Out of interest, Does anybody enjoy Press Conferences?

[HUNT3R]

Yes, having press conferences in the game makes it feel more realistic.

However, I have a major problem that my answers (or those of my assistant) somehow have an influence on the morale of my players. If you truly believe answering the same questions every week to the same media guys is of the slightest interest to professional football players, you need a reality check.

Press conferences are in existence for one reason: That journalists have something to write before and after games. I am one of them, trust me...

Press conferences in real life, yes. It serves an additional purpose in the game, in that you're basically setting up (and reviewing) expectations for the game and this affects your players. Otherwise, it doesn't serve much of a purpose in a gaming sense.

[Mars_Blackmon]

Press conferences being boring is fine, because they mostly are in rl. But the thing is; they don't feel realistic. That's the problem. And if they don't feel realistic, and neither do they add "fun" ... ?

By the way; I don't think that adding more questions and answers will help a lot. By it's mechanical nature, they will always feel phoney, I'm afraid. I don't see a way that they could be made to feel more real. Unless we have a AI clever enough to react to answers that we formulate ourselves, freely. I don't see that happening in this century. The initial questions asked by the journalists are not so bad; in rl they tend to be repetitive anyway. Football journalists are rarely clever. But if we can't answer those questions as we feel like, in our own words, and then have the journalists react to that and make proper follow-up questions, these press conferences will always feel "wrong" and phoney. And as I said earlier; if a feature can't be done close to right; don't do them. Or at least give us a choice to leave them out.

Should this apply to all dialog in RPG's too?

[sonata]

I get my assistant to do the majority of them, unless its a win over a rival or a big cup game.

[Maw74]

Yes, having press conferences in the game makes it feel more realistic.

No it doesn't.

Yeah I know in real life you would have to do these and doing a lot of them can be mundane/tedious but in the game they just don't work for me, I have to pick from about 4 answers and a lot of the time what I would want to say is not there, so that for me is not realistic at all and not at all fun, I play FMC so get less of these but the ones I get can still be stupid.

[Guest]

I try to pay attention but I guess much like I'd do irl I tend to auto-pilot through them.

[TQ13PS]

I quite enjoy them, especially winding up opposition managers or slating their star strikers performance.

[Salaq]

Occasionally, but when I've just suffered an infuriating defeat, I'm pissed IRL and in game, and the journalists want to rub salt in the wound, then I'll just send in the assistant. However, sometimes I like to roleplay and put myself into the mind of the manager, and thus do the responses accordingly, even switching moods for all the good it does (nothing as far as I can tell).

[denizgunu]

I think press conferences are okay. It is good enough if you roleplay. I appreciate longer questions they added later.

[Maystor]

By far the worst FM feature ever since it was introduced. Every year it's on the list of "big improvements" and yet it always ends up as repetitive and as boring as ever. From everything we've seen so far, FM16 is not going to be an exception.

[13xForever]

Use it when i take over a club, signing's, derby matches and cup final games. The rest i just leave to assistant

[Dharcness]

Since I play fmc, I just choose the obvious best answer and be done with it.

[PineappleBlender]

It's probably realistic. I know someone in the sports media trade and they've told me that their job is quite predictable, as it's usually the same old questions with the same old answers.

Now whether it's fun is another question...

[Xavessi]

A better way of doing them would be to abandon the random questions and turn them on their head.

Instead, allow the manager to select a point he or she would like to focus on (ie opposing manager, an opposing player, team form etc) and work through a tree of options. Once the manager is happy with the selection he then confirms.

This would solve the issue of having to plough through repetitive and tedious question of no interest and better represent how a manager would want to focus on an issue of his choosing, thus making it genuinely strategic.

[Goosewinkle]

A better way of doing them would be to abandon the random questions and turn them on their head.

Instead, allow the manager to select a point he or she would like to focus on (ie opposing manager, an opposing player, team form etc) and work through a tree of options. Once the manager is happy with the selection he then confirms.

This would solve the issue of having to plough through repetitive and tedious question of no interest and better represent how a manager would want to focus on an issue of his choosing, thus making it genuinely strategic.

That is an interesting idea, similar to Shakes's interesting idea...I think the biggest problem with press conferences is they are significantly more work than a real press conference, where someone asks you something, you say what you want, and done! Here you read a question, read a paragraph of canned answers, realize none of them are what you actually want to say, then read the answers again to decide on the least bad choice...

