FM's Steam 2017 rating

[Wakers]

http://store.steampowered.com/app/482730/

 

What do we make of this?

I know at first the game was getting panned by angry Chinese speakers, now it appears that the all of the most recent negative reviews are legit criticisms (albeit, ones we've seen before: super keepers, conceding 2 goals from shots consistently and so on) - is this the same crowd that were review bombing it changing tactics and mass marking negative reviews as helpful?

I'd very much like to write a piece about this. Doing some research into it. I've not seen a AAA game suffer with this for this long after release before.

Am I wrong? Does the community genuinely think 2017 is that bad? Or am I right in suspecting that this is merely review bombing? I've played about 20 hours of 2017 around launch. It didn't seem worse than FM 2016 for me.

[jmkn04]

 

It's a symptom of the developers/company/whoeverisincharge failing to acknowledge valid criticisms from it's customers. It's come back to bite them.

Also typical of the <snip> attitude on this forum for years - maybe it's an endemic attitude - of trying to silence those that do anything but evangelise the product. 

Anyway... been going downhill for years in my view. Not sure how you can justify producing (and expecting people to pay for) the same product yearly and showing little more than aesthetic change. 

Pity there isn't more competition within the genre.

 

[FrazT]

 

43 minutes ago, jmkn04 said:

 

It's a symptom of the developers/company/whoeverisincharge failing to acknowledge valid criticisms from it's customers. It's come back to bite them.

Also typical of the <snip> attitude on this forum for years - maybe it's an endemic attitude - of trying to silence those that do anything but evangelise the product. 

Anyway... been going downhill for years in my view. Not sure how you can justify producing (and expecting people to pay for) the same product yearly and showing little more than aesthetic change. 

Pity there isn't more competition within the genre.

 

Valid criticism of the game, expressed in a reasonable way is always welcome, as long as it abides by the forum rules.  Posts and threads that do not will be deleted.

Making comparisons like you have done is unacceptable- this time it will be deleted so no more please

[ilkork]

Hey, i am fairly new to this forum, although i was a lurker for years.
Like most reasonable people (and not angry teenagers), i find that there are things in FM that i like and things i could live without. I could give you a list, sure, but, that's not my point.
My question is, don't you people(SI staff) play the game as we do? Don't you test it yourselves? Do you really need us to make suggestions or tell you what's wrong with it?

[FrazT]

20 minutes ago, ilkork said:

Hey, i am fairly new to this forum, although i was a lurker for years.
Like most reasonable people (and not angry teenagers), i find that there are things in FM that i like and things i could live without. I could give you a list, sure, but, that's not my point.
My question is, don't you people(SI staff) play the game as we do? Don't you test it yourselves? Do you really need us to make suggestions or tell you what's wrong with it?

The answers to your questions are:

Yes, the SI staff play the game

Yes, they test it along with a team of in-house testers and members of the users beta test group

Yes, SI want suggestions from the community on how to make it better or features to consider

Yes, testing of the game is comprehensive but can never cover every eventuality, so SI need their users to report issues that they find so that they can be reviewed.

 

Nobody has ever suggested that the game is perfect and everyone can help to make it better.

[ilkork]

43 minutes ago, FrazT said:

The answers to your questions are:

Yes, the SI staff play the game

Yes, they test it along with a team of in-house testers and members of the users beta test group

Yes, SI want suggestions from the community on how to make it better or features to consider

Yes, testing of the game is comprehensive but can never cover every eventuality, so SI need their users to report issues that they find so that they can be reviewed.

 

Nobody has ever suggested that the game is perfect and everyone can help to make it better.

Ok, appreciate that. I will appreciate it more if you also answer the following question:
Then, why don't you change some old features that most people agree that need change and instead you add a new fake social feed which doesn't really enhance my experience?
I can already answer my question. You will come up with something between the lines of "The marketing department thought it was a good idea".
I mean, are you not bored of the same conversation options? You sir, personally.   <--- And that was just an example.
Is it really harder to change that or add a new social feed?

Nothing is perfect in life. But i am sure you can find ways to satisfy your customers even more.
Out of the top of my head, i could suggest that:
-Make polls about possible future features and try to implement the top 10s or 5s or more.
Do you already do that? If not, why not? As i said earlier i am fairly new here and haven't read every thread.
And nobody will say anything bad if you come with a response such as "Unfortunately we were unable to implement that specific feature for FM18 but we are working towards implementing it for FM19". Most reasonable people will understand.

[lemeuresnew]

2 hours ago, Wakers said:

What do we make of this?

i think i would question a lot of those first reviews. seriously, you dont give a game a positive rating, but you played it for 250+ hours? how long does it take to figure out if you like a game...

