Let's be honest, is anyone going to bother with FM19?

[lemeuresnew]

i don't understand why people are complaining that OP wouldn't have the game for free. Isn't that basically the demo 6 months in game?  If there is no 'free' game this year, I will not be spending another penny on this game without proof of serious improvements

Also, why shouldn't we be able to discuss these opinions without having to be told to just play something else? I am like a lot of people here, I have spent most of my life seemingly playing these games, and it is disenchanting to feel the same problems and repetitive situations are repeated over and over. Some people understand this, but every time some one cries like this it makes me feel less willing to call myself a fm fan

[anagain]

1 hour ago, lemeuresnew said:

i don't understand why people are complaining that OP wouldn't have the game for free. Isn't that basically the demo 6 months in game?  If there is no 'free' game this year, I will not be spending another penny on this game without proof of serious improvements

Also, why shouldn't we be able to discuss these opinions without having to be told to just play something else? I am like a lot of people here, I have spent most of my life seemingly playing these games, and it is disenchanting to feel the same problems and repetitive situations are repeated over and over. Some people understand this, but every time some one cries like this it makes me feel less willing to call myself a fm fan

But when someone deliberately states they wouldn't have FM19 if it was given to them for free it comes across as a blatant statement to enhance a point under false pretences. If you've played over 400 hours of every FM for years you don't turn down getting a copy for free. You get it for free and you give it a go, even if it's to give it a chance.

The obvious overstatement of saying "I wouldn't take it for free" was what annoyed me. It's the sort of statement that comes with an obvious rant, and is usually spoken in anger rather than with thought.

I don't think there's many, if any, saying 'go and play something else'. I suggested taking a break, but that's entirely different, and I suggested it because there was a time I felt something like the op. I played less FM and it rejuvenated the game for me. Things get old fast when you do too much of them. When that happens you see annoying little things you wouldn't see if you were fresh.

 

I have to say the latest reply by the op stunk a bit. @herne79 made a great post, full of helpful suggestions. The op replied with another example of hyperbole in talking about alfa romeos and audi. He then proceeded to post his complaints again, with just one example of trying to post a bug report. He also likes to use the old "someone else said it, so it must be true" argument. To me, he comes across as sarcastic and unwilling to listen to argument.

I'm all for constructive criticism. It helps games develop better and any developer worth their salt will happily accept constructive criticism. The op doesn't seem willing enough to enter in to that for me though. He just wants to be angry and make his point. There's no attempt to accede to arguments, however well put they might be. He just argues back. Sometimes people won't be helped.

[MagicHat]

The only gripe i have with fm18 is players begging for contracts every few months. All of what OP has said hasn't happened to me really. The only time stuff like that happens is if you buy too many players at once and your team hasn't gelled yet.

[molsen]

9 hours ago, forameuss said:

I always wonder about the mindset of people who decide that when they don't like a product anymore, instead of just, you know, not using said product and moving on with their lives, they decide instead to write a tear-stained thread on a forum about it.  Like, how desperate for attention do you have to be?  It's almost better if it's a deliberate troll, as at least that would have some awful BANTZ aspect to it.  As it is, it's just an old man on his stoop shouting at people that don't care.  At best, SI get nothing useful, and at worst outright insulted (although I'd imagine the OP venturing "I could make this game in a weekend" is more hilarious than insulting, given how quickly it evaporates any shred of a point they once had). 

I give it 3 regen strikers out of 10, and only that high because having three would annoy them.

What a random comment. SI has a huge community of fans, I’m just one of them. Been playing since the CM days. I think it’s fair to raise discussions like this because basically you wish for the game still being at its best. Unfortunately that wasn’t the case in my view with the previous versions. So fans try to make SI aware of that. Simple.

[Neotropolis]

11 hours ago, forameuss said:

It's almost better if it's a deliberate troll, as at least that would have some awful BANTZ aspect to it.

Upvoted for the BANTZ! Oh and this...

11 hours ago, forameuss said:

I give it 3 regen strikers out of 10, and only that high because having three would annoy them.

 

[RBKalle]

Il 1/9/2018 in 00:46 , sporadicsmiles ha scritto:

There is a very simple solution to the 3 striker exploit; do not use it to exploit the game.

I'm sorry but this is just a cop-out answer, and a terrible one too.

It's not like the old corner exploit where you had to create a SPECIFIC routine to break the engine. Playing with 3 strikers is a rather normal formation in football, so there's no reason whatsoever to suggest "well, just don't use it".

It's as if in an RPG, the two-handed swords were bugged to the point of one-hit killing any enemy even though your character is a Lv5 Wizard clumsly wielding a crappy Iron Sword. Or in a F1 game, SuperSoft tyres give you extreme grip AND durability.
 