It would help if it didn't make you read so much. Maybe they should tag the answers, like [enthusiastic yes], [cagey maybe], [evade], [agree jokingly] or whatever. You'd be able to find your answer much more quickly. In fact even with twice as many answers, you could find yours right away. I kinda cringe when people want more questions....at least with fewer questions, you memorize them and don't have to read through the paragraph of answers every time.

[dllu]

It's probably realistic. I know someone in the sports media trade and they've told me that their job is quite predictable, as it's usually the same old questions with the same old answers.

Now whether it's fun is another question...

Exactly. If you've ever heard any sports journalist ask any athlete or coach/manager any question ever - well, let's just say they probably weren't top of their class at uni, but they were at the front of the line when they were handing out journalistic cliches...

[asdpoo]

I wish there was an option to enforce media silence. Sending assistant is not the same as clicking "no comment" on everything. I don't want to have press events at all.

As long as that part of the game is boring as hell.

[AlexNFFC]

I view the press conferences as a necessary evil, in that I only attend them to avoid sending my assman and having him say something stupid. I can click on the 'right' answer without even reading the question. It's just so formulaic.

[vee-lo]

They're terrible: for reasons many have already stated, and also, I think, because the FM team either doesn't care about language very much or has been unable to hire anybody who can both code and write.

The news feed stories have the same clumsy, tone-deaf use of language, as if written by an child with a minor linguistic disability whose abusive parents have limited him to a steady diet of football journalism.

Seriously, read the match reports. Stock phrases and clichés cobbled together; the same goal mentioned multiple times; no transitions between sentences.

Realism? Sure, it's realistic that the media exist, but when the articles are so clearly the product of an algorithm combining a small stock of language chunks, they have the opposite effect.

The game world is made of numbers, I get that. But when the verbal description gets below a certain level, immersion, at least for me, is destroyed.

[forameuss]

They're terrible: for reasons many have already stated, and also, I think, because the FM team either doesn't care about language very much or has been unable to hire anybody who can both code and write.

The news feed stories have the same clumsy, tone-deaf use of language, as if written by an child with a minor linguistic disability whose abusive parents have limited him to a steady diet of football journalism.

Seriously, read the match reports. Stock phrases and clichés cobbled together; the same goal mentioned multiple times; no transitions between sentences.

Soooo...just like most news outlets in real life then?

[Jibby123]

....It always amazes me to see that the majority hate them and yet they are ever present and growing in the game.

Ditto for real life football. They are the most pointless, dire, forced labour part of football bar none. I have given up watching them tbh. What purpose does it serve to hear the same old robotic obvious questions and same old robotic obvious responses.

"So Wayne, you've just broken the England goal scoring record, how do you feel??"

"Gutted".

"Ah ok, you've just scored the winner in the final minute, how do you feel??"

"Gutted. I had a pony down on at 4/1 for us to lose".

"Ah ok, what do you think the chances of England winning the Euro's next summer??".

"Zero. We never even get close. The gaffer and lads are way behind the level of France, Holland, Italy, Spain and Germany, don't you watch football??".

Rinse and repeat.

Compared to that, FM Press Conferences are pretty immersive.

[isignedupfornorealreason]

They're terrible: for reasons many have already stated, and also, I think, because the FM team either doesn't care about language very much or has been unable to hire anybody who can both code and write.

The news feed stories have the same clumsy, tone-deaf use of language, as if written by an child with a minor linguistic disability whose abusive parents have limited him to a steady diet of football journalism.

Seriously, read the match reports. Stock phrases and clichés cobbled together; the same goal mentioned multiple times; no transitions between sentences.

Realism? Sure, it's realistic that the media exist, but when the articles are so clearly the product of an algorithm combining a small stock of language chunks, they have the opposite effect.

The game world is made of numbers, I get that. But when the verbal description gets below a certain level, immersion, at least for me, is destroyed.

It's basically the Phil McNulty school of writing.

Press conferences have always been a novelty feature, but the problem has always been how it would be possible to update them.

Personally, I think a small team should be assigned to do yearly press conference scouting. Like the club and player researchers, except they only watch press conferences (oh, you're gonna be bored lads!), and their job is to watch for any unique or special events that occur. Also, they'd pick up on how things inter-relate to each other.

Earlier on I had a press conference that "Brendan Rodgers was being disrespectful by playing down the occasion', but I had no idea what he said. We need something like a press officer who might give you a run-down of what has been said in press conferences during the day, *and* what questions he thinks will crop up at your conference, and how he thinks you should be tackling it, which ones to 'no comment' on because the tabloids are hoping to slander you in some form.