 

an edit - my favourite off of the first page is giving the game 7/10 but a negative review because the price didnt go down over 3 months and he didnt get a cheaper version for playing previous versions for '10 years'

[CFuller]

I'd generally take Steam's user reviews with a massive pinch of salt. I find that only a small percentage of them are informative or even slightly helpful.

Some of FM17's negative Steam reviews are understandable and well-reasoned. Most of them, though, fall along at least one of these lines:

• "No Chinese translation, therefore Miles Jacobson is bad."
• "It's just FM16 with a new-season squad update." (What new features were they expecting - Oculus Rift integration?)
• "My players keep getting injured. Game must be broken."
• "FM is too hard. Game must be broken."
• "FM is too easy. Game must be broken."
• "I was FM'd. My Man Utd team had 49 shots at goal (48 off target, but I won't mention that) and 135% possession, but Stourbridge scored in the 98th minute with an own goal and won 1-0. Game must be broken."
• "WORST VIDEO GAME EVER."

Read through the positive reviews, though, and you'll generally come across a more rounded view of FM. There's still quite a lot of rubbish to sift through ("BEST GAME OF ALL TIME", "Sign this player and you'll win everything", etc), but you can still find the odd proper pros-and-cons assessment.

In summary, I wouldn't read too much into the Steam community reviews. I'd give more weight to the opinions of professional game reviewers. (On Metacritic, for instance, FM17 currently has a Metascore of 80% based on 45 reviews. Its User Score is much less positive.)

[FrazT]

2 hours ago, ilkork said:

Ok, appreciate that. I will appreciate it more if you also answer the following question:
Then, why don't you change some old features that most people agree that need change and instead you add a new fake social feed which doesn't really enhance my experience?
I can already answer my question. You will come up with something between the lines of "The marketing department thought it was a good idea".
I mean, are you not bored of the same conversation options? You sir, personally.   <--- And that was just an example.
Is it really harder to change that or add a new social feed?

Nothing is perfect in life. But i am sure you can find ways to satisfy your customers even more.
Out of the top of my head, i could suggest that:
-Make polls about possible future features and try to implement the top 10s or 5s or more.
Do you already do that? If not, why not? As i said earlier i am fairly new here and haven't read every thread.
And nobody will say anything bad if you come with a response such as "Unfortunately we were unable to implement that specific feature for FM18 but we are working towards implementing it for FM19". Most reasonable people will understand.

I dont work for SI so cant answer why features are included or not- there is a team that reviews feature requests and suggestions, so they are all considered.

There is a specific forum for feature requests which the SI staff visit, s post your suggestions in there.

[jmkn04]

4 hours ago, FrazT said:

 

Valid criticism of the game, expressed in a reasonable way is always welcome, as long as it abides by the forum rules.  Posts and threads that do not will be deleted.

Making comparisons like you have done is unacceptable- this time it will be deleted so no more please

 

I wasn't calling anyone a Nazi. I was simply comparing the attitude in a colloquial sense. I think I'm probably justified as you've censored my post and shown you don't quite understand the concept of forums or expression (of views)... or english.

I expect I'll be banned as a final show of your authority.

 

 

[HUNT3R]

2 hours ago, jmkn04 said:

 

I wasn't calling anyone a Nazi. I was simply comparing the attitude in a colloquial sense. I think I'm probably justified as you've censored my post and shown you don't quite understand the concept of forums or expression (of views)... or english.

I expect I'll be banned as a final show of your authority.

 

 

This is still a family forum and has general house rules. If you're banned, it'll be for valid reasons, not something small like this. You're way off topic now, so rather stick to that.

[ilkork]

2 hours ago, FrazT said:

There is a specific forum for feature requests which the SI staff visit, s post your suggestions in there.

That's my point, right there sir. In that quote.
You (mods, staff here in general) always do that. Instead of discussing the various features requests with us, you "send us to the next office" and say "other people are involved with this, not me".
You've never given us your suggestions. I mean, you are people like us, are you not? Obviously, there are features about FM that you dislike/want to change. Right?

I want to have a conversation with the people that "review feature requests and suggestions". Has that ever happened? Have those people ever conducted a poll with the top 10 or 20 most popular suggestions?
Isn't that better instead of having angry teens posting "fix this", "fix that" threads all the time?

Am i wrong about all of this?

[HUNT3R]

We have our own suggestions that we post. We do bug reports and criticise the game (like adults ) if it's needed. This is mostly done elsewhere though.

You can see SI review the threads in the feature requests section though (which is why we tell everyone to put their wishes there!) and from there, it's up to SI to decide if it should be added, how to add it and when to add it.

[ilkork]

Fair enough (even if it leaves me slightly unsatisfied).

