Why doesn't FM look like FIFA?

[Kriss]

Each researcher would submit his data in a special app is my guess, then they'd all be merged.

[Qwqwqw]

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

Well, that's you and, in all honesty, that's probably me, as well. But new customers, buying the game for the first time? I don't think so.

[jumbohotdog]

Well, that's you and, in all honesty, that's probably me, as well. But new customers, buying the game for the first time? I don't think so.

Maybe i am just weird but I started playing fm watching 3d then when I found out that I can have 2d then I switched to it because I feel I can react easier in 2d

[forameuss]

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?

Simply put, no. The reason why most wouldn't want it is because such a job - despite being nigh on impossible for such a small team - would mean the rest of the game was neglected. OK, so they hire a massive team in specifically to work on the 3D engine. Great. Where is this funded from? FM may sell by the bucket load, but it's not even close to the echelon of games like GTA, CoD etc in terms of profitability. It's a finite market, you probably get 80% of the potential market for the game buying it regularly. Where's the extra money going to come from to pay for this development? Once people get past the "shiny shiny" they're still going to find the same game they decided not to buy before, so probably wouldn't be interested anyway.

We're only just starting to see small developers bring out games where the first thought isn't for graphics, instead concentrating on humour, story, game mechanics etc. I would be massively against FM spending the majority of their development time on whether a players shirt falls correctly when it rains. FIFA can get away with it, FM should stay away.

[dan99]

All this pointless arguing yet still ignoring the fact that Qwqwqw doesn't seem to actually know how the text, 2D and 3D work together.

[forameuss]

All this pointless arguing yet still ignoring the fact that Qwqwqw doesn't seem to actually know how the text, 2D and 3D work together.

I haven't read it in it's entirety (it was getting too tedious) so I may well be just agreeing with you, but really the three don't "work together".

The ME sits underneath, calculating the rest of the match each time a change is made, and then each piece is played out by either of the three - text, 2D or 3D.

[Schotsmannetje]

To use a popular, contemporary phrase: Well that escalated quickly.

I only want to add one point to the discussion: Yes it is relevant what people say on this forum about functions of the game (like 2D). Everybody who's an active member of this forum knows that SI use this forum as feedback and have implemented (and removed) a lot of aspects of the game that were proposed on this forum. Even the very inventors of the game sometimes participate in certain threads here, Miles also. It is very relevant what is being said on these forums.

[Neil Dejyothin]

Hey all. Interesting thread and one I can wade in on and give you some insight, because I used to work for EA and on some of their football titles, and I've been at SI for over 11 years now and work directly on the Match Engine team.

The two companies are very different in culture and approach. If I were to give you a football analogy – I’d liken SI to Barcelona and EA to Real Madrid. There’s no right or wrong way to go about things, they’re just different.

In the end, with Championship Manager (as it was back then) being my favourite game as a kid, I joined SI because their philosophy and approach matched mine. I couldn’t be happier, but I still had a great time at EA.

They're an enormous company that publishes and develops games, and they're in a position where they can share technology across different studios and their vast portfolio of titles. Their marketing approach has always been very aggressive and impressive. They've the resources that allow them to acquire exclusive licenses for many of their sporting titles too, which is why competing products or games in a similar field do not have access to them.

For us, the visual representation of FM was not the original focus when it was first designed. But the way it has evolved and where it has reached today is actually an admirable representation of who we are as a company. It demonstrates our philosophy and our values and our culture as a studio.

But what does that mean? I'll try and explain...

SI originated from Ov and Paul, two brothers, making a game in their bedroom in their spare time over 20 years ago. The pair of them still work at the company today and PaulC is actively involved in the Match Engine on a day to day basis.

In the early years, SI was made up of people who had little or no previous experience in the games industry. In fact, many of its employees had joined straight out of university or became full-time having impressed in the testing department, which is still a very effective way to get a job here.

We've had very little turnover of staff in that time, which is something we're very proud about and take seriously. We must have one of the best retention rates in the world, but that's because of the culture here. All we've ever done is try to provide a playground and an environment where staff can come to work every day to work hard and express and challenge themselves. We want them to push themselves and to learn and grow as professionals and as people, and in turn to help us make the game we love better. That's what we demand from our team.

