sperlz

2013 Primary Focus - Match Engine

175 posts in this topic

Completely agree that the focus needs to be on the ME.

There's still basic problems like the ball hitting players on the back, players with great technique dribbling the ball off the pitch with no pressure, players making ridiculous decisions when it comes to shot choice, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think strikers score too much as it is, the chances each attacker gets needs to be reduced.

+1 if striker is fast enough he can score stupid amount of goals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The one thing I would like was already mentioned and thats the referee playing the advantage. I don't care if a foul was committed if my player is the one that keeps possession. Let me keep my attack going. It would stop me from thinking that the opposition is doing it on purpose to disrupt my attacking flow (which they probably are trying to do, but if the advantage was played it would be a lot less frustrating.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think strikers score too much as it is, the chances each attacker gets needs to be reduced.

Love to know how you get them scoring. Mine clean through one on one and that's all they do, it's like the keeper has a big target on his chest!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm seeing very few responses to Govnars points! I think he's given loads of good, accurate reasons why the ME should be the main focus! Usually when I complain somebody on this forum always has an answer or reason for them which I find terribly unusual. Where are they now? They surely wouldn't be able to disagree with his points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm seeing very few responses to Govnars points! I think he's given loads of good, accurate reasons why the ME should be the main focus! Usually when I complain somebody on this forum always has an answer or reason for them which I find terribly unusual. Where are they now? They surely wouldn't be able to disagree with his points.

I could give you 100s of ways in which the ME could get better. However, that doesn't mean it is totally useless. It is very well balanced, meaning wide, narrow, deep and high tactics all have a chance of succeeding. Teams with good players generally do better than teams with worse players over the course of a season. Good tactical logic gets good results. There are fewer ME holes to exploit than ever before.

I don't see any point is agreeing or disagreeing with any of Govnar's points. Yes, the ME can get better. Yes, some of the things he's pointed out need work. No, others aren't so important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never bothered buying FM12 due to the fact nothing has really changed since 2010 version.

Honestly I stopped paying attention to you right there. The game is VERY different to FM11 let alone FM10!!

The way information is presented and its usefulness has increased ten fold. The prematch reports are worlds away from the less than useful FM10 equivalent, the youth team changes, the interface changes, tactics and players are now more relaistic, team talks are just totally different, player interaction is deeper and more individual feeling. These things just popped into my head, there are tons of other changes. Its the most different version of FM ive played for years, since the 3D ME was introduced tbh.

Its far from perfect buts accusing it of not changing is silly talk. Alot of the FM moaning I see on here each year seems to stem from the same gripe 'its to complex now, why cant it be simple like back in the day when you just bought 11 superstars, found an exploit super tactic and won everything without having to deal with players, press, other managers, board etc...'

Well sorry FM has moved on from those days and they arent coming back.

I know FM11 and FM12 haven't introduced too many new features over FM10, so logically, they aren't that different to FM10.

What particular version of reality are you living in? It has plenty of new features... It took me a few weeks to get to grips with it cause it felt so different to FM11.

I'm seeing very few responses to Govnars points! I think he's given loads of good, accurate reasons why the ME should be the main focus! Usually when I complain somebody on this forum always has an answer or reason for them which I find terribly unusual. Where are they now? They surely wouldn't be able to disagree with his points.

They are all good points, thats why nobody argued with him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thing is guys, I have a lot off posters telling me that these don;t happen or if they do, put up with it! That the ME is fine as it is, I;m sorry but I think it is nowhere near good enough. He has listed around 30 problems there, with one part of the game, it's not good enough! On the other hand, I think the rest of the game is going in the right direction and am happy with that. Some posters on here just will not accept criticism of the game, I don't understand it personally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thing is guys, I have a lot off posters telling me that these don;t happen or if they do, put up with it! That the ME is fine as it is, I;m sorry but I think it is nowhere near good enough. He has listed around 30 problems there, with one part of the game, it's not good enough! On the other hand, I think the rest of the game is going in the right direction and am happy with that. Some posters on here just will not accept criticism of the game, I don't understand it personally.