[HUNT3R]

13 minutes ago, ilkork said:

Fair enough (even if it leaves me slightly unsatisfied).

A good bug report can open the doors for conversation about the specific area as well, FWIW.

[Khalev]

Maybe time for a new director? Nothing personal Miles   But sometimes its good to have some new people in with new ideas.

[westy8chimp]

9 hours ago, ilkork said:

Ok, appreciate that. I will appreciate it more if you also answer the following question:
Then, why don't you change some old features that most people agree that need change and instead you add a new fake social feed which doesn't really enhance my experience?
I can already answer my question. You will come up with something between the lines of "The marketing department thought it was a good idea".
I mean, are you not bored of the same conversation options? You sir, personally.   <--- And that was just an example.
Is it really harder to change that or add a new social feed?

Nothing is perfect in life. But i am sure you can find ways to satisfy your customers even more.
Out of the top of my head, i could suggest that:
-Make polls about possible future features and try to implement the top 10s or 5s or more.
Do you already do that? If not, why not? As i said earlier i am fairly new here and haven't read every thread.
And nobody will say anything bad if you come with a response such as "Unfortunately we were unable to implement that specific feature for FM18 but we are working towards implementing it for FM19". Most reasonable people will understand.

The trouble is someone did request the social feed! And this year if you go to the features request... more people are asking for Avatar based improvements and to be the chairmen etc.

I've actually done a poll on Social feed and the response is alarming... 13% of responses like it the way it is ... whilst a further 30+ % like the idea and want it to be improved...

I'm sure FM have a paradigm with which they work to... a group of concepts linked to the main goal ... some requests will meet those concepts, even if it's just one user that asks for it.. some, however popular, do not so will never be implemented.

i.e. (and an idea I hate) is the constant requests to be able to spend your wages as a manager. The game would begin to withdraw from the football world and you go shopping for cars and houses...it becomes some sort of hybrid SIM game. Luckily SI have, presumably, discussed numerous times that they never want to allow the game to take this development path. So it doesn't matter about how many times it's asked for... they wont do it.

IMO social feed should have gone in that category, but at the same time with it's growing use within the game, I can understand how it maybe touched one of their outer concepts .. in the immersion spectrum.

[Wakers]

Hmm,

 

From what I've seen while looking around, two things are going on:

 

The game was review bombed by angry Chinese players who didn't get what they felt was a promised translation for FM17. This happened it both the form of leaving negative reviews and upvoting negative reviews that have nothing to do with the language issue. What also appears to be happening is that there's a genuine feeling of displeasure with the series, caused by what users feel are useless features and the constant perceived "one step forward, two steps back" of the match engine with each new release. This does mirror my own frustrations a little.  

 

Interesting. I've also noticed that this forum seems to be a lot, lot less active than it was even two years ago, which plays into the second part of what I said above.

[Cougar2010]

7 minutes ago, Wakers said:

Interesting. I've also noticed that this forum seems to be a lot, lot less active than it was even two years ago, which plays into the second part of what I said above.

Talking in general terms I suspect you would find the younger end of the spectrum don't tend to use forums as much as the older members as they have grown up with the likes of social media/reddit etc.

I regularly speak to teenagers about technology/software etc and I'm always surprised by how many don't know what a forum is.

On top of that you can add that FM appeals more to a certain type of gamer who likes a slower strategy type game which again tends to sync with older players.

[enigmatic]

There are plenty of legitimate criticisms of FM17, from the difficult-to-get-right balance like the match engine's implementation of midfield defending and interpretation of "active" offsides to obscure but game-breaking bugs to bugs which might be trivial but are so glaringly obvious its amazing they made it into the game, never mind the patched one (media highlights "key man" not in starting eleven during pre-match buildup). Some people on this forum have spent hours pointing out exactly where and what SI got wrong, even to the point of drawing bloody diagrams to show why wingers in the midfield strata don't defend properly.

But the Steam reviews are dominated by whinging by people that can't accept they sometimes lose games or making trivially false claims that the match engine hasn't changed since 2016. At least the Chinese brigaders had a specific issue they wanted fixing.

[Wakers]

I do think that they need to rethink how they handle tactics and media interaction.

 

Media interaction, to be blunt, I don't care about. I'll never care about it. There is nothing more repetitive and boring than having to answer the same small pool of questions every two minutes of game time. No matter how big they make the pool of questions, this will never not be boring.

 

When it comes to tactics - it's too hard to see what difference certain more detailed options make. They should make it more basic. Only include settings that make an obvious and immediate difference. Passing - short, direct, long. Not 20 settings in between. Team width is another easy one.

 

What we have at the moment, and what we've had for the last several versions, is a system that is not well replicated by the match engine, either because the match engine isn't capable of properly displaying the near limitless combinations the players can use, or because the game isn't good enough at showing the player the difference their minor, minor tweaks make. 