We've worked so hard to offer our staff the opportunity of spending their entire career with us. That means we are patient with them, and that we afford the time and space to improve their existing skills and learn new ones and that ties into our philosophy of doing as much as we can to be masters of our own destiny. The majority of our code base is ours – there is very little middleware or third party code, but it does mean we've spent a lot of time investing in our own technology and way of doing things. It does mean that we can and do make mistakes as we learn and try new technology and specialised areas that stretch or are outside of the expertise that we have. It does mean that we can be a little bit slower to deliver, but we're happy with our approach. We're content and comfortable, because we believe we treat people in the right way and that's respected and buys us loyalty and keeps us together as a family. Most of us have now grown up together - we're more than just colleagues - many of us are lifelong friends too.

As we've grown bigger some of our recruitment strategy has changed. We've reached a position where we can pick and choose and can hire the best in the business with high Current Ability or stick to our roots and offer opportunity to those with massive Potential Ability.

We do a bit of both and recently we've hired people for the Match Team from both ends of the spectrum, including someone considered as one of the best in his field to someone who spent the last four years working in a coffee shop and hopefully the outcome is the same; it's a positive life changing moment for them.

Now for a little bit of history. If we go back 20 years ago, we didn't have any programmers with specialised graphics, rendering, physics or animation expertise. That's why we didn't go down that route initially as the studios skill set was primarily based around simulation and artificial intelligence programming. Obviously over a period of time we decided it was something we wanted to pursue, but in true SI fashion, we didn't want to just buy an engine off of the shelf and plug it in. We didn't feel that was right for us, or offer our staff the appropriate challenge to learn these things for themselves and improve. So we did our own, partly by also hiring some people with some experience and partly offering the opportunity and challenge to some of our staff to learn new things.

From a technological point of view – we don't do too badly either. It's easy to focus on just the graphics and visuals, as that's an easy comparison to make and where we are admittedly not at the same level as some other games yet. But we don't do too badly either – we simply focused on something different to the rest, which was equality.

For many years, very few companies took Mac development as seriously as we did, for example. You'd often see ports arriving 6-12 months later after the Windows release. But we'd been releasing a disc with PC/Mac builds on it back from when we were still making Championship Manager. We were well ahead of the game and that's how we wanted our technology to evolve. We now do PC, Mac and Linux concurrently and we still support so much older hardware than most other games, which believe us, is not trivial. We take great pride in that even if it goes unnoticed.

That represents us as studio and has always been engrained in its roots. There are many success stories here that we're proud about. There are people who joined our test department as fans of the game, but who later evolved into programmers or artists, because the opportunity to learn and grow was there. Even Miles himself started out testing before eventually becoming the Managing Director and later Studio Director of the business.

There are not many other companies out there who would afford their staff the time, support or patience to do that, but that's us, that's who we are.

Do we want our game to look great visually? Of course we do. Will we get there? Hell yes, but on our terms, at our pace and in our way and the way we know.

[Neil Dejyothin]

I can also tell you that 2d is going nowhere, why would we remove it?

There are plenty of people out there who love it, including those in the studio. It's the same as it's always been, we want to allow people to enjoy the game in the way they best want to, whether it's Commentary Only, 2d only, 3d only or a combination of those things.

[forameuss]

You worked for EA?

But seriously, very good post Neil. Always interesting to get a view of the company "under the hood" so to speak, especially with comparison to EA.

Should also add that it sounds like SI would be a wonderful company to work for, particularly in the development industry. As someone who worked the corporate way for a major investment bank, and then moved to a much smaller operation in library collection management systems, smaller companies that put an emphasis on the staff themselves alongside getting things done are great to work for. An SI office up north would be a good improvement though...

[YKW]

Really, really enjoyable post Neil, thanks a lot for your time. It reflects very well on SI.

[jumbohotdog]

Very good post neil

[USASoundersFan]

I agree. Definitely one of the more interesting posts that I have read here over the years.

I absolutely love what SI stands for and that it places its focus on the realism aspect (we may all complain about certain aspects being unrealistic at times, but this game is still extremely realistic and much more realistic than FIFA). To be honest, this is the only game I ever buy. Not footballing game or sports game, but game period. Once I first purchased FM around 2006, I pretty much lost all interest I had in playing other games, and the realism aspect pretty much had everything to do with that, and I am happy that this is remaining SI's forcus for the foreseeable future. I am also very happy that 2D is not going anywhere as I still watch games in 2D today and likely still would even if the graphics were improved to FIFA's level.

[Schotsmannetje]

Very, very inspiring post. FM is such a wonderful and inspiring product. Not just the game itself, but also its history, the way its made, the company behind it. Brilliant stuff.