There hundreds of parts to the ME. Overall its solid, some of them are big issues, some not that big. The points he has raised are good ones,. Be happy with that, and be happy that there is a new ME in development, which will hopefully address those issues. wwfan has said he can see 100s of ways in which the ME can be improved, so I'm more than confident that PaulC knows these areas of concern

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My issue is with the other posters, you guys obviously know the issues are there but don't deny them, you just simply over look them and carry on. For me, it's far too annoying, each to their own. What grinds my gears is when other posters deny them and try to say 'match interpretation', I mean, come on, seriously? Most deny that they are even there! 'This never happens in any of my games' is a usual response. Always the same posters who just won't have the game critiqued, really annoying!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every thread will have up to five types of poster:

1. Enraged beyond belief, won't listen to reason, everything is wrong

2. Stubborn beyond belief, won't listen to reason, everything is right

3. Normal people willing to listen to, and discuss, both sides of the argument

4. People who post jokes, talk crap and are just there to +1

5. dafuge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha, you are totally correct Ackter! I'm really frustrated with defending and the ME on this version but I can still see why ppl enjoy it. It does have it's strengths, wouldn't it be nice if those weaknesses were ironed out too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Haha, you are totally correct Ackter! I'm really frustrated with defending and the ME on this version but I can still see why ppl enjoy it. It does have it's strengths, wouldn't it be nice if those weaknesses were ironed out too!

I can see the weaknesses in defending, usually good (or lucky) enough not to get punished by them. But would definitely not have them there in the first place.

Hopefully all our dreams will come true and they will be sorted.

Wish they would sort out throw in, good grief they bug me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol, they cause me some annoyance too! Trying out a new tactic with a sweeper/libero and making him the short option for every throw, hope this helps!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+1 if striker is fast enough he can score stupid amount of goals

To be fair, if he's otherwise crap, he won't score many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Every thread will have up to five types of poster:

1. Enraged beyond belief, won't listen to reason, everything is wrong

2. Stubborn beyond belief, won't listen to reason, everything is right

3. Normal people willing to listen to, and discuss, both sides of the argument

4. People who post jokes, talk crap and are just there to +1

5. dafuge.

so i guess you and milnerpoint are number 2 then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, you're being criticised for criticising a game you don't play.
I don't think this is a problem. If it doesn't look good on paper, then it probably isn't, given things are underpromised and oversold.

I do this all the time. Windows Vista, for example - I took one look at it and decided it wasn't worth upgrading, even before trying out any demo or Technet builds.

What's in it for you to criticise me for criticising the series, anyway?

Everyone here wants the series to constantly improve year on year its just that a lot of the improvements don't have the "Wow" factor you seem to want.

We see lots of improvements every version its just many of them are minor but when added together I personally feel give excellent value for money. Some users would even be happy just to pay for updated squads & league tables without anything else.

At the end of the day FM is about football management and there are limits to what SI can change/add after this many editions of the series, its mostly about refining/improving. Finding additions that also have your "Wow" factor are even rarer and only come along every few years.

They shouldn't be rare, however. Player interaction, for example, has been rather poor for many years. So have press conferences, which give you the idea that it is "Continue Manager 2012". Training has barely changed and was botched before this patch (where AI teams didn't train alternate formations). Contracts look bugged. Board interaction is close to zero despite the fact that the football and corporate side of things are becoming closer and closer in football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Barside, cynet. The yearly release cycle has been our business model for a long time and is completely non negotiable. Football is a seasonal game and we think we give excellent value in terms of money vs time spent playing each release. If someone wants to skip a year then that is absolutely their right, of course!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think this is a problem. If it doesn't look good on paper, then it probably isn't, given things are underpromised and oversold.

I do this all the time. Windows Vista, for example - I took one look at it and decided it wasn't worth upgrading, even before trying out any demo or Technet builds.

What's in it for you to criticise me for criticising the series, anyway?