 

However, that's veering off into a different topic.

[HUNT3R]

Just check the latest "most helpful" reviews. One guy gave it a not recommend just because he doesn't know what he's doing... and he's been playing for years AND has 284 hours on FM 17 alone. Another complains about having one long-term injury, but managed to hold out for 85 hours of game time.

 

The one below that whinges about the price and for that reason can't recommend it. Even suggests a loyalty discount, which there actually was, ffs. I feel sorry for him, because he's had 250 unhappy hours with FM 17.

Then there are countless I lose so game is bad reviews... Most of them with at least 60 hours logged. One had a massive rant, only mentioning "same issues", but dragged himself through 400 hours. Poor thing.

There are complaints. Some of them even understandable. But to "not recommend" a game, but people put hundreds of hours into the game anyway, doesn't make sense.

[Neil Brock]

Some of the reviews are just ridiculous in fairness - http://steamcommunity.com/id/danielrae/recommended/482730/

But yeah, we take the legitimate concerns on board. CFuller summed it up very well above with the types of reviews we've had. Of the 6,050 reviews currently active around 2,600 are from Chinese users negatively slated the game due to the lack of Chinese language in the game. 

[Wakers]

10 minutes ago, Neil Brock said:

Some of the reviews are just ridiculous in fairness - http://steamcommunity.com/id/danielrae/recommended/482730/

But yeah, we take the legitimate concerns on board. CFuller summed it up very well above with the types of reviews we've had. Of the 6,050 reviews currently active around 2,600 are from Chinese users negatively slated the game due to the lack of Chinese language in the game. 

Where did that come from, Neil?

 

Some of them said that there was a promise of Chinese language support for this year? I don't personally remember seeing that but then again it's not something I'd be looking out for, either.

[ilkork]

I gave it some thought and finally realized what's going on. Let me enlighten those of you who are in the same position i was.

SI, like any other company, has many departments. Developers, marketing etc.
I am sure they have the tools to collect every possible data that is available to them. They know how many people buy the game each year. They know how many people joined the forum and how many left. They even know what percentage of their customers use 32-bit or 64-bit.
SI also has a group of people who manage the features. I am 99% sure that they sat down and wrote every single real life feature that could be implemented in game.
Now, some of these features are included in the new version, some are kept for future versions. Sometimes, when someone in the forum suggests "hey, why don't you add this" and they see that many people want the same, they do it, giving you the feeling that you can, as a customer, request changes to their product and actually make it happen. This happens most of the times.

You may ask, "why is that happening"? Because, like any other company, they just can't produce a 99% complete version. You have to keep wanting more in order to buy the new version each year.
Like Intel. For example, do you really think that next gen processors haven't been already produced? They have, but are unavailable for mass production. I am not saying that FM20 is already produced, just some features.
So, business as usual.

P.S.1 I didn't want to post the above, i kept thinking to myself, "what is to be gained"?
Well, at least my words will enlighten more people, make them stop caring about features and just play the game.
No, i won't stop purchasing FM, because it is the best in its category. What i am gonna do is stop making suggestions or complain about stuff.

P.S.2  @westy8chimp yes, social feed is a pure waste. Doesn't really enhance our experience.
But, you have to remember that you and i are not the only ones playing the game. Teenagers also play it and they have to be satisfied too.

[dOrrrr]

Hi guys, just a few thoughts

I think in recent years the perceived prioritisation of features that most people don't care about (media, 3D match engine) over things like AI squad building (I'm not saying the Devs don't try to improve this, but AI still ends up with 6 strikers when playing 1 up front) and (for some people) Tactics, has really turned people off.

Like previous posts mentioned - Media has no interest for me and the 3D match engine adds nothing of value given how it is marketed as a main feature, I still use 2D and am more than happy. It gives the customer the feeling of trying to sell us something 'New,' when it doesn't feel like a new game. This immediately creates bad feeling from day 1 and for a lot of people it has boiled over with this version.

 

[Neil Brock]

15 minutes ago, ilkork said:

I gave it some thought and finally realized what's going on. Let me enlighten those of you who are in the same position i was.

SI, like any other company, has many departments. Developers, marketing etc.
I am sure they have the tools to collect every possible data that is available to them. They know how many people buy the game each year. They know how many people joined the forum and how many left. They even know what percentage of their customers use 32-bit or 64-bit.
SI also has a group of people who manage the features. I am 99% sure that they sat down and wrote every single real life feature that could be implemented in game.
Now, some of these features are included in the new version, some are kept for future versions. Sometimes, when someone in the forum suggests "hey, why don't you add this" and they see that many people want the same, they do it, giving you the feeling that you can, as a customer, request changes to their product and actually make it happen. This happens most of the times.