[blast126]

If Football Manager develop a 3d engine like FIFA the costs will increase, that means a higher selling price. I like FM 3d engine.

Fifa 3d engine also demand better graphic cards, so the minimum requirements will increase, reducing the potential market.

Keeping 2d engine is good because will attract people with old graphic cards. For example I have a desktop computer and play with 3d mode, but I also have a work laptop where sometimes I play FM, but with 2d mode.

[Harrymcintyre]

I don't buy fifa anymore. I think it's very poor. Especially when it's about 50 quid in shops.. All those bugs!!!! I don't even notice the bugs in FM and then they release their patch correcting these bugs I haven't even noticed. Lulz

[Fosse]

FIFA repackage the same game every with the same problems but the same people buy it and moan and still buy the next one, pace is essential and you can pick the game up and put little thought into it and win but hat's why I enjoy Fifa because you don't need to think all of the time unlike FM which is more rewarding because you do need to think.

[Straightdallas]

no need. this game ruined fifa and pes or any other game for that matter. (In a good way)

I just want fm to keep doing what they are doing cuz it works.

[Fond Foat]

Let me say it again, you should be making comparisons with FIFA Manager not FIFA.

Why?

Theoretically, Football Manager could have graphics as good as FIFA but have them behave in a manner that the models in FM now represent. Practically, it may be impossible, but I am not sure why the statement can't be discussed and graphical comparisons made.

FIFA manager used graphics from the FIFA08 engine and many players of that game complained long and loud as to why it was never updated. Add to that the difficulty of the UI and lack of player control, you ended up with a game just wasn't getting supported by EA any more. EA only keeps games that make them lots of money, not just some money.

I am not bothered about the graphics in FM, but if you told me we could have the FIFA graphics and they behaved as FM wanted them to do so, I would be very interested to see them.

People in this thread seem to be suggesting the OP wanted the game to be like FIFA. No, they just asked why it can't be represented graphically as well as FIFA.

Neil's answer suggests it comes down to finances and manpower.

[Kriss]

Why?

I was doing irony, nothing more

[forameuss]

To be fair to FIFA, a lot of people seem to be stuck in the old days of the series. It used to just be a repackaging, but recently they've taken the unprecedented step of actually making game improvements. No, it isn't perfect, but 14 on the next gen made massive strides away from PES and into the distance, and delivered the best footballing experience on a console. It has bugs, yes, but then every game does, and I don't think there's many more than is usual. It's fun to play. Seems people just like to take the hipster option and decry it.

Still, you can't really compare it to FM. May as well compare Command and Conquer to Call of Duty because in both games you shoot things at people.

[RBKalle]

Are we stil having this debate???

Why doesn't combat in Civilization look like in Call of Duty? Why doesn't Diablo 3 look like Skyrim?

Seriously... what's so difficult to understand about different genres having different requirements and priorities?

A FIFA-like match engine in FM would be a massive waste of resources (not to mention it'd need a beast of a computer to run...) and it wouldn't really help improving the core part of the game... Moreso, who cares about how lifelike and realistic the 3D engine is, if what we're watching is visually stunning but doesn't reflect what we've set up in the management area of the game?!

I don't mind the 3D looking like an ARCADE game from 10 years ago as long as it's functional to our management. Is the long shot animation brand new and crisp? Great! The thing is, maybe I didn't want my CM to shoot from 40 yards, so the whole "ohhh, look at how realistic that shot was", I'd be more inclined to think "why did you shoot from there, you tool!" and wonder why he wasn't passing instead.

So no, FIFA-like graphics aren't needed in FM, not as long as the 3D game is reflecting a state-of-the-art, almost flawless, management area.

[pheelf]

I have to say that I agree with the sentiment that this game should have better graphics than there are currently in the game. The 3D match engine has been incorporated into the game for 6 years now and while the underlying game on the pitch works better than any other game in this genre (which is to be applauded) I think that the game does itself a great disservice with the graphics of the match engine especially considering we have seen such great strides in other aspects of the game over that time period. I'm not asking that the game should look like FIFA but it should look better than the LMA Managers that were released in the early 2000's.