The bottom line still is though you criticize something you dont have a clue about fact there's no if's or but's thats fact, and the thing that gets me and others i think is you seem to go to such length's with fancy post and big words to put other people off getting the game, so we could question you as you have ackter in what do you get out of this ??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have two main gripes with the 3D, both of which I've brought up before.

1) Defending. Honestly, it's terrible in a lot of aspects, and some things really haven't changed since the 3D has come in. So many seemingly clear cut chances are created through defenders not reacting, or doing a little movement the wrong way, or jumping to head a ball but missing it entirely, or slowing right down in space, or not covering space they should etc. Full backs still can't consistently stay goal side and centre-halves still leave big gaps between them. I know it's only a 'representation', but that representation is what we see if we choose to play the 3D.

I'm sure defensive stats, tackles made, interceptions, defensive headers won, goals scored etc match up to real life stats, but with the manner in which so many goals are scored it's easy to see why a lot of users start feeling 'cheated', especially when the AI's defensive corner clearance has found its lone striker for the 15th time, while the three defenders you've set to stay back have all stood still watching. Or your central defender chasing a ball back towards his own goal, and you already know the striker chasing is going to dispossess him and shoot in one motion.

2) Ball trajectory is very unrealistic. Long balls and clearances don't float in the game, they arrow. Even in the lower leagues, at least 5-6 times a game you'll see someone punt a ball 80 yards and it will drop in front of the winger near the corner flag. Long balls are generally speculative, and it's only the best passers (Scholes, Carrick, Xavi, Beckham etc) find targets consistently over 25+ yards. And it takes time for a long pass to hit it's mark. In FM teams can do it with a flipping defensive clearance, because the ball seems to shoot out of a cannon over distance. When you add in the fact centre-halves don't mark strikers who pull out wide and full-backs are always caught out, pretty much every long ball down the flanks is effective, even when it's just a defensive clearance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think strikers score too much as it is, the chances each attacker gets needs to be reduced.

Which of course goes back to defending. The amount of times a straight forward ball puts attackers through because the defender has stood still, or moved the wrong way, or done the little backwards movement or not covered an obvious space etc is insane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
so i guess you and milnerpoint are number 2 then.

Nope, I'm all options between 1 and 4 depending on which part of the game we're talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Barside, cynet. The yearly release cycle has been our business model for a long time and is completely non negotiable. Football is a seasonal game and we think we give excellent value in terms of money vs time spent playing each release. If someone wants to skip a year then that is absolutely their right, of course!

Paul, I'm looking at the annual release cycle from the perspective of whether it actually holds back the game.

In the past it was fairly easy to offer a yearly release with significant advances due in part to the game being less complex & offering many areas of potential low investment development, now that the game has evolved to become a very complex beast I'm wondering if a bi-annual release would see a faster rate of development that an annual release.

Personally the only version I've skipped since 1999 was CM03/04 & that was due to the fact that CM4 was so bad I lost faith in SI producing the best product out there, since then the only change to my buying pattern of FM05-10 all being bought at full price on launch is that I did not buy FM11 or 12 at launch, instead waiting for the sticker price to drop so that I could use reward points to pick them up for nothing or next to nothing.

Says a lot that as a massive fan & addict of the game I have been prepared to wait for the new game so that I can spend as little as possible on it, I always hold back any reward points to use on games that I'm not too sure about & I never thought FM would end up on that list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best thing SI can do now is to consider the following fact:

There is no space in modern football.

It isn't actually possible to score goals at all in modern football. Yet, it happens almost every match. Impossibility becomes possibility because we are all human and we make mistakes and we become inspired by some unknown brilliancy and the result is that the ball enters the net. But there is no space, and there is no time to use this non-space for anything. So the players need to create space out of atomic density, and they need to buy time out of nothing - and when they do goals are scored, like if by some kind of magic... or stupidity.