Such bugs should have been spotted in beta-testing or at least mitigated after MONTHS of bug report from the paying customers. The fact it was there and it STILL is there is a testament to how bloated and out of control FM has become.
Too many modules, too much overlap between features, too much fluff while the basics of the game (tactics, AI squad building, transfers) are the same, if not worse, than they were 5 or even 10 years ago.

FM19 will be just the Nth iteration of a game that has metastasized, beyond repair I'm afraid. I'll still buy it on sale because I, like most of us, I'm an addict and need my new, shiny FM fix even though I know it'll be bad for me.

I do think SI should take a step back and re-evaluate the direction of the game and hopefully work on a really NEW game for FM20.

[Neotropolis]

4 minutes ago, RBKalle said:

Playing with 3 strikers is a rather normal formation in football

The thing is though, it isn't. Yes there are many teams that play with three attacking players up top, but there are none that play with three STRIKERS. The teams that play 3 up top usually have a Striker and two wingers/inside forwards or maybe two Strikers and an attacking mid who plays off them.

7 minutes ago, RBKalle said:

Such bugs should have been spotted in beta-testing or at least mitigated after MONTHS of bug report from the paying customers.

In all fairness, 3 Striker formations are only common in this game because they are an exploit (if used in the right way, just having three strikers doesn't guarantee success). How do we know that SI hasn't been working on it. FM19 hasn't been released yet and there is only ever one ME for each game in the FM series. And no doubt they'll have fixed it, if possible. But then they'll be another exploit that exists in the game which people will make the same complaints that are made in every version. Fixing something like this is a highly complex ME isn't a simple fix. And you can almost guarantee that any fix will change something else because that's exactly how coding and game development works. Fix one bug, create two more.

[anagain]

I just watched Loki Doki's most recent video on YT. I don't know if he had been the the forums and seen threads like this, but he did mention the forums.

His video was critical. He said FM could be better, and he mentioned the things he feels should be improved. He also said he still loves the game and that he knows the limits SI face.

People should watch it.

[themadsheep2001]

4 hours ago, RBKalle said:

I'm sorry but this is just a cop-out answer, and a terrible one too.

It's not like the old corner exploit where you had to create a SPECIFIC routine to break the engine. Playing with 3 strikers is a rather normal formation in football, so there's no reason whatsoever to suggest "well, just don't use it".

It's as if in an RPG, the two-handed swords were bugged to the point of one-hit killing any enemy even though your character is a Lv5 Wizard clumsly wielding a crappy Iron Sword. Or in a F1 game, SuperSoft tyres give you extreme grip AND durability.
 

Such bugs should have been spotted in beta-testing or at least mitigated after MONTHS of bug report from the paying customers. The fact it was there and it STILL is there is a testament to how bloated and out of control FM has become.
Too many modules, too much overlap between features, too much fluff while the basics of the game (tactics, AI squad building, transfers) are the same, if not worse, than they were 5 or even 10 years ago.

FM19 will be just the Nth iteration of a game that has metastasized, beyond repair I'm afraid. I'll still buy it on sale because I, like most of us, I'm an addict and need my new, shiny FM fix even though I know it'll be bad for me.

I do think SI should take a step back and re-evaluate the direction of the game and hopefully work on a really NEW game for FM20.

The Me team doesn't work on anything else apart from the ME. So a lot of this post is moot to be frank. Evaluating and fixing are entirely different things. And it depends also one where it lies as a priority in the ME for them. What's a priority for the ME team is not necessarily a priority for you and vice versa. 

There's plenty for them to work on without people conflating things and overselling points. 

[themadsheep2001]

Also playing with 3 out and out strikers is definitely not common in football. Still needs looking at, but a common usage, and thus a big issue in the game it's not. 

[MrPompey]

If the OP chooses not buy FM19 nor accept it for free I guess thats his choice and likely his loss. I'm not sure why that should upset anyone as I expect most will still buy FM19. Of course a post like this generates some interesting discussion

The 3 attackers exploit is a shame but I do wonder how many people would have discovered this without being told, much like the corner exploit. On the plus side its great that so many people try so many things as it gives the ME chance to improve when issues are found

There has always been posts from people saying they wont buy FM until the final patch in Feb/Mar. This will continue as will posts like this.

I'm not sure why SI would work on a "really new game" when this has been successful. In addition its evolved every year getting overall better and better. I suspect there is much work to be done on the ME but its always been a case of balance and small as a change here can cause an issue there. Open beta will give everyone a chance to raise bugs that will hopefully be resolved in time for formal release

[GerdMuller]

The OP clearly loves FM and as many always have been is disappointed his concerns arent adreesed enough by new versions. And as hard as it may sound his ultimate approach can only to be to not buy the game if he feels his issues arent adressed and he doesnt have fun anymore.  There is a point where developers also only can take a "cynical" stance and say take what we offer or leave it.

