bit of a waste, really. Like a kind of fastfood-computer gaming...

Also, if you hardcore fans usually play many seasons in the game you will get an entire additional year to play further on instead of abandoning the game and restart every year with the newest iteration, another kind of wasteful habit...Finally, with two or three years between versions, SI may finally be able to patch the game to perfection instead of abandoning the game as soon as a new version arrives. It would be a lot more fair to finish a product before you move on to the next one.

[milnerpoint]

christ read what is posted, this game will never come perfect, doesnt matter if they only release one every 10 years, it will NEVER EVER EVER be perfect, there will ALWAYS be patches to go along with the game, get over it guys, that is the way the industry works, if you dont like it, dont buy computer games.

[Ackter]

Calm down lads, please. Try to remain civil.

[stevie_G_32201]

Two wrongs don't make a right?

No software is bug-free, but doesn't the botched nature of FM11 worry you? The need for a release patch, then two further major patches and the game still has glaring bugs, and two minor patches to fixed a botched DRM?

No it doesnt worry me at all,they do their best and if you dont like the demo just dont buy the full version. simple really.

[Scab]

I find it a little strange that so many here first hail the game for its longevity and that you can play it for hundreds of hours and at the same time seems to get so bored with it that they need an entirely new game every year. If you walk into a second-hand store or e-Bay you find countless numbers of older versions of FM (and other yearly games like FIFA and NHL). It seems like a bit of a waste, really. Like a kind of fastfood-computer gaming...

Also, if you hardcore fans usually play many seasons in the game you will get an entire additional year to play further on instead of abandoning the game and restart every year with the newest iteration, another kind of wasteful habit...Finally, with two or three years between versions, SI may finally be able to patch the game to perfection instead of abandoning the game as soon as a new version arrives. It would be a lot more fair to finish a product before you move on to the next one.

Please don't misunderstand. While these games could easily last for years, they are not perfect. Yearly refreshes make improvements, hence they are welcome. It's really that simple from where I'm standing.

The issue of cost is a valid point, but as others have pointed out, we're not exactly talking about a fortune here considering the time the product lasts. I'm happy to buy the yearly iterations and would not prefer to save £25-50 over 2-3 years to have to wait that long for more new features at once. The game is good value to me as it is, and while there have been bugs, I've never experienced it as "unfinished".

[x42bn6]

if your not aware of them how can you call them bugs?

Because other people have spotted them?

[milnerpoint]

Because other people have spotted them?

Like i said i didnt read the forums, so as far as i was aware both games were bug free, nothing stood out that i would have complained about and when i read back on them now, i didnt notice any of them at the time. My point was the forums highlight the bugs, if you dont frequent here then the chances are your completely unaware of 90% of the so called bugs.

I have friends who play FM11 and dont come on here, none of them compain about ANY bugs in FM11, yet people on here say it was released in an unacceptable state. Who is right?

[x42bn6]

Like i said i didnt read the forums, so as far as i was aware both games were bug free, nothing stood out that i would have complained about and when i read back on them now, i didnt notice any of them at the time. My point was the forums highlight the bugs, if you dont frequent here then the chances are your completely unaware of 90% of the so called bugs.

I have friends who play FM11 and dont come on here, none of them compain about ANY bugs in FM11, yet people on here say it was released in an unacceptable state. Who is right?

Neither. You take an average over lots of people.

The plural of anecdote is not data. What is "right" does not necessarily come from either of two opposing sides.

[StormenDK]

While I haven't read the entire thread, it does seem to have devolved a bit, as can be expected

I would personally agree that the yearly release is a bit too much. The bugs will always be there, and as others have said, 3 patches seem to be more or less standard for most modern games. We will never get back to the days of old, where patching wasn't done. Those games certainly weren't bug free, but people lived with whatever bugs as they could never expect a patch anyways.

Now the problem for me with the yearly release is that new features are introduced, but since the development cycle is so short, it makes it hard for SI to manage development, testing, bug fixing and adding new fully-fletched features. This results in features that don't really work well or seems a bit shallow, as there have been no time to create any depths to it. That usually takes a version or two before it feels done.

I am sure SI does care about releasing a product with bugs, and would like to have every bug fixed and tested and every feature done right for every release, but SEGA seems to be the ones demanding when the next version should be done ... and then SI just have to do the best they can. SEGA have absolutely no interest in making a data update at half price each year, when they can get some new features in and a data update and get full price, even if some of the things don't quite get the attention it should have.

