Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
antbonc

Why doesn't FM look like FIFA?

Recommended Posts

Well, this might help http://steamcharts.com/app/231670

Sales stats are unavailable to the public, though. Valve won't release them. Also, what you said is exactly what I am saying, so what happens on the forums cannot be taken into consideration at all, since we don't know how and if it relates to the actual customer base.

[edit] There was one very lonely guy in February 2013 :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3d is relatively new? No it isn't. It's been around for donkeys years. Look at half life 1 for example.I hate fifa but that is beside the point. The match graphics are years, if not decades ahead of football manager, even if fifa is a pile of poo and FM remains the best football game on the market. If SI could get match day graphics that match FIFA combined with FMs extremely high quality of simulation then they'd be on to the best game ever developed. (For football fans that is)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do wonder sometimes why we still have such and awful match engine (comparitively speaking). Especially now they don't really add much to the game each year, just a few tweaks and call them 'features' along with an updated database. I know a fantastic looking match engine wouldn't appeal to everyone, but to those with decent computers and laptops I think it could be a great addition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, this seems to have sparked a lot of debate.

Seems obvious that SI can't compete with EA Sports in terms of finance and man power.

Many people are saying that they wouldn't like FM matches to look as good as FIFA matches. This to me seems disingenuous. FM is about realism, why wouldn't you want the actual matches to look as realistic as possible?

And no, this doesn't necessarily need to be a comparison with FIFA Manager. I didn't ask for a comparison of the games as a whole. Just the graphical representation of football games.

If I could only buy one football game a year, it would be FM. I would be insanely excited though if one year the graphics took a leap into FIFA territory. It would improve FM massively.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally i would like it to be better looking but all in all fm is a managerial game first and so that should always be top priority

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I only bought the last one. It had some interesting ideas, took a different approach to some things and had some charm. But ultimately the bad outweighed the good- there was a depth there, but the presentation and UI did a poor job of showing it off. The match engine looked pretty but didn't work especially well. It ultimately felt too passive to me- things would carry on the same way regardless of my input as the boss.

I too bought the last one (Fifa Manager 14) to "check it out". Glad I got it on sale. Total game time (2 hours). FM14 total game time (over 800 hours according to Steam) and that does not include the time I spent playing FMH 14 on the ipad while travelling or away from my desktop. Keep up the great work SI!!!:applause:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3d is relatively new?

FM started 3D matches in 2009 - in those terms it's relatively new.

I'm not comparing it to other games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"But I reckon, from my time on the forums and other forums related to SI...". And I reckon that's bad reckoning. See?

You're taking things out of context. If you can't take the time to read and understand the posts then that's not my issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're taking things out of context. If you can't take the time to read and understand the posts then that's not my issue.

I'm not, but I don't think you know what you want to say. You initially linked the mentioned poll, as if to say it means something, and then you say:

No - it doesn't represent all the people that bought the game at all.

Nor can you say that the people who play 3D represent all the players in the world.

The only people that have the stats for this is SI (or SEGA) I can't remember which - or even if that stat is checkable.

But we can't make assumptions that people don't want it at all. A lot of people use it - and even to lose 20% of your customer base worldwide would be devastating for SI. But I reckon, from my time on the forums and other forums related to SI that it would be much higher than 20% who would stop playing the game.

See? You say the poll doesn't represent the people who bough the game, and then say that it and the rest of the forums are a good representation of the game audience. And then:

You have absolutely no basis for your argument there. You are guessing.

I'm on the forums almost every day, I've seen the fan reaction countless times on requests that 2D be removed.

I have some basis for my argument, you have none, and you even admit that you don't regularly visit the forums or participate in the forums, or let alone read the topics that are even on page 1 of the forums.

Not trying to put you down, but you have no basis whatsoever for your argument.

See? You again use the forums as the guidance for what should or shouldn't be in the game, while my stance is that the forums should not be taken into account at all, since they - and especially the polls on them - do not represent the customer base at all.