That being said SI always felt like a different company where you always felt theres actually still enthusiasm for the game behind it and not only marketing and meeting deadlines but the bigger they got of course the moe difficult that was.

Personally i came from th german "Off the ball/Anstoss" Series and it was awesome the developers enthusiasm geat and you coul see it was still small enough to ever improve the game. Anstoss 3 was the best ever, but then the team was bought by EA and while the first versions of the new EA Fussball Manager whre using the nefinance power and licences by EA, while the old Anstoss with a new team went down as Franchise (paralell: CM/FM) soon EA seemed to really take over with its big company philosphie, bugs never adressed across versions, features in on versions out the next etc, and that game started to suck too soon.

Thats when i glady discovered the original CM/FM andneverlooked back, it was a little less manager game in a financial sense and i miss that a bit but the atmosphere and the team dedicated to it was awesome. So it rightly so grew and grew. I guess theres still great people developing it but it is huge now and not that accesible for gamers AND developers of course any more. Personally i think it gets more and more micromangement and the interviews are so repititive the match talks so cryptic what they actually do....and the NEW football world all about options, loans,money money money..its a different world and thus game.

Seeing that size of company , the market etc i still think SI still gives us a great Product that is not just there to make money but you can feel this really should be a great game too.

The problem is you cant just programm the greatest game off 2000 you need new options and features to sell it. That of course always is prone to bugs, micromangement and seeing the marketing aspect over the game sometimes.

 

So my approach is to buy the game from time to time i gut 2017 again and i loved it apart from the repititve stuff and really deep tactical approach which i love too but isnt always too accessible from an UI standpoint, you need a team on one screen from where you can easily adress all tactical and individual options.

I got a brand new Laptop now and am tempted to use it on 19. So far theres little info on 19 and it looks a bit EA-y , meaning the new  German licence and the presentation seem to be a focus. A more treamlined 17 is what i would have liked. But we will see, i gotten old now and i accept my role as customer ...so it its all shiny and less else i will skip and play 17, otherwise i will see if its tempting enough to get it at start..normally waiting for patches and getting it cheaper is my way to go to. And then i can blame development, cpmpany and superficial young players as much as i want. The day one"wow, LOOKS superficially good " players pay for most of the real development too then. Its gotten a mainstrnstream tittle and the audience is mixed , so you have to try to please all customers not just the hardcore from years past. It is as it is, personally i just hope it never goees the EA route so  it gets so superficial it gets meaningless. THos might go for NBA and NFL, but football maagers will always stay a niche in principle and you risk going down like EA in that area before- Its far from that and we all just hope teres also a niche for ever growing a game with keeping the magic that made its principles and beginning so special.

[Serj]

17 hours ago, forameuss said:

I always wonder about the mindset of people who decide that when they don't like a product anymore, instead of just, you know, not using said product and moving on with their lives, they decide instead to write a tear-stained thread on a forum about it.  Like, how desperate for attention do you have to be?  It's almost better if it's a deliberate troll, as at least that would have some awful BANTZ aspect to it.  As it is, it's just an old man on his stoop shouting at people that don't care.  At best, SI get nothing useful, and at worst outright insulted (although I'd imagine the OP venturing "I could make this game in a weekend" is more hilarious than insulting, given how quickly it evaporates any shred of a point they once had). 

I give it 3 regen strikers out of 10, and only that high because having three would annoy them.

It's almost as if customer feedback is something necessary that forces companies to improve their product...

FM is a game close to my heart for the last 20 years but I lose interest with every edition. It's more scripted than ever and, for a stats-based game, shows little sign of realism. AI scoring with every shot on target, away matches being completely different to home, league rubber-banding. I'm sure they're all designed to keep people playing but they just add to the frustration. Anybody should be able to pick up, and be successful with FM. You shouldn't need a degree in how to manipulate the AI (assuming results aren't pre-determined anyway). The game is supposed to be fun to play, not full of ********.

FM was once great but I'll never buy another one. SI will get the sales they deserve.

[Aiken Drum]

7 minuti fa, Serj ha scritto:

It's almost as if customer feedback is something necessary that forces companies to improve their product...

FM is a game close to my heart for the last 20 years but I lose interest with every edition. It's more scripted than ever and, for a stats-based game, shows little sign of realism. AI scoring with every shot on target, away matches being completely different to home, league rubber-banding. I'm sure they're all designed to keep people playing but they just add to the frustration. Anybody should be able to pick up, and be successful with FM. You shouldn't need a degree in how to manipulate the AI (assuming results aren't pre-determined anyway). The game is supposed to be fun to play, not full of ********.