While I appreciate SI's desire to travel in a certain direction at their own speed there comes a point at which the fan base (which incidentally will require a steady stream of new younger consumers to maintain) will start to demand it (much as you correctly highlighted in FIFA Manager...players got fed up with the same old regurgitated match engine year after year so stopped buying it...although admittedly there were plenty of other issues). Personally I'd be quite happy with a graphics engine which fits somewhere in between the two extremes of current FIFA and the current FM2015 build (I'm encouraged by the motion capture though) for a good few years. Much like 64bit capability and how the transition to it is going to be made, these challenges are on the horizon and will have to be confronted sooner or later (I'd say you have a good few years with the 64bit capability though).

I do appreciate all the hard work that SI do when they work on the game which is why I have been a fan of the series since the mid 90's editions but I am also aware of how failing to deal with an issue which although currently not severe will become increasingly problematic with time can prove disastrous (FIFA Manager is case and point...they were being asked for years when they were going to improve the match engine...they didn't and now they no longer exist).

@RBKalle

How is it a waste of resources to improve the graphics of the 3D match engine considering that we are discussing such a fundamental aspect of the game?

Do you honestly believe that people are playing the game without regard to how the match engine looks? (maybe you and others aren't but you don't speak for everybody).

It's all about immersion and currently there is hardly none with regards to this aspect of the game. I take the point that different genres have different priorities and it would be ridiculous to demand FIFA level graphics in this game but the OP didn't ask for FIFA graphics which you seem to be implying with your response, he asked the question of why the game looks nowhere near as good as games like FIFA which is a completely different argument.

[forameuss]

How is it a waste of resources to improve the graphics of the 3D match engine considering that we are discussing such a fundamental aspect of the game?

Do you honestly believe that people are playing the game without regard to how the match engine looks? (maybe you and others aren't but you don't speak for everybody).

It's all about immersion and currently there is hardly none with regards to this aspect of the game. I take the point that different genres have different priorities and it would be ridiculous to demand FIFA level graphics in this game but the OP didn't ask for FIFA graphics which you seem to be implying with your response, he asked the question of why the game looks nowhere near as good as games like FIFA which is a completely different argument.

Because, as you saw in the post by Neil yesterday, SI don't have the resources. If they were to use who they had, it would take them off current issues and projects, hence wasting them.

Plus it's only "such a fundamental aspect of the game" in your opinion. Probably others too. But that's just it, it's an opinion, and one that I absolutely don't agree with, same as plenty of others I'm sure.

[Neil Dejyothin]

I am also aware of how failing to deal with an issue which although currently not severe will become increasingly problematic with time can prove disastrous (FIFA Manager is case and point...they were being asked for years when they were going to improve the match engine...they didn't and now they no longer exist).

That's not the reason why they don't exist.

Their management simulation used the 3d engine from their action game. That engine was not originally designed for a management simulation and would have been lower on the priorities for support and development that probably (unfortunately) affected the management simulation adversely. The team working on the management simulation probably didn't have the expertise or resources to make those improvements themselves (or large scale changes), nor would they likely do anyway purely from a cost effective and resource point of view and you don't want to wind up in a situation where the technology splits into two and end up with a hybrid of the original engine.

Even though they are the same company they were different teams in different regions of the world. FIFA is developed over in Vancouver in Canada and FIFA Manager was developed over in Cologne in Germany. So it's still a bit like what I said earlier, with one of those teams having to plug in an engine made elsewhere and then having to rely on that team to provide updates and support. You may end up bound by their needs and requirements or their road map of evolution that doesn't necessarily match your own. That technology and engine may even be bound to other titles elsewhere across the portfolio too and is most likely going to have a commercially driven focus.

So there are always pros and cons to every approach you take and while sharing and re-using technology can provide some huge benefits, especially in terms of speed of development and consistency of code, it can cause huge complications too, depending on how it's done.

That's one of the reasons we want to be the masters of our own destiny and that our technology is our own. That way we can only be dictated by what we want to do and achieve for our games. We certainly have a road map of how we want to evolve our 3d experience over the coming years and hopefully it's going to be something that you'll enjoy and be a part of and share the ride with us.

[upthetoon]

Some fantastic post there Neil. I perfectly understand SI position.

Though you are still a relatively ''small'' company not on the scale of EA, you have delivered us a game which is truly life-like and very very close to reality.

this makes us ''feel'' like your company is gigantic and want it to be a perfect game. We feel SI is truly capable of a life-like simulation. The very best. Demanding the best from all aspect of the game. Match engine to AI to 3D graphics. We feel you can deliver it.

We are being impatient. I know. We're just human as well.