You may ask, "why is that happening"? Because, like any other company, they just can't produce a 99% complete version. You have to keep wanting more in order to buy the new version each year.
Like Intel. For example, do you really think that next gen processors haven't been already produced? They have, but are unavailable for mass production. I am not saying that FM20 is already produced, just some features.
So, business as usual.

 

You do realise coding and designing features take time? We don't 'hold back' features to be major selling points for future games. We only have a limited amount of staff and time available to us to implement anything new (not to mention working on pre-existing features), so we're restricted by what can be done for any new game. 

Yes we do have a very large feature database of which a good portion have come directly from the community, but we're not holding certain features off just so we have a way of selling the game later. 

[Neil Brock]

2 minutes ago, dOrrrr said:

Hi guys, just a few thoughts

I think in recent years the perceived prioritisation of features that most people don't care about (media, 3D match engine) over things like AI squad building (I'm not saying the Devs don't try to improve this, but AI still ends up with 6 strikers when playing 1 up front) and (for some people) Tactics, has really turned people off.

Like previous posts mentioned - Media has no interest for me and the 3D match engine adds nothing of value given how it is marketed as a main feature, I still use 2D and am more than happy. It gives the customer the feeling of trying to sell us something 'New,' when it doesn't feel like a new game. This immediately creates bad feeling from day 1 and for a lot of people it has boiled over with this version.

 

I posted this in another thread the other day but feel it's approproate as a response to your comment:

Our coders are compartmentalised into certain areas of the game. The match team works on the match, the competition and rule group work on exactly that, media team work on the media etc. There's only limited fluidity between the teams as the code is entirely different, so for every version the work on each area is balanced in such a way that the improvements are made to each and every area. The media doesn't suffer by the amount of work done on the match and vice-versa. From some comments we read on these forums there seems to be an impression if one area gets an overhaul, everything else is ignored. That's not and has never been the case.

People don't tend to notice some of the changes made 'under the hood' so to speak in some areas. The changes in AI from when I first started on FM (over ten years ago) compared to now is just incredible. But as always there's improvements to be made and we strive to do as many of these as we realistically can without affecting the balance of the game negatively for each new version. 

[westy8chimp]

6 minutes ago, dOrrrr said:

most people don't care about (media, 3D match engine

'most people don't care about the match engine'? Go post that in the tactics forum and you will have an e-lynch mob on your back in no time.

Joke of a statement. It's probably the most important facet of the game.

[KUBI]

I think balancing is the key word, as such a complex simulation has to work for people with sometimes completely different ways to play the game. That's one of the reasons for a lot of bad reviews, because some people focus on one part of the game and if they find something that does not work as it should (and it could be a lot, as people have sometimes strange expectations), they post a review like "The game is still fun to play, but I can't change the manager picture anymore, therefore I have to give a negative review".  There are also a lot of "this could be done easy" or "why did they not spot this issue". But sometimes a small change in one part of the game could interfere with other parts and leading into more issues. That's also the reason why testing the game has become more time consuming over the years, as every part of the game has now its own complexity, while in the early years al lot of things where just basic stuff, like interaction, media etc.

[upthetoon]

to be honest, the reviews are a reflection of what the community thinks of this game in the current state. SI can go on lying to themselves saying Chinese people have downvoted their game and take solace from there.

but the steam reviews are cold hard truth of the decline the game is in now. go on in the same direction adding useless social media features and there will be further drop in players and even worse reviews in future. my advise is take the reviews seriously and reflect on the condition of the game. it's going backwards.

[KUBI]

1 minute ago, upthetoon said:

to be honest, the reviews are a reflection of what the community thinks of this game in the current state. SI can go on lying to themselves saying Chinese people have downvoted their game and take solace from there.

but the steam reviews are cold hard truth of the decline the game is in now. go on in the same direction adding useless social media features and there will be further drop in players and even worse reviews in future. my advise is take the reviews seriously and reflect on the condition of the game. it's going backwards.

I'm sure they take the reviews seriously, but only about 20% of it can be taken seriously. I did spend some time in reading steam reviews and there are a lot with stuff like "Can't win a single game and half of my team are injured all the time". 

[upthetoon]

2 hours ago, HUNT3R said:

Just check the latest "most helpful" reviews. One guy gave it a not recommend just because he doesn't know what he's doing... and he's been playing for years AND has 284 hours on FM 17 alone. Another complains about having one long-term injury, but managed to hold out for 85 hours of game time.

 

The one below that whinges about the price and for that reason can't recommend it. Even suggests a loyalty discount, which there actually was, ffs. I feel sorry for him, because he's had 250 unhappy hours with FM 17.