Watching some of the interviews with ex-managers, they make it sound as if press conferences are a hazard, a way of losing authority or creating a disconnect between the manager and fans, or players. While some of that is already in, it could be better - whether that would be worth implementing further is debatable as it would have a potentially more profound impact on the game in my view.

[forameuss]

It's basically the Phil McNulty school of writing.

Press conferences have always been a novelty feature, but the problem has always been how it would be possible to update them.

Personally, I think a small team should be assigned to do yearly press conference scouting. Like the club and player researchers, except they only watch press conferences (oh, you're gonna be bored lads!), and their job is to watch for any unique or special events that occur. Also, they'd pick up on how things inter-relate to each other.

Earlier on I had a press conference that "Brendan Rodgers was being disrespectful by playing down the occasion', but I had no idea what he said. We need something like a press officer who might give you a run-down of what has been said in press conferences during the day, *and* what questions he thinks will crop up at your conference, and how he thinks you should be tackling it, which ones to 'no comment' on because the tabloids are hoping to slander you in some form.

Watching some of the interviews with ex-managers, they make it sound as if press conferences are a hazard, a way of losing authority or creating a disconnect between the manager and fans, or players. While some of that is already in, it could be better - whether that would be worth implementing further is debatable as it would have a potentially more profound impact on the game in my view.

Are you seriously suggesting that they should scout press conferences? I'm hoping it's tongue in cheek...

Press conferences in FM are probably just about as exciting and predictable as they are in real life - that is, not exciting, and very predictable. Beyond expanding the question and answer back and putting a little more unpredictability into them, there's not much they can really do unless they move away from what press conferences are in real life. The only other thing would be a natural language parser for custom responses, where the AI media takes what you've said and tries to gleam meaning from them. But since that's not really probable...

[isignedupfornorealreason]

Are you seriously suggesting that they should scout press conferences? I'm hoping it's tongue in cheek...

Press conferences in FM are probably just about as exciting and predictable as they are in real life - that is, not exciting, and very predictable. Beyond expanding the question and answer back and putting a little more unpredictability into them, there's not much they can really do unless they move away from what press conferences are in real life. The only other thing would be a natural language parser for custom responses, where the AI media takes what you've said and tries to gleam meaning from them. But since that's not really probable...

No, it's not tongue in cheek. Basically, a team could get together and look at the way the whole system interacts. From how the conferences are conducted, to how it is reported and to how the information is spread. For example, a lot of the press conferences I have in-game tends to automatically appear to know about every minor injury that happens, rather than allowing me to disclose it.

I wouldn't get so hung up on the scouting point, it was more the idea of getting a few people to specialise in that area to get ideas on the table to improve a feature that people appear to have no ideas on how to improve realistically.

[themadsheep2001]

Are you seriously suggesting that they should scout press conferences? I'm hoping it's tongue in cheek...

Press conferences in FM are probably just about as exciting and predictable as they are in real life - that is, not exciting, and very predictable. Beyond expanding the question and answer back and putting a little more unpredictability into them, there's not much they can really do unless they move away from what press conferences are in real life. The only other thing would be a natural language parser for custom responses, where the AI media takes what you've said and tries to gleam meaning from them. But since that's not really probable...

Not, probably, they definitely are having had to film a fair few. There need to be a few more reactive questions each time on the key game points, which doesn't happen enough though

[HMFCUK]

Send my assistant, too repetitive.

[martplfc1]

All the 'interaction' features are poor, not just the press conferences. Talking to players, staff, the team as a whole etc. is really unrealistic and causes ridiculous reactions (good and bad). For example, at the start of every season you have a team meeting where the only option is "How are we all feeling about the season ahead?" The players' morale goes up just by asking the question ffs Then you get to choose "that's exactly the reaction I was looking for" or "I guess I misjudged the situation". And depending on which one you choose, you either enrage the squad or make them even happier! I mean come on, it's a terrible feature.

I'd love a overhaul of the system entirely but doubt it's even possible to have a more human-like conversation with current technology.

[forameuss]

All the 'interaction' features are poor, not just the press conferences. Talking to players, staff, the team as a whole etc. is really unrealistic and causes ridiculous reactions (good and bad). For example, at the start of every season you have a team meeting where the only option is "How are we all feeling about the season ahead?" The players' morale goes up just by asking the question ffs Then you get to choose "that's exactly the reaction I was looking for" or "I guess I misjudged the situation". And depending on which one you choose, you either enrage the squad or make them even happier! I mean come on, it's a terrible feature.