Yes I am aware that I can just drop FM12 and wait for FM13 ... but that doesn't matter, as FM13 will have some features that are not completely done, and then people would say that I could just have waited until FM14 (which will likely have the same issue).

I just think that the FM franchise would feel so much more complete if the fixed yearly release was scrapped, and the game was released when it was ready. But I am realistic enough to know that won't happen.

[milnerpoint]

Neither. You take an average over lots of people.

The plural of anecdote is not data. What is "right" does not necessarily come from either of two opposing sides.

well what does it say that they are quite happy playing this "broken" game and have never noticed a problem?

[Danielos]

I just wanted to say StormenDK that that was an excellent post and I agree with everything you said...

[x42bn6]

well what does it say that they are quite happy playing this "broken" game and have never noticed a problem?

What does it say about these people who are playing this "not broken" game and they find a bug?

All it says is that they haven't noticed a bug, or have.

We don't see many things, but it doesn't mean there isn't a problem with them. We don't see some mistakes when we do exams, but we shouldn't belittle examiners for marking you down. We can't see carbon monoxide, but shouldn't belittle someone who detects it nearby with a machine. We can't see all bugs in a piece of software, but we shouldn't belittle someone who does spot it.

For a lot of software, people find exploits in extreme corner areas all the time. You will never notice the majority of bugs filed for Internet Explorer or Firefox as they involve extreme-case scenarios. But they are still bugs.

[philly_flyer10]

No they wouldn't - they'd still require 3 patches until SI were happy with it. The added time does not make any difference. They won't implement one year's worth of code if they have two years to work in.

So youre saying SI are just inept then? They will release a poor bug ridden game no matter what.

[Bradley21]

So youre saying SI are just inept then? They will release a poor bug ridden game no matter what.

Please, every game has bugs in it, if you think theres a game on the planet that is released bug free you're crazy. Its the nature of the games industry that these things happen, i have a friend who works for rockstar games and the pressure he is put under during the development process is insane.

[philly_flyer10]

well what does it say that they are quite happy playing this "broken" game and have never noticed a problem?

They have very low standards or arent intelligent enough to spot something that doesnt make sense.

[milnerpoint]

I wondered when that nugget would come, "people are stupid because they dont think the same as me" brilliant.

[cruyff14]

The original CM (from the same company) had sequels like CM 3 and 4 with season updates in between.

The only time I can remember a season update being released was on CM93 they had a end of season update and then they also released a 93/94 update for the game other than that it's always been a new game every year.

[Danielos]

The only time I can remember a season update being released was on CM93 they had a end of season update and then they also released a 93/94 update for the game other than that it's always been a new game every year.

But Championship Manager 03/04 for example, was more like a season update than an entire new game, right?

[shelton]

I like the current system. And this system have one important thing, is more easy to SI correct bugs in next versions because they have million of people in the world playing the game and reporting bugs. Furthermore, in same time SI can analyse new features feedback.

[milnerpoint]

But Championship Manager 03/04 for example, was more like a season update than an entire new game, right?

Your the one saying that they released only season updates, now your asking?

Which is it?

[Cougar2010]

But Championship Manager 03/04 for example, was more like a season update than an entire new game, right?

No it was as much a new game as FM09/10/11 is.

Basically as I understand it is CM was written in one massive lump of code which was added to and changed with each version. Every few years they would rewrite the code from scratch (CM2, CM3, CM4).

When it changed to FM the coding was changed and broken down into modules. These modules could then be "unplugged", worked on separately and then "plugged" back in. There was no longer a need to write the whole code from scratch and now from one version to the next modules get added while others get improved or even rewritten.

[Danielos]

Your the one saying that they released only season updates, now your asking?

Which is it?

As I said, I´m not a hardcore FM-player, so I have only played CM 00/01, CM 03/04, FM06 and FM08. I assumed CM 1-4 were the sequels and the CM xx/yy were the season updates. Anyway, I´m all for seasonal updates even if it wasn´t used before.

[milnerpoint]

So basically you have argued that they should go back to seasonal updates even tho you had no idea if they even did them in the first place?