Then there are countless I lose so game is bad reviews... Most of them with at least 60 hours logged. One had a massive rant, only mentioning "same issues", but dragged himself through 400 hours. Poor thing.

There are complaints. Some of them even understandable. But to "not recommend" a game, but people put hundreds of hours into the game anyway, doesn't make sense.

this is simply clutching at straws. I have played FM for hundreds of hours in the last few series but doesn't mean I've enjoyed it. i'm 'enjoying' it only because there is no competition in this series. I have no other alternative. I love the feel of coming home and managing a club. it's a chill out game as I don't really play fast action games or whatsoever. but I can see the game has stagnated and even gone backwards. fundamental issues are not fixed. I don't need to repeat as you can just go to the bugs forums and go have a look.

so anyway, please don't equate time spent in game is correlation to how much a person is enjoying game. it's lame. especially with a game like this. facing the reality is much better.

[YKW]

In terms of the Chinese reviews, from my understanding it isn't that Chinese language isn't in the game, but that the Chinese fans think that they were led to believe that the Chinese language would be in the game. It's a subtle difference, but I think that's what puts the Chinese reviews on the same page as the rest of the reviews. From a general perspective I think the issue is that the game we get isn't as good as the game we thought we were going to get, or maybe as good as the game we think we deserve.

For example, a few versions ago a main feature of the negative FM reviews was a complaint about the huge number of new features going into each release, many of which lacked any kind of depth, etc. Was FM15 2,500 new features better than FM12? No it wasn't, so were the 2,500 new features worth it? Is FM17 a new approach, or the same approach that was frustrating users before? I feel that the overwhelmingly negative recent review scores are entirely justified in the context of FM17 being a continuation of a series. As a standalone game then obviously it is the best there it is.

Secondly, if there has been a co-ordinated attack on FM by some angry Chinese fans, then my question is where is the co-ordinated defense by the FM community? Personally I think we as FM fans are some of the most loyal and passionate fans of anything that there is. Why has nobody been proactive and tried to rally people around defending the game? From my perspective I wouldn't be fully behind this because I think the Chinese fans have fair concerns based on what happened, and I also agree with the vast majority of helpful, negative reviews of FM17.

Taking comments from the first page of 30 day reviews:

"Every year they add very little changes to the game, and I bought them and played them with joy....I will quite this. Because I really don't think that they will ever improve their game. We play the same game for years now. They don't add anything important."

"This is the first time the game has beat me. I literally have no idea what I am doing wrong or how to fix the slumps in my team's encounter. I can go from being on a 12 game unbeaten run to a 12 game losing streak. I appreciate I must be doing something wrong, but the game is horrendous at offering any sort of constructive feedback. Generic Assman suggestions such as 'I suggest we adopt a shorter passing game or words to that effect are useless and often counter productive. I have spent hours in forums reading up on tactics, listening to podcasts, all to no avail."

"Every new release is basically an update of records. Overall 7/10 from me, FM will always be awesome but the price vs any new features stops it being anything more."

"Essentially, its incrementalism every single year. The social feed is pointless when it's all generated.. The AI do not know how to build a team and set them up in a way to challenge you."

"They've done nothing to advance the game. If you do a quick google search on "ideas to implement in FM", you'll find a million great ideas from fans that give a ****. But alas, no, nothing. Social news is the biggest **** you this game has ever given to it's fans. Who honestly thought that would be a good idea?...But fret not, they've also added a ton of new staff roles THAT DOES NOTHING. Yes, Nothing."

(I didn't write these last two, but I may as well have.)

"But you know what Sega? You got me by the balls. And you damn well know it. I'm going to keep purchasing this parody of a manager game because you're the only half decent option out there. You'll keep ****ing me in the *** with a God to honest smile on your ace, and I'll keep taking it. But I'm a person who only plays one game, and I'm a minority in the gaming world. Most of your fans have several games they indulge in, and someday they will stop buying your game. We'll go down together, only this time I'll be smiling. So tuck in for the ride Sega, it's cold outside."

"And the worst, the official forum is full of people that love and defend the game, any constructive criticism gets you ban warnings and threads closed. Very unprofessional bunch of moderators on their mixed with FM lovers who wont hear a bad word about the game. Most of them also act like moderators."

It's all well and good passing off the review scores as being angry Chinese fans, but I think that's drastically missing the point. None of the above complaints are unique to FM17. There is a build up of very specific frustrations which are well represented in just the most recent, helpful reviews. The all time most helpful reviews have these exact same frustrations at the center of them.

I agree with the review scores for FM17 and I agree with a lot of the reasons given for those review scores. If FM18 doesn't address some of these issues which are very common and fairly long-running, then I think it may also be reviewed negatively.