I'd love a overhaul of the system entirely but doubt it's even possible to have a more human-like conversation with current technology.

The first part, fair enough, but the bolded part...can you not see why that might happen? A player thinks one thing, his manager agrees with him. Seems pretty standard to me.

[Sunstrikuuu]

All the 'interaction' features are poor, not just the press conferences. Talking to players, staff, the team as a whole etc. is really unrealistic and causes ridiculous reactions (good and bad). For example, at the start of every season you have a team meeting where the only option is "How are we all feeling about the season ahead?" The players' morale goes up just by asking the question ffs Then you get to choose "that's exactly the reaction I was looking for" or "I guess I misjudged the situation". And depending on which one you choose, you either enrage the squad or make them even happier! I mean come on, it's a terrible feature.

I'd love a overhaul of the system entirely but doubt it's even possible to have a more human-like conversation with current technology.

Sometimes you get "what was the point of calling us here?" and squad morale drops. And you don't have theoption to say "I've called you all here today because I'm required by the engine to do so."

A lot of the time the response we want to questions and stuff isn't available for whatever reason. When you sign a young player, there's a question about what you're going to do with them. And the options are "we're sending him on loan", "we want to send him on loan", "no comment", "I don't think we can send him on loan", and "he's going to be a first-team player". Where's the option for "he's fifteen so he'll be in the Under 18s"?

Likewise, why, when I talk to a player about his poor performance in the previous game, why am I restricted to criticizing his tackling or his distribution or his chance creation? Or his crossing or his finishing? He did everything badly or I wouldn't be talking to him! He's got 60% pass completion, took 14 shots and put three on target, scoring zero, and had a dozen unsuccessful crosses with zero completions. Don't make me play a guessing game which one will get the result I want. Let me just say "you played badly and need to improve", the way the Recent Form version works. And mistakes. Let me say "you made too many mistakes".

My whole squad at Roma got really mad at me yesteday for refusing to give Daniele Rugani first team football. And there's no option that explains why; specifically, he gave away three penalties in 10 games, he had an average rating of about 6.3 and he reacted badly to being told to improve. He hasn't done anything to deserve first team football, and you're all also mad that I haven't given a new contract to the guy who's replaced him in the first team. You can't have it both ways, my lads.

And the absolute most pointless is in the backroom advice screen. You sign a player, and six weeks later you're being told by your coaches that you need to give him a new contract to tie him down for the long-term. That's... that's not useful. 1) A new contract won't run any longer than the current one 2) It'll involve giving him a big pay raise for like no reason 3) I can't anyway because he won't enter negotiations having just signed a contract. Meanwhile, the coaches are unsure that your star defender, who's averaged a 7.5 rating over three full seasons, deserves a new deal with 18 months to run on his current one.

That said, FM2015 is much better than FM2014 in at least one respect. In 14, calling team meetings caused serious slowdown, at least on my machine. That's not the case in 2015.

[martplfc1]

Why do you need to be looking for a reaction at all? Why can't you just ask how they're feeling? Some say yeah great, others say their concerns. To the ones who say they're great, you say great back, can't wait to see you in action. To the others who have problems why can't you say I'm sorry to hear that, we'll have a chat one-to-one later. Or, if their problem is injury/fitness related, you say thanks for letting me know, I'll get one of the medical staff to look at you ASAP, etc. You know, just more natural responses to gauge the state of your squad, which is what a pre-season meeting should be about. It just seems so pointless at the minute.

[martplfc1]

Sometimes you get "what was the point of calling us here?" and squad morale drops. And you don't have theoption to say "I've called you all here today because I'm required by the engine to do so."

A lot of the time the response we want to questions and stuff isn't available for whatever reason. When you sign a young player, there's a question about what you're going to do with them. And the options are "we're sending him on loan", "we want to send him on loan", "no comment", "I don't think we can send him on loan", and "he's going to be a first-team player". Where's the option for "he's fifteen so he'll be in the Under 18s"?

Likewise, why, when I talk to a player about his poor performance in the previous game, why am I restricted to criticizing his tackling or his distribution or his chance creation? Or his crossing or his finishing? He did everything badly or I wouldn't be talking to him! He's got 60% pass completion, took 14 shots and put three on target, scoring zero, and had a dozen unsuccessful crosses with zero completions. Don't make me play a guessing game which one will get the result I want. Let me just say "you played badly and need to improve", the way the Recent Form version works. And mistakes. Let me say "you made too many mistakes".