So which one is it, do you think that forums do or do not represent the entire customer base?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do wonder sometimes why we still have such and awful match engine (comparitively speaking). Especially now they don't really add much to the game each year, just a few tweaks and call them 'features' along with an updated database. I know a fantastic looking match engine wouldn't appeal to everyone, but to those with decent computers and laptops I think it could be a great addition.

Truth be told, a good 3D engine is expensive and very hard to make. But then truth be told again, with this tempo, we'll get a modern looking one in FM2034 (and if they keep adding more press related stuff, it'll probably be called PressConferences2034 :p)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first was in a response to you and your claim of how the poll represents not enough people to justify keeping 2D.

You really need to understand taking out of context properly.

The second is in response to you responding that you are not on the forums regularly and you don't follow the threads, not even on the first page.

I have a much broader general feeling to fans on the forum who across the boards (these forums) consistently say that 2D is required.

You consistently take posts at the their posted value, without considering any sort of context to what my posts where in responding to.

That is taking posts out of their context, which you continue to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But I am not :D I am telling you that the fans on the forums do not represent the customer base, so what the fans on the forums say does not matter in terms of how popular a certain part of the game is. I don't know how else to put it. If you think that 2D is important in the game because forum users on this (and maybe other forums) say so, you are mistaken, since those users do not represent all users of the game and in fact, we don't even know the relationship between the number of users on the forums and the number of people who bought the game and play it. So to say that 2D should stay in the game because users on forums say so is misguided.

You do not know how many people use 2D percentage-wise. Neither do I, the forums give no information about that. We both have the same basis, which is our own a$$. There, do you get it now?

[edit] In the four days the 2D/3D poll was up, 124 people as of this moment voted that they use 2D mode. In those four days, in average about 30,000 people played the game on Steam. So where's the vast number of users that use 2D? The thing is, it might actually be there, maybe 29,800 of them played in 2D - we just don't know, it has nothing to do with the forums and forum polls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're missing my point completely.

I first told you that the polls on the forum are not representative of the real world - now you're claiming you told me. You have twisted it around.

I am telling you that I have experience in dealing with the forum users,not just here, but on other forums for FM and the response to any sort of 2D removal has always been negative.

I cannot possibly give you a real world example, I can only give you my experience.

You, on the other hand, have admitted you don't visit the forum often, admitted forum polls are inaccurate, and admitted you don't read the forum in it's entirity, yet insist that your view on 2D is correct.

You have less basis for your theory than I have. I have a slight advantage where I am a positive member of forums all over the world (literally) about FM.

Your basis for removing 2D is based on your own personal opinion, you have not interviewed, asked, queried forum users, or committed to online polls about this. However, I have done this, since 2007 (I think, could be 2009?) on a daily basis.

Your basis is next to 0.

Do you understand why you are you talking out of context?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they needed to SI could get figures representative enough to base a decision on, as it stands they won't because 2D is going to be an option for the forseeable future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[edit] This is a response to Eugene Tyson :)

Ok, let's try like this :D This is what you seem to be saying, correct me if I'm wrong:

1) Forum users are a decent/good/adequate/whatever kind of basis for determining how often 2D is used

2) However, forum polls by those same users on those same forums are not a good basis for determining how often 2D is used

Is that your argument? Because mine has been from the start that neither 1 or 2 are good for determining anything. It's a negative response on the subject of 2D removal from a very tiny (hundreds of people?) group of customers. AND you don't know if that's all of them that use 2D or if there are a million more, who just don't use the forums. So what they say cannot correlate to actual world in any meaningful way. So your basis is next to 0, just as mine is. Now is it clear?

Anyway, my basis is the fact that it's 2014 and good graphics are sort of a given AND the fact that SI games is constantly improving the 3D engine. The new customers have never heard of CM3 and 'commentary only', they only know 3D. Thus, once 2D is too much to maintain (in terms of resources), it will be removed from the game and all focus will be on the 3D engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it will remain a feature.

All it is is using the same match engine, but instead of moving 3d figures around, it moves 2d counters around.

There's no difference to how the engine works for 2D vs 3D, so there's no real reason to remove it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it will remain a feature.

All it is is using the same match engine, but instead of moving 3d figures around, it moves 2d counters around.