FM was once great but I'll never buy another one. SI will get the sales they deserve.

That is really similar to what im feeling playing this game.. my limited knowledge of english prevent me to explain exactly what i dont like, but - in example -  watching matches is a frustrating thing. Lot of absurd things (long shots to the corner flag, long passes from one box to another ending in a striker alone with a clear cut chance etc etc) having nothing to do with what really happens in a real football pitch, even if the match vision is only an approximation etc etc. Im playing this game from 1995 or 1996, but in last edition there was lot of frustration and not so much fun.

[theballstopshere]

i think the problem with SI is that they are just obsessed with adding more and more flashy stuff on the game and not focusing on keeping the proper stuff working right.

things like real-world, current tactics/style of play, good AI, stadium, celebrations, game play realism... i think these are the crucial stuff that needs to get right first before loading more bugs (features) into an already laggy and flawed game. 

game play realism is very important. but there are so many things that do not reflect real life. like how often do we see a player dribbling past a goalkeeper (in the game)? like never?

another example, opposing team from 2 goals down scores a goal to bring the game to 2-1, with about 10mins left. rather than rushing to retrieve the ball and get an equaliser they went ahead to celebrate.

or that my team needs a goal to equalise or win but just strokes the ball around in defence (even with attacking instructions) with the clock ticking down. no sense of urgency at all.

really??

this is so so frustrating for a game that touts itself to be the best out there, and having done this for so long.

i personally find such basic errors for a game so entrenched, unacceptable. 

it has been many years but i really hope SI steps up, finally. 

[westy8chimp]

I kind of wish SI would come out now and say they are doing nothing to fix the '3 striker bug'. If you choose three pacey out n out strikers then moan that you score too many goals, youre just a bit of a mug. 

My concern is all the jibber jabber and uproar about it will make them attempt to fix it... Which could end up making other aspects of the ME worse. Are they going to make cbs that much better to cope with 3 pacey strikers? Well how good are the defenders going to be against the 99% of us who use 1 or 2 strikers? Cbs overpowered? Ai managers playing 6 at the back so we can just dominate possession in the middle of the park? 

Its all a balancing act... Whilst its not perfect... In terms of exploit this affects me, and im sure most, far less than some previous exploits like the 532 of fm16 

[themadsheep2001]

Whenever I hear people say SI shouldn't add features, I always raise an eyebrow. Do the same people look at the feature requests, or even other people's feedback. What one might want isn't the same as what someone else might what, which isn't the same as what SI. I think an awful lot of people need to bear that in mind a bit.

[themadsheep2001]

3 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

I kind of wish SI would come out now and say they are doing nothing to fix the '3 striker bug'. If you choose three pacey out n out strikers then moan that you score too many goals, youre just a bit of a mug. 

My concern is all the jibber jabber and uproar about it will make them attempt to fix it... Which could end up making other aspects of the ME worse. Are they going to make cbs that much better to cope with 3 pacey strikers? Well how good are the defenders going to be against the 99% of us who use 1 or 2 strikers? Cbs overpowered? Ai managers playing 6 at the back so we can just dominate possession in the middle of the park? 

Its all a balancing act... Whilst its not perfect... In terms of exploit this affects me, and im sure most, far less than some previous exploits like the 532 of fm16 

They will decide how of a priority it is to them, assuming of course that's if they have fixes in place. They are pretty good at not over reacting to hyperbole most of the time.  

[theballstopshere]

6 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

Whenever I hear people say SI shouldn't add features, I always raise an eyebrow. Do the same people look at the feature requests, or even other people's feedback. What one might want isn't the same as what someone else might what, which isn't the same as what SI. I think an awful lot of people need to bear that in mind a bit.

i stand corrected. i do not literally mean not adding features, but getting the house fixed first is the biggest priority. if you can't even get the basics of the game right, the (useless) features that are added will do little to enhance the game. 

and to be honest, i don't see how many people will refuse to have such things improved:

- game play realism

- AI

- current football tactics

not a lot to ask for, i don't think so.

i rather SI come out to say that these and perhaps a few other important aspects have been massively improved, along with say, 10 other new features. than announce like 30 new features but game play and realism still suffer.

[GerdMuller]

But that is also a danger i suggested, as i said FM the bigger it gets and more mainstream also will always be based in a niche market of sorts , there is a FIFA out there you know and its way flashier and approachable for kids that want o experience football as a video game.