Don't get me wrong, I have a couple of hundred hours of FM17 under my belt, and I'm enjoying it and it has been value for money, as it always is. But I do think it's important to try and understand all of the common reasons for the negative reviews, rather than sweep them all under the same rug as just being angry bitterness. Obviously this is what Neil said SI is already doing, which is good.

[Neil Brock]

4 minutes ago, upthetoon said:

to be honest, the reviews are a reflection of what the community thinks of this game in the current state. SI can go on lying to themselves saying Chinese people have downvoted their game and take solace from there.

but the steam reviews are cold hard truth of the decline the game is in now. go on in the same direction adding useless social media features and there will be further drop in players and even worse reviews in future. my advise is take the reviews seriously and reflect on the condition of the game. it's going backwards.

The reviews are a reflection of the point you're seemingly trying to make here rather than the community as a whole - they have enough avenues and ways of making their opinions heard which they've done and we've absolutely been listening. Likewise the community are free to make their own comments and leave their own reviews. Any legitimate feedback wherever it comes from of course we take into account - and when I say legitimate that doesn't mean "only positive". 

[Guest]

For the most part Steam user reviews are unhelpful because of the binary approach to scoring but there will always be some well written & well thought out posts however FM17 has a problem, there are fewer than 5,000 user submitted reviews which means there is just not enough content to draw any conclusion if you're considering buying the product as a consumer or from an SI perspective how much your consumer is enjoying the product (time played can be an imprecise indicator, I have long run holiday saves & I know others who seem to never shut FM down when they're not playing it).

[KUBI]

2 minutes ago, YKW said:

"Every year they add very little changes to the game, and I bought them and played them with joy....I will quite this. Because I really don't think that they will ever improve their game. We play the same game for years now. They don't add anything important."

"Every new release is basically an update of records. Overall 7/10 from me, FM will always be awesome but the price vs any new features stops it being anything more."

Those are posted a lot. And than there are the opposite, that people get angry because new features like press conferences, social media etc. are added. You can't add something fundamental to a football simulation that is on the market for 20 years. At least if you don't want to go into a direction like other sims did, by adding private life for managers, building stadiums and control the burger vans and restaurants. 

[dieu]

13 minutes ago, upthetoon said:

So anyway, please don't equate time spent in game is correlation to how much a person is enjoying game. it's lame. especially with a game like this. facing the reality is much better.

Really? You must really like to punish your self if you play a game for hundreds of hours without any enjoyment at all. 

I know that if I don't enjoy a game I quit playing it after 1 or 2 hours and move on to the next one. Thats why I have over a dozen games in my steam account with 2 or less hours played. 

[Cougar2010]

6 minutes ago, upthetoon said:

to be honest, the reviews are a reflection of what the community thinks of this game in the current state. SI can go on lying to themselves saying Chinese people have downvoted their game and take solace from there.

but the steam reviews are cold hard truth of the decline the game is in now. go on in the same direction adding useless social media features and there will be further drop in players and even worse reviews in future. my advise is take the reviews seriously and reflect on the condition of the game. it's going backwards.

Thats just not true at all I'm afraid and to think different is very blinkered.

The reviews on Steam are only a very small minority of the users buying & playing the game.  Even so if you took out the Chinese ones and the ones of a poor standard (Both positive & negative) you would be left with a more accurate reflection of where FM is.

Even after that you still have negative comments about value for money which is quite frankly ridiculous and gameplay where its clear that the person giving the review doesn't fully understand the game.

Its also clear to anyone with an unbiased standpoint that the game isn't going backwards just by looking at older versions.  Sure new features/improvements have slowed somewhat from early versions but thats to be expected from a mature game while the nature of the game (Simulating being a manager) also limits what you can do with it.  Over the years some features have been altered/adapted sometimes for the better, sometimes for worse in which case they have been altered again or binned for something else but thats the way progress goes.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, dieu said:

Really? You must really like to punish your self if you play a game for hundreds of hours without any enjoyment at all. 

I know that if I don't enjoy a game I quit playing it after 1 or 2 hours and move on to the next one. Thats why I have over a dozen games in my steam account with 2 or less hours played. 

tbf FM isn't the type of game that you can or should make a judgement on after only a few hours, I have 250 hours logged on FM17 of which I imagine half is actual playing time & it took that long for me to definitively decide that this version is not one that I like.

[dieu]

13 minutes ago, Barside said:

tbf FM isn't the type of game that you can or should make a judgement on after only a few hours, I have 250 hours logged on FM17 of which I imagine half is actual playing time & it took that long for me to definitively decide that this version is not one that I like.

Yes, but where you not enjoying it at all? Surely you must at least have gotten some enjoyment out of it or you would not have have bothered to play it for 100+ hours.