There's no difference to how the engine works for 2D vs 3D, so there's no real reason to remove it.

As I said, resource-wise: move the people from maintaining a feature that is used less and less to something used more and more (and so more important). I don't know when that day will come, but I can imagine it happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[edit] This is a response to Eugene Tyson :)

Ok, let's try like this :D This is what you seem to be saying, correct me if I'm wrong:

1) Forum users are a decent/good/adequate/whatever kind of basis for determining how often 2D is used

2) However, forum polls by those same users on those same forums are not a good basis for determining how often 2D is used

Not everyone enters polls. The polls aren't always available when the query comes up.

There's no correlation between the two.

They are separate in every way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As I said, resource-wise: move the people from maintaining a feature that is used less and less to something used more and more (and so more important). I don't know when that day will come, but I can imagine it happening.

How many people on this thread agree with you?

How many are you against you?

This thread is not a poll, but the responses could generate a simple graph that shows you the general response.

Look up any thread on this matter, using the search button, and search other forums etc.

Bar graph them yourself.

I know the internets is not ideal for gathering opinion, we both agree on that. But we don't have any other data to go on.

So go on, treat yourself to a grand "No" being prevalent in all your graphs.

I don't have any other info on this, good luck finding some.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not everyone enters polls. The polls aren't always available when the query comes up.

There's no correlation between the two.

They are separate in every way.

Now replace "polls" with "forums" and think about customers and forums: Not everyone uses forums. There is no correlation between the two. They are separate in every way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How many people on this thread agree with you?

How many are you against you?

This thread is not a poll, but the responses could generate a simple graph that shows you the general response.

Look up any thread on this matter, using the search button, and search other forums etc.

Bar graph them yourself.

I know the internets is not ideal for gathering opinion, we both agree on that. But we don't have any other data to go on.

So go on, treat yourself to a grand "No" being prevalent in all your graphs.

I don't have any other info on this, good luck finding some.

It doesn't matter. There is no correlation between forum users and customers of the game. The numbers don't mean anything. You think you have some sort of info based on that, but you don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It doesn't matter. There is no correlation between forum users and customers of the game. The numbers don't mean anything. You think you have some sort of info based on that, but you don't.

What info do you have?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what is the magical number that 2D usage cannot drop without SI slicing it gleefully out of the game? How many people have to never use it to make it a white elephant of a feature? How would anyone ever know how many people use it? Why does anyone care? If you don't use it, oh joyous day! If you do, Hooray for you!

Thus, once 2D is too much to maintain (in terms of resources), it will be removed from the game and all focus will be on the 3D engine.

Nope.

If the 2D option becomes too expensive to maintain then the world will have become a very silly place where dots are a finite resource that can only be mined in the vicinity of Betelgeuse.

You can tell a thread has gotten very silly indeed when the majority of the posts are attempting to explain who said what and when it was said and to whom it was said. You're all terrible posters and should be ashamed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So what is the magical number that 2D usage cannot drop without SI slicing it gleefully out of the game? How many people have to never use it to make it a white elephant of a feature? How would anyone ever know how many people use it? Why does anyone care? If you don't use it, oh joyous day! If you do, Hooray for you!

Nope.

If the 2D option becomes too expensive to maintain then the world will have become a very silly place where dots are a finite resource that can only be mined in the vicinity of Betelgeuse.

You can tell a thread has gotten very silly indeed when the majority of the posts are attempting to explain who said what and when it was said and to whom it was said. You're all terrible posters and should be ashamed.

There are developer(s) and probably (hopefully) tester(s) working on the 2D engine. They are working on it because it is still an important part of the game. My guess is that 2D will become less and less important, to the level where it will make no financial sense to keep those developer(s) and tester(s) working on 2D and it will make more financial sense to move them to something else. Then 2D will be done with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never said I had info. I simply explained that I have more insight to the situation based on feedback from forums, and in the same breath I said the forums/polls were not a good source for info like this.

You have said you don't post on forums. You said you don't read them.

Nobody has any stats, except SI. You keep bringing it back to a null point.