Its what i said what brought me to FM in the first place...the EAproduct just was about flashy appearance, major bugs that killd the gameplay and bothered players that want to enjoy the game mechanic not play it 50  hours and the the next game , remained in the game version after version. it more and more onyl was about flashy features and not really the base mechanics anymore. I see that as a crucial danger for the game. I am way beyond the "If SI is mean and doesnt fix my problems i will say i hate evryone and wont buy the game. (then still will)"-phase.

I am just saying theres lot of things that point in the direction it could go the EA way and destroy the market its based on by laying too much focus on other aspects and trying to reac more gamers. It killed one of my favourite development teams and franchises in this sector that left me with SI alone. Andhaving that marktalone alwys has the danger to get too satisfied with what you offer. I  hope the difference and as i said as much as 19 looks like a EA nearer version so far a streamlined 17 it could be also in tradition of a 12 maybe. SI got me from the german market after EA destroyed "Off the ball!" fanchise then its own with just those wrong decisions. A german licence is a nice extra now but nothing to reach the real market, fans and still buyers. Just hope SI keeps finding the balance in the most positive way....i want to buy a great game and SI shouldnt bother if people say they wont much on the forums...just make that great game that makes you want to buy it. And i still think itss the basics that make the game and make you coming back.

vor 5 Minuten schrieb themadsheep2001:

Whenever I hear people say SI shouldn't add features, I always raise an eyebrow. Do the same people look at the feature requests, or even other people's feedback. What one might want isn't the same as what someone else might what, which isn't the same as what SI. I think an awful lot of people need to bear that in mind a bit.

 

[themadsheep2001]

4 minutes ago, theballstopshere said:

i stand corrected. i do not literally mean not adding features, but getting the house fixed first is the biggest priority. if you can't even get the basics of the game right, the (useless) features that are added will do little to enhance the game. 

and to be honest, i don't see how many people will refuse to have such things improved:

- game play realism

- AI

- current football tactics

not a lot to ask for, i don't think so.

i rather SI come out to say that these and perhaps a few other important aspects have been massively improved, along with say, 10 other new features. than announce like 30 new features but game play and realism still suffer.

When you list the AI, you list arguably the single biggest challenge they have. That's not to say they shouldn't be targets. But you really underestimate the scale of improving that 

And again, what you might deem useless, might be great for someone else. 

For example, I absolutely do not care about regeneration faces, at all. Yet this is a gamebreaker for others. And all that feedback is a balancing act for SI, and that's not even accounting got what they would want to do, or be able to do, or their production demands and restrictions 

[GerdMuller]

vor 24 Minuten schrieb themadsheep2001:

Whenever I hear people say SI shouldn't add features, I always raise an eyebrow. Do the same people look at the feature requests, or even other people's feedback. What one might want isn't the same as what someone else might what, which isn't the same as what SI. I think an awful lot of people need to bear that in mind a bit.

Yes i see where you come from its not this way or the other alone though i could also say do you really believe peopl that want new features are ok by saying i want new features i agree that you keep the ol bugs in? In the end there always should be emphasis on getting the basics right first and especially in such a market i have seen that customers DO realize and sometimes you can loose your loyal fanbasethat cares about that while not really keeping the new one that you attracted shortly with some flashy new features on the front of the "box" " :-D Man even boxes are outdated today :-D

 

All in all i see weagree madsheep, its the balance ...i say though dont underestimate your core buyer baseand adressing the basics in your game even if it might not go in any statistic that lists new customers and how you grow to bigger sells. Its dagerous this balance and to forget about what already is there and to focus too much on new things . Yes, balance.

[theballstopshere]

3 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

When you list the AI, you list arguably the single biggest challenge they have. That's not to say they shouldn't be targets. But you really underestimate the scale of improving that 

And again, what you might deem useless, might be great for someone else. 

For example, I absolutely do not care about regeneration faces, at all. Yet this is a gamebreaker for others. And all that feedback is a balancing act for SI, and that's not even accounting got what they would want to do, or be able to do, or their production demands and restrictions 

i get that i may have underestimated the scale of improving things like game play realism, current football tactics, AI...

but come on, isn't these features the "bread and butter" of a football simulation game that touts itself on being the best and being realistic???

 

[themadsheep2001]

6 minutes ago, theballstopshere said:

i get that i may have underestimated the scale of improving things like game play realism, current football tactics, AI...

but come on, isn't these features the "bread and butter" of a football simulation game that touts itself on being the best and being realistic???

 

Being core doesn't mean improving it is easy, or quick. For example one of things that balances development in the AI is the processing power of computers playing the game. FM players sit towards the lower end of the pc power spectrum. How do you balance that when significantly upping minimum system requirements would cut out swathes of your game base? It's a difficult call and I think soon they may have to make some hard decisions around that 

[RBKalle]

6 ore fa, Neotropolis ha scritto:

The thing is though, it isn't. Yes there are many teams that play with three attacking players up top, but there are none that play with three STRIKERS. The teams that play 3 up top usually have a Striker and two wingers/inside forwards or maybe two Strikers and an attacking mid who plays off them.