With this as a starting point, the 3d renditions will look like real life football instead of two and two players duelling like knights for a white speck while the audience (both the 20 on the pitch and the 20 000 off it) waits in anxiety for the outcome, and then reacts. Pace will also no longer be the single most important aspect of the game since there is so much space to cover on the defense and so much space to run in on the offense; instead, with no space to run in or cover, pace is out and brains are in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've had this discussion in another thread, but clearly a yearly release schedule holds back the game. Exactly the same as it holds back FIFA and PES. All three games there make small incremental changes each year because the development money and/or staff isn't there. It's only FIFA that has been brave enough to re-write their engine in the last 4 years (FIFA 08 I believe - and that was only really done because they needed to take market share from PES), which was as a result of shifting some development to a 'B' team - a luxury SI don't have.

It makes good business sense, of course, and people continue to buy and enjoy the game each year so it isn't going to change. For a lot of people they probably don't even see the issues that others are frustrated with - I'd imagine the vast majority of players only ever pick their favourite team or a big team and play for a few seasons - so frustrations with things like long-term AI/squad building/lower league management don't factor into their gaming. (Incidentally, I'd love to know the average number of seasons played across the userbase.)

Ultimately I think that the areas that perhaps are most in need of action don't register enough with the majority of players for it to create the need for SI to rip it out and rework it. The other thing that would benefit the FM series is a real, credible competitor.

Actually, this is really our fault for buying FIFA/PES/FM each and every year; if we didn't - and made our reasons why - then each company would have to do a bit more to win us back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
few more:

+ Inability to instruct players to get behind ball when defending

+ Inability to instruct players to retreat to own half when defending (negates opposition midfield space and time on ball, helps fast forwards on counter)

+ Inability to set different widths for defense/midfield/attack

+ Lack of struggle for ball in lower/lesser leagues

+ Inability of ME to simulate leagues where teams prefer choppy game-play with lot of small fouls disrupting game flow

+ Inability of ME to differentiate and appropriately use particular and very different qualities of tall players that can't jump high and small player that can jump high when calculating who will win the ball

+ Goalkeepers not sweeping when situation obliviously demands it

+ Far post goals from free kicks happen far too often

+ Lack of goals from certain types of direct free kicks

+ Players to often attempting to get a corner/throw off opposition player

+ Players automatically heading toward their default position after free kick/corner even though their current position is clearly superior

+ ...

* Everything written above and in previous post affects AI far more then human managers as we are able to use all sorts of workarounds. This in combination to poor squad building by AI (inability of AI to recognize players that will complement preferred formation/style and particular skills of already available players) makes game very easy for experienced players.

Goalkeepers either dont sweep like said above or they start to close on the ball only to get within touching distance before deciding to change their mind and running back to their goal line allowing the striker to score an easy finish into an open net.

To be honest every time a new version of FM is released i don't like it at first and always go back to playing the previous version for quite a few months before i decided to move onto the new one. This obviously is not a good thing especially when considering new players to the series because if itss not piquing their interest straight away then they are'nt going to stick with it. I have been playing this series for a long time so i am aware of this period of disappointment that i know i have every version and probably others do as well. However i think alot of the time when people go onto the forums and complain about the latest release it is more to do with their saved game not going as well or being as fun as their previous save game on a previous version. I have came to the conclusion that this is indeed the case,at least for myself, as i like to play long haul saves and miss them when moving over to another new version and i become reluctant to abandon my other save that i have put so much effort and time into and got so much enjoyment out of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Biggus to a degree, I would also put forward an argument for less highlights per game. Keep it concise and precise.

CityandColour, you are so right in what you say!

I also have to say that although it doesn;t really bother me, training, player interaction, board interaction, media and teamtalks are extremely vague and continuous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dr. Who is​ awful though.

Of course it is! I know. I haven't watched an episode since Christopher Eccleston left, but I've seen a couple of trailers of David Tennant episodes and heard someone on the bus say Matt Smith is rubbish so I'm an expert.