Get over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are developer(s) and probably (hopefully) tester(s) working on the 2D engine. They are working on it because it is still an important part of the game. My guess is that 2D will become less and less important, to the level where it will make no financial sense to keep those developer(s) and tester(s) working on 2D and it will make more financial sense to move them to something else. Then 2D will be done with.

Yes a guess based on nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are developer(s) and probably (hopefully) tester(s) working on the 2D engine. They are working on it because it is still an important part of the game. My guess is that 2D will become less and less important, to the level where it will make no financial sense to keep those developer(s) and tester(s) working on 2D and it will make more financial sense to move them to something else. Then 2D will be done with.

How expensive do you think the dots are?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The dots may not be expensive, but people working on them are. And besides, one of the arguments that FIFA-like 3D is a waste of time is because those resources are better spent elsewhere, like in AI squad building. Well, the same thing applies for 2D. I would rather have the people working on 2D be moved to AI squad building, so we can let go of something that belongs in the 1990s.

Eugene, you don't have any insight, because info from the forums is useless. Can't you get it in your head? Your drive is based on misinformation, and, as it often goes, you are convinced you are correct. Based on nothing that you think is something (Insight on the forums? Seriously?). You get over it - you have nothing to support your claim, just as I don't.

But I do know making and maintaining 2D costs money, and SI, like every other company, review their priorities constantly. And the most important one is making money, and the moment they see 2D is not doing that any more, they are done with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your insight is based on absolutely nothing!!! Don't you get that???

I have never said I am correct, I have never said that the info I have is correct, I said, again in the same breath (I've said this already! from the start from the first time I've mentioned it!!!!!) that the info from forum polls is not accurate.

However, I have more real data to back my claim than you do. Don't you get that???? Really? You have nothing!

Tell me exactly, what is the cost of maintaining 2D animation? What does it cost, how big is the team, annual salaries, research, etc.??? Tell me exactly!

How do you know? You are guessing! You do not know! You do not have a clue!

You don't have a clue.

You had a valid point at the begining regarding graphic quality of players.

It's a million miles away from that now.

I'm done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you have? Forum data? It is not data, it is nothing. You also have nothing. You do not have any real data. Try and understand that. Besides, present it here if you have it?

I do not know the costs of 2D, but they are certainly there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course it's data! It's real people who play the game!

It is not representative of the entire gaming community. But it's data.

You have 0 data - no data - zilch - nada - nothing.

That's my point!

I'm sure there are people working on the press conferences - well in my opinion press conferences are a joke, so they should cut press conferences and put those people working on 3D graphics. Nobody uses press conferences- blanket statement. It's just a fact, despite 7 years of forum debates on it, and countless polls where press conferences were favourited, it's my opinion that they should cut them out altogether, focus on 3D animation and cut the ****.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's data that cannot be interpreted in any meaningful way, so it should be disregarded, and that is what I am trying to tell you. The fact that some people on some forum say that they like 2D does nothing to tell you about how much of the customer base uses 2D. So you cannot use it to support anything, because you don't know what it says. The 124 guys that voted 2D might be all of the users that use 2D or they might just be 1% of the users that use 2D. But since you don't know which one it is, you cannot use that as useful information, because it does not tell you anything.

SI knows what is used and played (hopefully). Features are added and removed based on how much money they make. If a feature costs more than it can earn, it will be removed. Now, SI has already moved on to 3D, while still supporting 2D. But as other features that have been removed from the game (some really useful ones, like with/without ball instructions), 2D might have the same destiny, since I think - based on what the new users want to see, people who are buying the game for the first time - that 2D will slowly become less and less relevant. Jeebus, that is all I am trying to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are people who still use commentary-only. Surely, by your logic, that will be phased out long before 2D ever will?

And, let's not forget, there's not actually been any indication whatsoever that either of them will ever be discontinued. So it's all a bit of a moot point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, but if you look at today's generations, they want fancy graphics, it's almost a must. There is less and less people who ignore the aesthetics of a game, and focus only on its core. SI themselves are bragging about the "new and improved" 3D, so that they attract new audiences. Commentary and 2D are for us, the old guys. New kids want shiny stuff :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's data that cannot be interpreted in any meaningful way, so it should be disregarded, and that is what I am trying to tell you. The fact that some people on some forum say that they like 2D does nothing to tell you about how much of the customer base uses 2D. So you cannot use it to support anything, because you don't know what it says. [/b].