My whole squad at Roma got really mad at me yesteday for refusing to give Daniele Rugani first team football. And there's no option that explains why; specifically, he gave away three penalties in 10 games, he had an average rating of about 6.3 and he reacted badly to being told to improve. He hasn't done anything to deserve first team football, and you're all also mad that I haven't given a new contract to the guy who's replaced him in the first team. You can't have it both ways, my lads.

And the absolute most pointless is in the backroom advice screen. You sign a player, and six weeks later you're being told by your coaches that you need to give him a new contract to tie him down for the long-term. That's... that's not useful. 1) A new contract won't run any longer than the current one 2) It'll involve giving him a big pay raise for like no reason 3) I can't anyway because he won't enter negotiations having just signed a contract. Meanwhile, the coaches are unsure that your star defender, who's averaged a 7.5 rating over three full seasons, deserves a new deal with 18 months to run on his current one.

That said, FM2015 is much better than FM2014 in at least one respect. In 14, calling team meetings caused serious slowdown, at least on my machine. That's not the case in 2015.

Pretty much this.

[Sunstrikuuu]

You know, just more natural responses to gauge the state of your squad, which is what a pre-season meeting should be about. It just seems so pointless at the minute.

Well, you can ask your captain, and he'll say "morale is high, there's a great togetherness amongst the lads at the moment". And then you have four players fall out with each other over tutoring.

[RBKalle]

I understand why they're in the game, but I don't enjoy them at all and I can't skip them either because the effect on the squad's morale is too important.

For the same reason, the whole ordeal feels pointless because it quickly becomes a game of "pick the best answer" instead of a coherent, albeit over-simplified, take on how press conferences work in real life.

Not to mention most questions are irrelevant or completely silly, like the aforementioned "former backup is coming back", or the absurdity of AI managers pointing out a backup as the weakest link. Or all the pettiness of manager feuds despite a gulf in their career's achievements. It's not Mourinho v Wenger, it's Nigel Adkins v Mourinho.

Press conferences could become interesting with more variety and more relevant topics about the game and the league. Specific incidents, selection or tactical choices, future plans etc. Even the attempts to create controversy currently feel forced and flat, despite the gameworld offering plenty of potential topics.

Also, the effect on morale should be limited, in order to allow us more freedom instead of playing it safe to avoid consequences.

[martplfc1]

This sums up how awful PCs are in the game:

Beat Keverkusen 8-1 away from home. Messi scored 6.

Just two questions after the game: 1. How is your relationship with their Manager. 2. Player x had a great game against you. He really is a top player isn't he?

just shockingly bad. Really hope it's improved this time round.

[fabioke]

I do them all myself. For me FM isn't always about fun, it's more about immersion. I always play VLLM so maybe the frequency is more bearable for me.

I fully understand the complaints but even in real life they're incredibly boring unless you're called Van Gaal, Mourinho or Trappatoni.

[kefalo84]

Nope, too repetitive.

[talhak]

After a single season, you deal with almost all types of questions; so then it is boring. hope it won't be same in FM16..

[grade]

I do them all myself. For me FM isn't always about fun, it's more about immersion. I always play VLLM so maybe the frequency is more bearable for me.

I fully understand the complaints but even in real life they're incredibly boring unless you're called Van Gaal, Mourinho or Trappatoni.

You must at least fun playing the game. Your immersion to the gmae, is what makes fun playing this game. Trust me, when I say, that if you would have fun with the game I would barelly touch it.

I just send AM to deal with it. But been nearly 8 months since i play full fat game.

[HUNT3R]

After a single season, you deal with almost all types of questions; so then it is boring. hope it won't be same in FM16..

The answers to the same questions aren't always the same though. I answer the same questions differently depending on context.

[talhak]

The answers to the same questions aren't always the same though. I answer the same questions differently depending on context.

I did not say the answers for the questions are always same; but questions. So when I see starts of questions, it is easy to select answer through one look without reading details. If the questions vary (through the years, players, events, etc), it won't be same.

[HUNT3R]

I did not say the answers for the questions are always same; but questions. So when I see starts of questions, it is easy to select answer through one look without reading details. If the questions vary (through the years, players, events, etc), it won't be same.

There are only so many ways to ask the same question, so it doesn't matter too much, imo. I also know what they're asking just from reading the first part of the question, but my answers vary. I don't mind that I know very quickly what they're asking. It saves time.