Metaphors aside, the problem is different people can see exactly the same thing and react in an entirely different way. One person can see a game with some faults but think that you will never get a computer simulation to completely reflect the physics of the ball, let alone twenty two different players thinking and reacting at the same time. The "glass half full" type of person will notice that strikers score too high a proportion of a team's goals, that defenders don't react as intelligently as forwards, and half a dozen other things which could be better but their overall opinion is that the game does a really good job of producing realistic scores and results, gives you a variety of options to try and for thirty quid offers good value for money. And that's broadly my position - things could be improved, of course, but I'm more impressed by how well it works than annoyed by the flaws.

Other people will see things which that type of person regards as minor irritations and be outraged - "why haven't they sorted THAT out!"

You can't please everyone and finally what decides whether the makers are doing a good job or not is the market. If they annoy enough buyers to seriously affect profits they are doing things wrong: if sales and profits increase they are pleasing more customers than they're losing and, broadly, doing a good job. And there's a very good early warning system which Steam brings too. It enables SI to see how many hours buyers are playing the game. If the balance is badly wrong - too easy, too hard, too complicated - then the average number of hours a buyer plays the game will drop and that would hint that they are less likely to buy next year's offering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course it is! I know. I haven't watched an episode since Christopher Eccleston left, but I've seen a couple of trailers of David Tennant episodes and heard someone on the bus say Matt Smith is rubbish so I'm an expert.

Metaphors aside, the problem is different people can see exactly the same thing and react in an entirely different way. One person can see a game with some faults but think that you will never get a computer simulation to completely reflect the physics of the ball, let alone twenty two different players thinking and reacting at the same time. The "glass half full" type of person will notice that strikers score too high a proportion of a team's goals, that defenders don't react as intelligently as forwards, and half a dozen other things which could be better but their overall opinion is that the game does a really good job of producing realistic scores and results, gives you a variety of options to try and for thirty quid offers good value for money. And that's broadly my position - things could be improved, of course, but I'm more impressed by how well it works than annoyed by the flaws.

Other people will see things which that type of person regards as minor irritations and be outraged - "why haven't they sorted THAT out!"

You can't please everyone and finally what decides whether the makers are doing a good job or not is the market. If they annoy enough buyers to seriously affect profits they are doing things wrong: if sales and profits increase they are pleasing more customers than they're losing and, broadly, doing a good job. And there's a very good early warning system which Steam brings too. It enables SI to see how many hours buyers are playing the game. If the balance is badly wrong - too easy, too hard, too complicated - then the average number of hours a buyer plays the game will drop and that would hint that they are less likely to buy next year's offering.

Another very very good post, GD is impressing me today! lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree Graham, but FM is different, they have loyal users 99% of the time who buy without even knowing if the game has been improved much or not, I am one of those people. Before even knowing the new features or ME I can't wait as release for the new version approaches. Silly thing is these days too, you can't even take it back if you're not impressed due to the whole steam thing which I find crazy. 'Not happy with it? Unlucky!' SI do have a massive responsibility due to this alone, and with their loyal users I feel they should want to keep them happy.

I believe they do and I believe the next version will be much improved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To be fair, if he's otherwise crap, he won't score many.

True, although my fast but technically limited (finishing 14, dribbling 11, technique 10 and first touch 8(!); all other technical attributes 9 or lower) led mediocre team to Europa cup final.

I have two main gripes with the 3D, both of which I've brought up before.

1) Defending. Honestly, it's terrible in a lot of aspects, and some things really haven't changed since the 3D has come in. So many seemingly clear cut chances are created through defenders not reacting, or doing a little movement the wrong way, or jumping to head a ball but missing it entirely, or slowing right down in space, or not covering space they should etc. Full backs still can't consistently stay goal side and centre-halves still leave big gaps between them. I know it's only a 'representation', but that representation is what we see if we choose to play the 3D.

I'm sure defensive stats, tackles made, interceptions, defensive headers won, goals scored etc match up to real life stats, but with the manner in which so many goals are scored it's easy to see why a lot of users start feeling 'cheated', especially when the AI's defensive corner clearance has found its lone striker for the 15th time, while the three defenders you've set to stay back have all stood still watching. Or your central defender chasing a ball back towards his own goal, and you already know the striker chasing is going to dispossess him and shoot in one motion.