FM offers little variation in terms of positioning the players on the pitch, so many users may end up "accidentally" setting up a 4-3-3 narrow (with 3 CFs) because they don't feel the AML/AMR setup is what they want (the two wide forwards are either too wide and high, or are perceived as wingers and not forwards, depending on where you put them).

Frankly, if I had to replicate Zeman or Eggen's 4-3-3 (dated examples, I know) I'd use 3 CFs. Ditto for the most recent incarnation of Rosenborg, with Bendtner relatively wide, but definitely NOT an AML.

Even Mandzukic's position for Juventus may be debatable... So as long as FM doesn't allow for more nuanced positioning, 3 CFs are far from an outlandish situation people choose because they want to exploit.

Not to mention whenever a great CF is available for free, so it can happen that you'd pick that formation to take advantage of a few worldclass strikers

 

6 ore fa, Neotropolis ha scritto:

 Fixing something like this is a highly complex ME isn't a simple fix. And you can almost guarantee that any fix will change something else because that's exactly how coding and game development works. Fix one bug, create two more.

And this happens when the code has become too complex or bloated...

I know it's a difficult task, but honestly the ME has had issues since its inception, and some basic concepts never really worked (horrid CB movement, crossing accuracy, pace trumping technique) despite many tweaks.

Instead of keeping on adding new coats paints, hoping they'd have covered the cracks, it'd have been smarter trying to solve a few of the recurring issues.

 

[themadsheep2001]

7 minutes ago, RBKalle said:

FM offers little variation in terms of positioning the players on the pitch, so many users may end up "accidentally" setting up a 4-3-3 narrow (with 3 CFs) because they don't feel the AML/AMR setup is what they want (the two wide forwards are either too wide and high, or are perceived as wingers and not forwards, depending on where you put them).

Frankly, if I had to replicate Zeman or Eggen's 4-3-3 (dated examples, I know) I'd use 3 CFs. Ditto for the most recent incarnation of Rosenborg, with Bendtner relatively wide, but definitely NOT an AML.

Even Mandzukic's position for Juventus may be debatable... So as long as FM doesn't allow for more nuanced positioning, 3 CFs are far from an outlandish situation people choose because they want to exploit.

Not to mention whenever a great CF is available for free, so it can happen that you'd pick that formation to take advantage of a few worldclass strikers

 

And this happens when the code has become too complex or bloated...

I know it's a difficult task, but honestly the ME has had issues since its inception, and some basic concepts never really worked (horrid CB movement, crossing accuracy, pace trumping technique) despite many tweaks.

Instead of keeping on adding new coats paints, hoping they'd have covered the cracks, it'd have been smarter trying to solve a few of the recurring issues.

 

They've rewritten large chunks of the ME at least twice before.... And that's a development process that takes years. This is a process that could he happening right now. 

[GerdMuller]

And that is just what happened with and killed EAs manager game, there was a point i guess when the development team saw the ME needs major investment so the game keeps being relevant , but EA demanded flashy things to "sell" the game ...and it came to a point where that logic actually lost the core market, basically the real buyers were smarter than EA thought. And the team itself got lost in that divide itself i guess. I am just saying i so hope SI never goes down that road and w loose the last great game in the market over it. And we are from that, justsaying there are some signs down the wrong road also. Its tricky, no question. Especially for the developers to balance and actually standing the ground to reach the market with a real good product.. And especially as the cyycle to adress the core issues is laid out over years its happening so fast its forgotten and the product damaged beyond repairs and killed by the "easy fixes". ANd yes i just hope SI avoids that right now too. :-) So i can believe in and buy the product for many more years to come.

[Guest]

AKAIK FIFA Manager never had a match engine of its own, just the code of an older FIFA title.

The reason that game ceased it only sold in decent numbers in one county due to the benefit of a legal block preventing Si from cleaning up sales there too.

I am fearful for the title though, the low cost features just aren’t there anymore, there is only limited scope to create revenue after the initial point of purchase unless Sega force a deeper in game purchases model on SI to increase revenue from a key title (all pray that never happens) & more importantly the investment needed to make a true leap in the core areas of match, transfers & interactions are probably at a tipping point of being greater than potential revenue & available development time, at some point FM will not be financially viable as a simulation title in the same way that FIFA Manager had no value. 

The lack of tangibale core progression is what has kept me from playing a full season of FM since 16 & the 19 demo probably needs to blow my socks off for me to buy the full game at any price.