[krlenjushka]

SI is maybe small company but dont forget researchers worldwide. Who knows how many people

[barto123]

Sometimes I feel like Im the only one still only using commentary only

[Schotsmannetje]

I have to say that I agree with the sentiment that this game should have better graphics than there are currently in the game. The 3D match engine

I don't mean to be anal, but there is (correct me if I'm wrong) no such thing as a 3D match engine. The match engine is the same for all representations I believe. The 3D part is purely the graphics. It doesn't really change the morale of your post, but just wanted to point that out.

[Schotsmannetje]

Some fantastic post there Neil. I perfectly understand SI position.

Though you are still a relatively ''small'' company not on the scale of EA, you have delivered us a game which is truly life-like and very very close to reality.

this makes us ''feel'' like your company is gigantic and want it to be a perfect game. We feel SI is truly capable of a life-like simulation. The very best. Demanding the best from all aspect of the game. Match engine to AI to 3D graphics. We feel you can deliver it.

We are being impatient. I know. We're just human as well.

That's an excellent point you make there. Because FM is such a complete product and such a good selling game (one of the best selling games on the pc in the UK), people get the impression that SI is a big company in a huge office with plenty of time on their hands. That is simply not the case. In fact, all the research is done by volunteers. That should tell you something about the size of the company, but of course also about the passion with which the game is made.

I mean, FIFA still get the favorite foot wrong of many top league players. That tells me something.

[Qwqwqw]

If you had two identical games - let's say two Football Manager 2015 - where one had 2D match with the outdated dots for players and the other one had a fancy, life-like 3D match representation, which one would you get? The 2D one or the 3D one? Remember, the 3D one has all the qualities of Football Manager with an addition of a life-like 3D match representation ,where you can see Messi do his dribbles, Ronaldo take his free kicks and Suarez take his bites, while in the 2D one, all you can see is dots running around.

It's a good thing for SI that they have no competition whatsoever, so they an afford to do things "at their own pace", not to mention some other things they also do, which they couldn't afford to do, if they had real competition.

[jumbohotdog]

If you had two identical games - let's say two Football Manager 2015 - where one had 2D match with the outdated dots for players and the other one had a fancy, life-like 3D match representation, which one would you get? The 2D one or the 3D one? Remember, the 3D one has all the qualities of Football Manager with an addition of a life-like 3D match representation.

It's a good thing for SI that they have no competition whatsoever, so they an afford to do things "at their own pace", not to mention some other things they also do, which they couldn't afford to do, if they had real competition.

I do not know if you are just trying to be obtuse but you just do not get it. 2d is still used by a part of SI's costumers so why would they remove it. Secondly What happened to FIFA Manager again?

[Qwqwqw]

You completely missed what I tried to say

[Schotsmannetje]

That's completely irrelevant. Nobody has ever been able to make a management game as good as Football Manager when it comes to detail, interface, realism, database and match engine. The reason FM has no competition is not because nobody has tried to compete, but because it's simply the best management game. There has been plenty of competition for SI, but they have never been able to make an equal product (in sales also), even with much better graphics.

[jumbohotdog]

You completely missed what I tried to say

No I got it but if there are two I would try out the betas for both and get the one where I feel I can easily react to changes in strategy by the AI which is 2d.

[Qwqwqw]

Aha, because you can't have top-down view in a 3D engine

[nie jem frytek]

Because it's gameplay what matters.

[HUNT3R]

If you had two identical games - let's say two Football Manager 2015 - where one had 2D match with the outdated dots for players and the other one had a fancy, life-like 3D match representation, which one would you get? The 2D one or the 3D one? Remember, the 3D one has all the qualities of Football Manager with an addition of a life-like 3D match representation ,where you can see Messi do his dribbles, Ronaldo take his free kicks and Suarez take his bites, while in the 2D one, all you can see is dots running around.

It's a good thing for SI that they have no competition whatsoever, so they an afford to do things "at their own pace", not to mention some other things they also do, which they couldn't afford to do, if they had real competition.

I don't see what competition has to do with this? With or without competition, SI had and still has by far the best ME, not to mention the other aspects of the game.

[Lawlore]

It's a good thing for SI that they have no competition whatsoever, so they an afford to do things "at their own pace", not to mention some other things they also do, which they couldn't afford to do, if they had real competition.