2) Ball trajectory is very unrealistic. Long balls and clearances don't float in the game, they arrow. Even in the lower leagues, at least 5-6 times a game you'll see someone punt a ball 80 yards and it will drop in front of the winger near the corner flag. Long balls are generally speculative, and it's only the best passers (Scholes, Carrick, Xavi, Beckham etc) find targets consistently over 25+ yards. And it takes time for a long pass to hit it's mark. In FM teams can do it with a flipping defensive clearance, because the ball seems to shoot out of a cannon over distance. When you add in the fact centre-halves don't mark strikers who pull out wide and full-backs are always caught out, pretty much every long ball down the flanks is effective, even when it's just a defensive clearance.

All very valid points.

It's very annoying to see a defender not pressuring sole attacker standing around center after corner/free kick although there is sufficient cover (multiple fast defenders next to him and no opposition players).

Long ball problem is even more visible in lower leagues. Most annoying are incredible (50+ m) headed passes from my defenders/defensive midfielder straight to striker. Defenders seam completely unaware of the incoming ball and are poorly positioned as a result. On top of it there is distinctive lack of long balls missed by both defenders and attackers (leading to heavy struggle for ball) in lower leagues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And there's a very good early warning system which Steam brings too. It enables SI to see how many hours buyers are playing the game. If the balance is badly wrong - too easy, too hard, too complicated - then the average number of hours a buyer plays the game will drop and that would hint that they are less likely to buy next year's offering.

Reduced hours played in itself doesn't tell SI anything at all, they need feedback from players as to *why* those people are playing less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do love seeing my lower league team getting 80%+ passing success rates while they attack with the style & panache of the 1982 Brazil team, just a shame they defend like them too. :rolleyes:

As for figures from Steam I wouldn't entirely trust them as FM is a rather unique game, it's certainly one of the few out there that people will continue to play despite finding its faults infuriating.

I've used this analogy before, FM is like a cheating girlfriend/partner who you keep taking back because this time it will be different only to find out that you've been let down again but you're still doomed to repeat the cycle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

beyond match engine changes - i have an idea about revamping the game fundamentally.

removing set positions is one: judging by a players stats i should be able to play a player out of position without it being a complete disaster every single time. in real life zhirkov and coentrao have made seamless transitions from average andvanced wingers to amazing fullbacks. zambrotta even more so is able to seamlessly switch flanks - as should any other player. i dont think there is an argument against that. i mean what idiot doesnt understand that all flank play is the same - only difference is that the line is on the other side. using inverted wingers (a very in vouge aspect of the modern game) is nearly impossible since your player is AML och AML GODDAMN ONLY. how would you then migrate Bastian Schweini from AML to a fantastic MC/deep lying playmaker. FM kinda makes this too hard. I know a position can be trained but at the expense of a player being hopelessly abject for months in that new position.

removing the 1-20 statline - or hiding it to be exact. incorporating more "fuzzy" letter grades A-F perhaps and leaving it more to the manager to decide how good or effective his player is. a striker should not be judged by his "finishing, strenght" but have "strenghts and weaknesses" along with a more "fuzzy" grading. i.e. the "finishing" stat should be a grade A-F that is the aggregate of "finishing+technique+composure" and instead of reading in 8 mental stats there should be one overarching grade called "intelligence or football iq" - this in turn is the aggregate of decisions, creativity, positioning etc. a little more similar to nbadraft.net

with this you could have a striker with a B+ for finishing A in football IQ (movement and such) but poor Physical D (pace, stamina etc) and you know that he is your best candidate for a trequartista.

these two ideas are what ive been thinking of the past few years but in all honesty as much as i would love to test them out myself i still love FM so much that i still might be hostile to any change :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The bottom line still is though you criticize something you dont have a clue about fact there's no if's or but's thats fact, and the thing that gets me and others i think is you seem to go to such length's with fancy post and big words to put other people off getting the game, so we could question you as you have ackter in what do you get out of this ??