[talhak]

There are only so many ways to ask the same question, so it doesn't matter too much, imo. I also know what they're asking just from reading the first part of the question, but my answers vary. I don't mind that I know very quickly what they're asking. It saves time.

you describe it as "time saving" - but others posted here describe it "boring, repetitive"; so current one does not make sensation after get used to questions.

[HUNT3R]

you describe it as "time saving" - but others posted here describe it "boring, repetitive"; so current one does not make sensation after get used to questions.

Time saving on reading the questions, yes, but I put thought into what I answer. The boring/repetitive crowd answer the same way each time.

[martplfc1]

I'm part of that crowd and I answer differently depending on the context; doesn't make it any less boring for me as the questions are the same and often completely out of context (see my previous post).

[HUNT3R]

Send Assistant Manager.

[Xavessi]

Interesting thread and it confirms what the stats tell us; that it's a marmite feature. Some people love it, some people don't want to go near it.

With all due respect, I think this is delusional.

I have read the thread and and I can't find ANYONE who 'loves it'. The evidence in this thread indicates there is a small minority who tolerate it, and none of the defenders admit to actually loving the feature.

[themadsheep2001]

With all due respect, I think this is delusional.

I have read the thread and and I can't find ANYONE who 'loves it'. The evidence in this thread indicates there is a small minority who tolerate it, and none of the defenders admit to actually loving the feature.

OP's question was "does anyone enjoy it?" People can definitely enjoy it (as I do) without being referred to as a defender, thanks.

And definitely do not refer to other posters as delusional. Will not tell you again.

[talhak]

sorry but why are some moderators too hard to your guests (members here)?? It got my attention that people from SI are a lot more kind than some of you. People can make intentional or unintentional mistakes. I think you must tolerate them since they are the reason you moderate the forum here. As an old moderator of a big community wanted to share my ideas. This is a friendly place - so it is not good to use harsh and threatening expressions such as "will not tell you again". Come one, just tell people their mistakes and warn them in a polite way to let them to continue loving the game & the company.

[themadsheep2001]

It comes down to this essentially:

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/370304-Failure-to-Read-or-Follow-House-Rules?p=9157726#post9157726

Although we appreciate constructive criticism, when a new game is released we've often seen destructive criticism and personal insults aimed at SI staff and the forum moderating team and this simply cannot be tolerated. This form of criticism not only spreads false information about game development, but poisons the forum experience for all our users, including those employed by SI. These forums are intended to be a source of help and information to SI's consumer base, and this purpose is obscured when team members have to spend inordinate lengths of time defending themselves against snipes, insults, deliberate falsehoods, prejudiced misinterpretations and destructive attacks on their integrity and ability.

We feel that certain users' posts over-step the mark in terms of the above and therefore we have procedures to address this. We understand that our community is incredibly passionate about the game and very much wants every new incarnation of Football Manager to be our best. We as a developer share that – we want FM to be the best Football Management experience our users have ever encountered.

We really do value constructive feedback. The game simply wouldn’t be what it is today without the huge amount of support, feedback and suggestions we’ve received over the years. It’s just when users overstep the line, including personal attacks on SI employees and moderators and a plethora of posts which seem intended to start arguments rather than generate constructive critical debate, we have to take stronger action. We would love to become more engaged with our forums, but feel that the current climate is preventing that from being an achievable goal. Therefore if anyone posts in a manner which is continually disrespectful, either to the developers, moderators or other users they will be banned.

At no point is there any need in any debate to refer to anyone's posts as delusional. Such posting styles are always given short shrift around here, and there really is no excuse for it, in the past we've been lenient on it and sadly that led less to less and less people willing to post, and it's not something we want to go back to. We have done, and will continue to keep this a pleasant place to interact, both for users and SI staff who take the time to come and post in here. I hope that clears it up and we will move on from it.

[Mars_Blackmon]

With all due respect, I think this is delusional.

I have read the thread and and I can't find ANYONE who 'loves it'. The evidence in this thread indicates there is a small minority who tolerate it, and none of the defenders admit to actually loving the feature.

I love it...

But it can improve just like any other feature in the game.

[themadsheep2001]

I definitely wouldn't call it my favorite feature of the game, but one thing that I like about FM is that it tries (arguably) to run as a simulator, and press conferences are a fact of managerial life, so I can appreciate them from that perspective. To a point, managers get asked questions of essentially the same nature week in and week out anyway in real life.

I think it can definitely be better in picking out key points in the game a lot more. That would give it a lot more life and scope than adding more answers.