There is a reason they have no competition- because the product they are delivering has outlasted contemporaries and seen off new pretenders by being the best at what it does. They do this by doing things at their own pace- it wasn't until CM4, in 2003, that 2D was introduced for the first time. That's five years later than the classic FIFA RTWC98. And before that, CM was still the best-selling management game.

The thing to remember: FIFA-style 3D is not essential to a game of this nature. 3D itself is not essential to a game of this nature. Hell, 2D is not essential to a game of this nature. In a game like FM, graphics are fluff. It's the guts of the game that matters most, and SI are streets ahead in that respect.

[forameuss]

If you had two identical games - let's say two Football Manager 2015 - where one had 2D match with the outdated dots for players and the other one had a fancy, life-like 3D match representation, which one would you get? The 2D one or the 3D one? Remember, the 3D one has all the qualities of Football Manager with an addition of a life-like 3D match representation ,where you can see Messi do his dribbles, Ronaldo take his free kicks and Suarez take his bites, while in the 2D one, all you can see is dots running around.

It's a good thing for SI that they have no competition whatsoever, so they an afford to do things "at their own pace", not to mention some other things they also do, which they couldn't afford to do, if they had real competition.

It's a pointless argument given it's not going to happen, but given you're probably not going to let it go, to be honest the 2D one. Your "life-like" 3D representation would probably not work quickly enough for my tastes on my laptop, and I don't care enough about 3D for it to make a difference.

I'm guessing that doesn't suit your argument though...

[andyinuk]

I do not know if you are just trying to be obtuse but you just do not get it. 2d is still used by a part of SI's costumers so why would they remove it. Secondly What happened to FIFA Manager again?

I am betting on the former

[pheelf]

That's not the reason why they don't exist.

Their management simulation used the 3d engine from their action game. That engine was not originally designed for a management simulation and would have been lower on the priorities for support and development that probably (unfortunately) affected the management simulation adversely. The team working on the management simulation probably didn't have the expertise or resources to make those improvements themselves (or large scale changes), nor would they likely do anyway purely from a cost effective and resource point of view and you don't want to wind up in a situation where the technology splits into two and end up with a hybrid of the original engine.

Even though they are the same company they were different teams in different regions of the world. FIFA is developed over in Vancouver in Canada and FIFA Manager was developed over in Cologne in Germany. So it's still a bit like what I said earlier, with one of those teams having to plug in an engine made elsewhere and then having to rely on that team to provide updates and support. You may end up bound by their needs and requirements or their road map of evolution that doesn't necessarily match your own. That technology and engine may even be bound to other titles elsewhere across the portfolio too and is most likely going to have a commercially driven focus.

So there are always pros and cons to every approach you take and while sharing and re-using technology can provide some huge benefits, especially in terms of speed of development and consistency of code, it can cause huge complications too, depending on how it's done.

That's one of the reasons we want to be the masters of our own destiny and that our technology is our own. That way we can only be dictated by what we want to do and achieve for our games. We certainly have a road map of how we want to evolve our 3d experience over the coming years and hopefully it's going to be something that you'll enjoy and be a part of and share the ride with us.

Maybe I was too concise with my comment and I know there were a myriad of reasons why they failed (including their rather awkward structure, abysmal customer service) but I think it would be fair to say that their inability to adapt and cater to the needs of a significant section of their fan base which reflect the trends of where they expected the series to develop contributed greatly to their demise. What I will say though is that although currently this is not an issue it has potential to become one so that was what I was highlighting more than anything else. If the graphics of the 3D match were to only be improved very slightly over the next few years I definitely could see it becoming a major issue in time especially if a competitor were to emerge in this niche market.

I'm encouraged by your response however as it make me optimistic that there is a plan in place to develop the 3D experience to a better level than we have seen previously. I agree that it is important to be in control of your own destiny and it does provide a good sound basis to build upon. Without wanting you to give too much away, in what ways are you planning to enhance the 3D experience in the coming years?

@forameuss

You're right in the sense that you have the right to have your opinion and to disagree with mine but I can't see how the representation of the match is not fundamental to the game it always has been and always will be. You have to consider the fact that I've been playing this game since the days of possession bars and commentary only so I do have some perspective on this. What was acceptable then could never cut it today (even if in my moments of nostalgia I play game or two on those old CM games and still get the same enjoyment now as I did then).