[westy8chimp]

 

23 minutes ago, YKW said:

"But you know what Sega? You got me by the balls. And you damn well know it. I'm going to keep purchasing this parody of a manager game because you're the only half decent option out there. You'll keep ****ing me in the *** with a God to honest smile on your ace, and I'll keep taking it. But I'm a person who only plays one game, and I'm a minority in the gaming world. Most of your fans have several games they indulge in, and someday they will stop buying your game. We'll go down together, only this time I'll be smiling. So tuck in for the ride Sega, it's cold outside."

the trouble is .. you say you could have written this yourself. If that's really your opinion, just walk away from the game. If not you have to acknowledge that the game is good?

There's been so many games me and my brother bought when we were younger because we liked certain sports where we've played once and never again. If it's bad ...don't play. i.e we used to love EA rugby on mega drive... so as we upgraded to playstations and xboxs we would always try at least one rugby game... but could never find one that matched our expectation ... so after a few matches it would sit at the back of the cupboard getting dusty.. until we forgot about it completely and bought the new version a year later... and repeated the cycle.

There's elements I hate... and may vocalise here to get feedback and to maybe add awareness to SI ... there are some bugs which I raise and get fixed, some that don't. But nothing makes the game unplayable... in fact I basically turn it on every time my wife is out of the house or watching escape to the country etc. I'll rack up 1000 hours on this FM and the next ... like I have for 20 odd years. It's a great game. Cant wait for my brother to get a new laptop so we can start our first network game on FM17. We are both in our 30s with full time jobs... but revert to being 10 year olds desperate to get home from school and turn on FM (or CM back in the days).

[dOrrrr]

41 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

'most people don't care about the match engine'? Go post that in the tactics forum and you will have an e-lynch mob on your back in no time.

Joke of a statement. It's probably the most important facet of the game.

Not the match engine, the 3D match engine. It's very important to have a flowing match engine but the emphasis put on the 3D animations should be on the low list of priorities. 2D is more than fine.

Thanks for the reply Neil. I agree that the match engine has come on leaps and bounds and perhaps it is more 'noticeable,' than under the hood stuff. In terms of Marketing, the 3D match engine and Media Interaction are always at the top of the 'New Features,' whereas it tends to be ..........and improve AI squad building. This should be A1 in my opinion.

[westy8chimp]

id go onto steam and write a positive review when I get home if it weren't for the fact that if I had time to do that... thatd mean I had time to play FM so would be playing FM...

[dieu]

3 minutes ago, dOrrrr said:

Not the match engine, the 3D match engine. It's very important to have a flowing match engine but the emphasis put on the 3D animations should be on the low list of priorities. 2D is more than fine.

3D-match engine may not be important to you, but tell that to the people who complain every year because FM do not have FIFA graphics

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, dieu said:

Yes, but where you not enjoying it at all? Surely you must at least have gotten some enjoyment out of it or you would not have have bothered to play it for 100+ hours.

There were times when the game showed of elements that were good but after I had taken time to consider every aspect I came to the conclusion that the overall package is not enjoyable & it is the first release in a long time where I do not have an active career save.

[KUBI]

I'm on the opposite with FM 2017. For me this is the best balanced version for years. And I think this shows how different people did and do play this game, especially the long time players have their own favorite aspects of the game. I still can think of a lot of things that could be improved, but I played FM 2017 for more hours already than some of the prior versions.

[Putzibram]

23 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

id go onto steam and write a positive review when I get home if it weren't for the fact that if I had time to do that... thatd mean I had time to play FM so would be playing FM...

Amen !

99,99% of those who like FM don't bother to write review (or post on the forums). We'd rather use our scarce time to play the game.

[Cougar2010]

8 minutes ago, KUBI said:

I'm on the opposite with FM 2017. For me this is the best balanced version for years. And I think this shows how different people did and do play this game, especially the long time players have their own favorite aspects of the game. I still can think of a lot of things that could be improved, but I played FM 2017 for more hours already than some of the prior versions.

Yeah its each to their own.

Personally speaking I think the FM15 ME was the most balanced.  You could play different shapes/formations/styles and the level of success felt about right for the club you were managing.  16 & 17 I can't quite put my finger on why but something seems a little off, not massively but you seem to get stuck in ruts where you do well for a group of games and then it swings and you do badly for a run of games.  These runs rightly or wrongly feel a little too robotic.

[KUBI]

For me the overall game play is more important than the ME. If the ME does not have any obvious flaws I'm happy with it. I like FM2017 because a lot of the other aspects of the game has been improved, like interaction with the staff, the UI in general and also the AI. It's the most polished version with hundreds of improvements compared to FM 2016.