I do wait in hope though.

[RBKalle]

1 ora fa, themadsheep2001 ha scritto:

They've rewritten large chunks of the ME at least twice before....

Yes, but the kernel, so to speak, is still the same, isn't it.

It can't be explained otherwise how some issues or traits (depending on how lenient you want to be) have been carried over since the very first ME, even from the days of 2D-only!

Frankly, stuff like "CB gets caught napping by a predictable long ball/through ball" scenario is something I remember discussed as early as FM08-09, and it's still a thing 10 years later. Pacey forwards have been consistently a threat exactly because of defenders' inability to react quickly or to be in the right place to thwart an attack.

Maybe I'm wrong, but the very core of how FM "sees" football is in need of a complete overhaul, scrapping stuff like Mentality and Shape, in favour of something more contemporary and fluid (or possibly timelessly adaptable).
Currently there are two main gameplans: "hoof and run" (courtesy of sloppy defending positioning) or "tiki-taka" (always on point, no matter if you're Barça or Barrow) and trying something different will require an insane amount of tinkering, with no guarantee of success. Not in terms of winning games, but of actually getting the players to do what you've envisioned

 

1 ora fa, themadsheep2001 ha scritto:

And that's a development process that takes years. This is a process that could he happening right now. 

Again, as long as they keep on repainting the same house, moving the furniture around or adding a new bathroom, it won't change much.

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, RBKalle said:

Again, as long as they keep on repainting the same house, moving the furniture around or adding a new bathroom, it won't change much.

This is what’s slowly pushed me away from the game. Years of constantly providing examples of the same defensive issues ground away a tonne of enthusiasm & the introduction of new defensive issues eliminated the remaining goodwill to the point that I simply stopped contributing to helping SI release the best game they could.

[themadsheep2001]

26 minutes ago, RBKalle said:

Yes, but the kernel, so to speak, is still the same, isn't it.

It can't be explained otherwise how some issues or traits (depending on how lenient you want to be) have been carried over since the very first ME, even from the days of 2D-only!

Frankly, stuff like "CB gets caught napping by a predictable long ball/through ball" scenario is something I remember discussed as early as FM08-09, and it's still a thing 10 years later. Pacey forwards have been consistently a threat exactly because of defenders' inability to react quickly or to be in the right place to thwart an attack.

Maybe I'm wrong, but the very core of how FM "sees" football is in need of a complete overhaul, scrapping stuff like Mentality and Shape, in favour of something more contemporary and fluid (or possibly timelessly adaptable).
Currently there are two main gameplans: "hoof and run" (courtesy of sloppy defending positioning) or "tiki-taka" (always on point, no matter if you're Barça or Barrow) and trying something different will require an insane amount of tinkering, with no guarantee of success. Not in terms of winning games, but of actually getting the players to do what you've envisioned

 

Again, as long as they keep on repainting the same house, moving the furniture around or adding a new bathroom, it won't change much.

Well no, the Kernel is very different. And to say there's only two ways of getting players to do what you want is, well, wrong. The underlying parts of the ME have been redesigned with multiple future iterations in mind, because they also rely on other tangential developments. For example to really push pressing, you have to really flesh out non tackling defending.

To do that requires the expansion of the game physics, because you need the ability to jostle. The analogy you use s wrong, because that's not always what's happening anyway. Also mentality absolutely needs to exist, you simply rename it to Risk, which is absolutely contemporary and in many ways how it works already. 

 

Shape is different in that it needs to really only exist offensively, but you absolutely need to be able to control the placing of space between players and the lines, and this could never be done by roles alone. With respect I think you're wrong with a lot of how the ME goes together. That's not to say it's not without its flaws. But I've made these points before. 

[Tony Wright 747]

1 hour ago, Barside said:

AKAIK FIFA Manager never had a match engine of its own, just the code of an older FIFA title.

The reason that game ceased it only sold in decent numbers in one county due to the benefit of a legal block preventing Si from cleaning up sales there too.

I am fearful for the title though, the low cost features just aren’t there anymore, there is only limited scope to create revenue after the initial point of purchase unless Sega force a deeper in game purchases model on SI to increase revenue from a key title (all pray that never happens) & more importantly the investment needed to make a true leap in the core areas of match, transfers & interactions are probably at a tipping point of being greater than potential revenue & available development time, at some point FM will not be financially viable as a simulation title in the same way that FIFA Manager had no value. 

The lack of tangibale core progression is what has kept me from playing a full season of FM since 16 & the 19 demo probably needs to blow my socks off for me to buy the full game at any price.

I do wait in hope though.