[Danielos]

So basically you have argued that they should go back to seasonal updates even tho you had no idea if they even did them in the first place?

I argue that they should start with seasonal updates. What does it really matter that much if they have done it before or not?

[442 is dead]

I've being playing FM/CM through its various incarnations for over 16 years now and I for one have bought the game on release each year without fail. I'll be the first to admit that some versions were better than others, but none of them were unplayable. Granted all software has bugs and no that doesn't make it right, but what no one can deny is that the game has come a long way and for the most part has gotten better and better each year.

Is it value for money? I would have to say absolutely the €45 I spend each year is easily the best value for money anywhere. I'm nearly 34 but on release day I'm like a 10 year-old on Christmas morning. I will yet again buy FM 12 on release.

This shouldn't be about the hardcore vs the casual gamer as both have valid points and both are right to a certain degree.

As for SI; say what you will about them but how many game developers listen to their customers/fans as well and as they do. How many improvements/features have been added over the years as a result of what was posted on these very forums. Granted they don't always get it 100% every time and they would be the first to admit this, but by and large they listen to their loyal fans more than most, and I for one will continue to support them keep up the good work guys!

On yearly updates, one of the great things about this game is the community, from the guys who create custom skins, facepacks, custom databases, updated databases etc., to the ones who help the newest noob with the "there's no such thing as a stupid question" attitude, if SI were to release database updates with a few tweaks thrown in, this would damage it for me.

Both sides have valid arguments, both are right in some ways, and both should be respected......and remember guys, opinions are like 'arseholes', everybody has one.

[Danielos]

Both sides have valid arguments, both are right in some ways, and both should be respected......and remember guys, opinions are like 'arseholes', everybody has one.

[milnerpoint]

I argue that they should start with seasonal updates. What does it really matter that much if they have done it before or not?

No you argued they should go back to seasonal updates.

I think SI should get back to releasing Football Manager with the sequels a few years aparts and with yearly season-packs between them.

[Danielos]

No you argued they should go back to seasonal updates.

*sigh* So I was wrong about them releasing seasonal updates before. I WAS WRONG! Happy now?

Can we continue the discussion now, please...

[cruyff14]

But Championship Manager 03/04 for example, was more like a season update than an entire new game, right?

No it was just another game instead of calling them champ 3, champ 4, ect... they just decided to call it after whatever season it was that year.

[pezza1]

I havent read the entire thread but thought I would drop my 2 pence in!

I personally am happy with the way things currently are done. SI have a routine (probably set by SEGA) and I think they do ok all things considered! A year isnt long to incorporate and test new features and the game will always have bugs, but I think they do ok in keeping bugs to a minimum. I certianly wouldnt pay for an update anyway.

Also, for the game to push forward, SI are going to need the money from a yearly release. I will however be changing my routine this year and buying the game after the final patch as I want to play the game in its best iteration. I have always bought the day of release but became fustrated at not being able to play the game to my satisfaction for months on end.

Anyways, both sides have a point but we have to all face facts, SI will continue to release a game every year for the forseeable future.

[B4L]

I don't see a problem with the current system TBH. I haven't played all releases since starting out in the late 90ies, but so far I have always been relatively happy with the progression the series has made each year. At any rate the FM series is by far the best value for money I have ever spent on any game/franchise. Keep 'em coming ...

[Danielos]

A minor annoyance for more casual fans like me is that is very difficult to participate in the discussion with so many versions around. If you don´t have the latest iteration, it gets pretty confusing to discuss flaws since you don´t know if they are still present in the latest version.

Just think if for example FM05, FM08 and FM11 were the only FM-games around. Instead of small, incremental steps these three games would have been truly different and major sequels.

[Lem]

Im hardly throwing insults at you, im asking you to prove that FM is losing customers, like you claimed and that releasing a game every two years would both increase sales and increase quality, you've yet to show either.

I never said it was losing customers, as I already explained to you I was responding to the question about "how less income encourages them to improve the game" by suggesting it shows dissatisfaction by voting with your wallet, as opposed to giving them money no matter what which does nothing to improve things. Perhaps you should read a conversation in full before you stick your nose in?

Obviously taking 2 years to produce a game instead of rushing it will increase quality, that much is common sense. Higher quality will of course increase sales, especially over the long term by reducing those people who buy the game once, but decide it's too poor quality to revisit.