The fact that your brain tells you one thing should be disregarded.

The fact that user polls who interact with the game produces should be considered slightly.

You do know I've had a lot features in FM added by campaigning for them over the years. Mostly the "48 month" transfer - it was me that campaigned on these forums to have it altered. And it was done in FM13!

So forums have no say???

since I think - based on what the new users want to see, people who are buying the game for the first time - that 2D will slowly become less and less relevant. Jeebus, that is all I am trying to say.

Examine that

"Since I think"... "based on what the new users want to see"

What? How do you know what new users want to see? Are you physic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I assure you, I am not physic :D Maybe you can use the forum to gain something, but it still does not represent the majority, and never will. Forums are usually populated by a minority of hardcore fans, and that is the case with every game. Kudos to you if you convinced SI to do something in the game, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not just something... a few things.

You don't seem to get this at all - it's about the 15th time I've said it - "the forums do not match or represent the majority of users"

Who will SI listen to "forum users giving real time feedback from hardcore fans"

or

From "game users who don't interact with SI online?"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you remember the days when you had to write a letter to get a firm to patch a game for your console?

You'd have to wait for the demo to be on CD. Play that for a few months. Get the full game in the next mag! Exciting. Play it, doesn't get past a certain point! Arrrghhhh. Write letter to company. Wait weeks for floppy disk to arrive! It arrives, it works! Years of joy!

Nowadays, if it doesn't work out of the box there's uproar!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An entertaining discussion but going round in circles now- agree to disagree and lets move on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would prefer to move back to the 3D Graphics discussion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. Eugene, I see what you mean now, but it's the opposite of what I was trying to say. Yes, you can use the forums to influence the developers these days. But no, as you agree, forum users do not represent the majority. Whether you should listen to users you know do not represent the majority or not is debatable, and we don't have time for that now :D

Anyway, thanks for the 48 months thing :D Now convince them to drop the whole press conferences thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for 3D, I honestly think the next big step in realism would be the manger view from the dugout. I doubt anyone would play like that, cause it would be really hard, but I'd love to try it. Like they have the 'general camera' in Rome: Total War (the first one, at least). It was awesome, but completely unplayable, cause it was impossible to control the units from that far out. But with proper feedback from other sources, maybe it could be done.

Oh well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to produce evidence to support your reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, thanks for the 48 months thing :D Now convince them to drop the whole press conferences thing?

Turns out some fans like the press conferences. I don't. But doesn't mean it isn't a valuable asset to the game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Personally i would like it to be better looking but all in all fm is a managerial game first and so that should always be top priority

I completely agree. How the game works and how realistic it is in terms of recreating both what happens in the 90 minutes as well as working with members of a team is significantly more important to me than 3D graphics. Then again, I am absolutely the type to get quickly bored by how unrealistic game play is in FIFA and to instead be enthralled by Football Manager for hours (days, weeks, months ...) at a time.

Bottom line, if FM got rid of 3D entirely, it would not stop me from buying it at all. I am very happy with 2D.

Sure, but if you look at today's generations, they want fancy graphics, it's almost a must. There is less and less people who ignore the aesthetics of a game, and focus only on its core. SI themselves are bragging about the "new and improved" 3D, so that they attract new audiences. Commentary and 2D are for us, the old guys. New kids want shiny stuff :)

However, this is a valid point. Although I am still in my 30s, I sometimes feel much older than that ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bottom line, if FM got rid of 3D entirely, it would not stop me from buying it at all. I am very happy with 2D.

That's a very good point, if for some reason they had to abandon 3D I'd still get the 2D version. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As Miles said in the recent Q&A (and some of you may have seen on the FM Documentary credits) SI has 99 employees. And we're not all coders.!

Is this true??? I know SI have lot of researchers worldwide... I guess they make database piece by piece. I made database with 110000 changes and i know how big job is. Impressive :applause:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...