Similarly, going forward early 2000's graphics won't really cut it for too much longer not because I want the game to be pushed in that direction but if I doesn't update it risks looking dated. It's just a cold hard fact of reality...things have to move on or become obsolete. The trend is towards games with better graphics even for those games which you wouldn't think need it. My best example of this would be a game like Civilization, the graphics in Civ 5 are vastly improved over Civ 4 even if the fundamental game mechanics remained the same.

Your point about the resources is valid and if that is the reason then I can understand that but then again SI can always hire more people should they need to.

@Schotsmannetje

Point taken

Also I'm no great fan of FIFA although I do play it from time to time. I tend to go for games with gameplay as the first priority then graphics which is why PES had my vote for the longest time (during it's golden age) but what happened was that the graphics started to become more of an issue as they started to look dated. It kind of crept up on them then they desperately tried to improve the graphics which adversely affected the gameplay aspects. PES really struggled with the transition to the last gen consoles which left them floundering and they really haven't recovered since. I take the viewpoint that if they had prepared for the improvement in graphics required earlier and thus more gradually when their gameplay was top dog then they would have been able to dominate for a lot longer than they ultimately did and that would have been great as I much preferred their gameplay. But alas they didn't fix the roof in the summer and have suffered the consequences when the rains came.

[Qwqwqw]

Did anyone read what I wrote? Two identical Football Managers, one with 2D match graphics, the other one with an awesome 3D match graphics engine? That being the only difference between the two?

And of course proper competition would force them into having a faster pace and making the game even better, so that people buy that, instead of something else. Just imagine if tomorrow a new game appeared that beat Football Manager in every aspect? Think they's still be doing things "at their own pace"?

[jumbohotdog]

Aha, because you can't have top-down view in a 3D engine

And why should I want to lose?????

[jumbohotdog]

Did anyone read what I wrote? Two identical Football Managers, one with 2D match graphics, the other one with an awesome 3D match graphics engine? That being the only difference between the two?

And of course proper competition would force them into having a faster pace and making the game even better, so that people buy that, instead of something else. Just imagine if tomorrow a new game appeared that beat Football Manager in every aspect? Think they's still be doing things "at their own pace"?

And how do we know that it is AWESOME

[Äktsjon Männ]

Aha, because you can't have top-down view in a 3D engine

You can, and you can also have a top down view with dots that has no effect on other view modes. I get it if you want better 3D but why keep bringing 2D into this discussion?

The match engine is a code that was originally designed to be viewed in 2D. It has had many parts of it revamped but it's still the same base. Removing 2D now would have absolutely zero benefits to anyone. They may some day remove 2D classic when it's an absolute certainty that there isn't any demand for it (i.e people with hardware that can't run 3D) but 2D will still be one of the view angles in 3D simply because people still want it.

[Schotsmannetje]

Did anyone read what I wrote? Two identical Football Managers, one with 2D match graphics, the other one with an awesome 3D match graphics engine? That being the only difference between the two?

And of course proper competition would force them into having a faster pace and making the game even better, so that people buy that, instead of something else. Just imagine if tomorrow a new game appeared that beat Football Manager in every aspect? Think they's still be doing things "at their own pace"?

For the millionth time: There is a reason why they have no proper competition. Because they make a very sound product that is quite simply lightyears ahead of the competition. As they have proven many times in the past.

You make it sound like nobody has ever tried to compete. That's complete bullfaeces.

[Lawlore]

Did anyone read what I wrote? Two identical Football Managers, one with 2D match graphics, the other one with an awesome 3D match graphics engine? That being the only difference between the two?

And of course proper competition would force them into having a faster pace and making the game even better, so that people buy that, instead of something else. Just imagine if tomorrow a new game appeared that beat Football Manager in every aspect? Think they's still be doing things "at their own pace"?

Your question is literally "Would you prefer nicer graphics?" Yes, I'd like them.

Are they central to the game in any way, shape or form, to require development move any quicker than it currently is? No. Not in the slightest.

[Qwqwqw]

Jumbohotdog, I have no idea what you're trying to say.

[HUNT3R]

And of course proper competition would force them into having a faster pace and making the game even better, so that people buy that, instead of something else. Just imagine if tomorrow a new game appeared that beat Football Manager in every aspect? Think they's still be doing things "at their own pace"?

Yes, they would. They're not going to change the way they do things just because there's another company. They didn't change when CM and FIFA manager were around. They can do things at their own pace, because even with competition they have the best game.

I'd choose the game with the best ME. In 2007, I did just that when I discovered FM and I chose dots over FIFA Manager's graphics.