What do I get out of this? I get my point across to SI, so that they hopefully work harder, so I get better value for money should I decide to purchase FM13.

How does the game improve if everyone just bends over?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
beyond match engine changes - i have an idea about revamping the game fundamentally.

removing set positions is one: judging by a players stats i should be able to play a player out of position without it being a complete disaster every single time. in real life zhirkov and coentrao have made seamless transitions from average andvanced wingers to amazing fullbacks. zambrotta even more so is able to seamlessly switch flanks - as should any other player. i dont think there is an argument against that. i mean what idiot doesnt understand that all flank play is the same - only difference is that the line is on the other side. using inverted wingers (a very in vouge aspect of the modern game) is nearly impossible since your player is AML och AML GODDAMN ONLY. how would you then migrate Bastian Schweini from AML to a fantastic MC/deep lying playmaker. FM kinda makes this too hard. I know a position can be trained but at the expense of a player being hopelessly abject for months in that new position.

removing the 1-20 statline - or hiding it to be exact. incorporating more "fuzzy" letter grades A-F perhaps and leaving it more to the manager to decide how good or effective his player is. a striker should not be judged by his "finishing, strenght" but have "strenghts and weaknesses" along with a more "fuzzy" grading. i.e. the "finishing" stat should be a grade A-F that is the aggregate of "finishing+technique+composure" and instead of reading in 8 mental stats there should be one overarching grade called "intelligence or football iq" - this in turn is the aggregate of decisions, creativity, positioning etc. a little more similar to nbadraft.net

with this you could have a striker with a B+ for finishing A in football IQ (movement and such) but poor Physical D (pace, stamina etc) and you know that he is your best candidate for a trequartista.

these two ideas are what ive been thinking of the past few years but in all honesty as much as i would love to test them out myself i still love FM so much that i still might be hostile to any change :p

Interesting ideas, and I can think of only one game off the top of my head that abolished stats completely and you had to actually watch games to see if players were good - that was The Double on the C64/Spectrum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What do I get out of this? I get my point across to SI, so that they hopefully work harder, so I get better value for money should I decide to purchase FM13.

How does the game improve if everyone just bends over?

Who's bending over ?? its just the fact the people dont rattle on as much as you seem to on a topic or issue you dont really have a clue about or personal poof about more importantly

im sure the SI team want there product to be as good as possible without you reminding them in your every post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course it is! I know. I haven't watched an episode since Christopher Eccleston left, but I've seen a couple of trailers of David Tennant episodes and heard someone on the bus say Matt Smith is rubbish so I'm an expert.

Metaphors aside, the problem is different people can see exactly the same thing and react in an entirely different way. One person can see a game with some faults but think that you will never get a computer simulation to completely reflect the physics of the ball, let alone twenty two different players thinking and reacting at the same time. The "glass half full" type of person will notice that strikers score too high a proportion of a team's goals, that defenders don't react as intelligently as forwards, and half a dozen other things which could be better but their overall opinion is that the game does a really good job of producing realistic scores and results, gives you a variety of options to try and for thirty quid offers good value for money. And that's broadly my position - things could be improved, of course, but I'm more impressed by how well it works than annoyed by the flaws.

Other people will see things which that type of person regards as minor irritations and be outraged - "why haven't they sorted THAT out!"

You can't please everyone and finally what decides whether the makers are doing a good job or not is the market. If they annoy enough buyers to seriously affect profits they are doing things wrong: if sales and profits increase they are pleasing more customers than they're losing and, broadly, doing a good job. And there's a very good early warning system which Steam brings too. It enables SI to see how many hours buyers are playing the game. If the balance is badly wrong - too easy, too hard, too complicated - then the average number of hours a buyer plays the game will drop and that would hint that they are less likely to buy next year's offering.

I actually agree with this, because no matter what happens it is impossible to give an accurate representation of football 100%. It is a very good game for what it is... however as the op, my original post was regarding parts of the game which I believe are very possible to be implemented into the game which just aren't there and they are things such as handballs not regular enough and goalkeepers not commiting fouls. These are two things that are extremely common in football and really should be in the game and I cant understand why they are not there.

Everything else statwise seems more or less accurate, corner goals have been toned down which is pretty good, DFK's are slightly off but the two things I mentioned above are effecting the game. Also penalties are 99% (roughly) of the time given for a bad challenge by an outfield player. There is no variation and thats what I would like to see. Also outfield players are sent off nearly always for a reckless fouls and occasionally for last man. But I would like to see more variation in these things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who's bending over ?? its just the fact the people dont rattle on as much as you seem to on a topic or issue you dont really have a clue about or personal poof about more importantly

I apologise for the fact that not everyone is like me.

im sure the SI team want there product to be as good as possible without you reminding them in your every post

I'm sure that's what they want as well. However, why should I care what they want?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I apologise for the fact that not everyone is like me.

I'm sure that's what they want as well. However, why should I care what they want?

Ok i give in its all about you, and thank good not everyone is like you or it be a free for all every thread on here, i've nothing against you or your comments personally but just think you should have more knowledge on the issue in question

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Everything else statwise seems more or less accurate, corner goals have been toned down which is pretty good, DFK's are slightly off but the two things I mentioned above are effecting the game. Also penalties are 99% (roughly) of the time given for a bad challenge by an outfield player. There is no variation and thats what I would like to see. Also outfield players are sent off nearly always for a reckless fouls and occasionally for last man. But I would like to see more variation in these things.

I will have to calculate it again to be 100% sure but it seems that AI teams (in AI vs AI matches) still score to many goals from corners and indirect free kicks. This has all sorts of negative repercussions especially for defensive minded teams as too many long shots result in a corner (again in AI vs AI matches). As a result some rather poor offensive tactics overachieve. Though inability of ME to properly replicate lower league football is much bigger problem, as in my opinion ability to play with your local team should be FM's greatest strength.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont know what realy need to be fixed, but i also feel that FM improve over the years but still stuck on some old basics.

here is few things i think they shold look on :)

1. marking system is very poor, very old, and not working as it shold, there is NO full Man marking in modern footballl, and zonal marking in FM working so bad with attacking tactics you want to cry when you see it.

2. training still same old system for ages now, this not how real football players works on daily traning heh, its simple pazel games now.

3. shouts are to strong but on the other hand they to many and not easy to control, my idia is to split them to somthing like a real life manager shout - play defnsive ( stand off - nerrow - drop deep), its realy to many shout atm and not so much good detail to use them right.

4. teams that suffer hi pressure in FM dont play counter, even wolves can do tiki taka becouse of the poor marking system heh, in genral the players need brain, small one, if i say pressure the ball he dont need to run in zig zag like headless chicken, he simple shold stop :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i dont know what realy need to be fixed, but i also feel that FM improve over the years but still stuck on some old basics.

here is few things i think they shold look on :)

1. marking system is very poor, very old, and not working as it shold, there is NO full Man marking in modern footballl, and zonal marking in FM working so bad with attacking tactics you want to cry when you see it.

2. training still same old system for ages now, this not how real football players works on daily traning heh, its simple pazel games now.

3. shouts are to strong but on the other hand they to many and not easy to control, my idia is to split them to somthing like a real life manager shout - play defnsive ( stand off - nerrow - drop deep), its realy to many shout atm and not so much good detail to use them right.

4. teams that suffer hi pressure in FM dont play counter, even wolves can do tiki taka becouse of the poor marking system heh, in genral the players need brain, small one, if i say pressure the ball he dont need to run in zig zag like headless chicken, he simple shold stop :)

Absence of brick principle and dynamic repositioning/concentration of players according to ball position in ME greatly reduces effectiveness of defensive tactics and defenders in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Absence of brick principle

What is this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its the Neil "Im as hard as a brick" Ruddock, effect. FM players are wimps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.