Ditto your last paragraph

[SOULjah]

I will buy FM19, at what point I do not know. I have changed my habits with FM18 using muscle memory rather than writing untold notes which I have done since FM12, I have got to say that it has been very difficult for me playing this version because I keep getting the sack with every team I play with. I always put in 1000+ hours into every version but determined to stick with FM18 for a while but then again like I do every version I may buy it again on pre-order I am going to see what the pre-release details are like.

[shirajzl]

2 hours ago, Barside said:

 there is only limited scope to create revenue after the initial point of purchase unless Sega force a deeper in game purchases model on SI to increase revenue from a key title (all pray that never happens)

I shuddered at this since recent trends in gaming industry clearly show the way it'd most likely be done. It's so easy in FM as well, just lock some popular leagues behind a microtransaction paywall and voila. People would bitch and moan...and then fork out the money regardless. It's a classic story of modern gaming industry.

[GerdMuller]

Yes ,its the story of  companies in niche markets that in desperation try to go that way and rip themselves of the functioning core that made them what they are. TBH when i talked about the past and FiFA Manager and stuff i ctually hoped to hear its all not that and SI is going down that way now and sonner or later has to die because making a good football manager game, that gets the basics right, isnt viable in todays market anymore . But it looks to be true by having to go the way of always growing into mainstream this gme could be doomed to destroy its foundation, and some answers here now make me fear we are already down the rabbit hole deeper than i woulkd habe feared. Please dont be FIFA Manager :-(

[Serj]

16 minutes ago, shirajzl said:

I shuddered at this since recent trends in gaming industry clearly show the way it'd most likely be done. It's so easy in FM as well, just lock some popular leagues behind a microtransaction paywall and voila. People would bitch and moan...and then fork out the money regardless. It's a classic story of modern gaming industry.

Locking leagues behind a paywall would be suicide for them. The first step would be something like scouting packages but I honestly think the FM audience would refuse anything.

[Neotropolis]

9 minutes ago, Serj said:

Locking leagues behind a paywall would be suicide for them. The first step would be something like scouting packages but I honestly think the FM audience would refuse anything.

Also, all it would take is one person to buy it, go through the editor files and 'recreate' the league as something different, stick it on the Steam Workshop and then there's a workaround.

[themadsheep2001]

44 minutes ago, Neotropolis said:

Also, all it would take is one person to buy it, go through the editor files and 'recreate' the league as something different, stick it on the Steam Workshop and then there's a workaround.

Yeah it just wouldn't happen. 

[TopToffee]

What a weird thread

[RBKalle]

3 ore fa, themadsheep2001 ha scritto:

Well no, the Kernel is very different. And to say there's only two ways of getting players to do what you want is, well, wrong. The underlying parts of the ME have been redesigned with multiple future iterations in mind, because they also rely on other tangential developments. For example to really push pressing, you have to really flesh out non tackling defending.

I never said there are only two ways of getting players to do what you want.

I said there are two ways of playing that pop up very frequently, almost regardless of what you asked them to do.

Anyway, how can they flesh out non-tackling defending when CBs have been sloppy for 10+ years, full-backs can't cover on the far side to save their life and/or can't seen to properly cover a cross (unless the year they blocked literally everything, as a side-effect of a 'fix' for said problem).

 

3 ore fa, themadsheep2001 ha scritto:

To do that requires the expansion of the game physics, because you need the ability to jostle. The analogy you use s wrong, because that's not always what's happening anyway.

Again, stacking more stuff over an imperfect (and apparently unfixable) foundation is a rather futile effort IMO. Sooner or later it'll collapse under its weight.

 

3 ore fa, themadsheep2001 ha scritto:

Also mentality absolutely needs to exist, you simply rename it to Risk, which is absolutely contemporary and in many ways how it works already. 

Shape is different in that it needs to really only exist offensively, but you absolutely need to be able to control the placing of space between players and the lines, and this could never be done by roles alone. With respect I think you're wrong with a lot of how the ME goes together. That's not to say it's not without its flaws. But I've made these points before. 

Ok, maybe the concepts need to stay, but with a much better-defined role and explaination. And they're still part of the bigger problem IMO.  How much freedom and leeway do we actually have? Is the ME's core still modern enough to allow for all the progress we hope and expect?

[Federico]

I just want to underline once again that I can't wait for FM19 to be released. And I'm confident it'll be the greatest FM ever, or at least can't be worse than FM18.

Meanwhile, I'll try to win the Copa Libertadores on FM07, the only trophy missing to my showcase. It might sound weird but its engine is fun to watch and still makes me jump from my chair. If I had one, because after 3 season on FM18 I threw that I was sitting on out of the window.

[themadsheep2001]

6 hours ago, RBKalle said:

I never said there are only two ways of getting players to do what you want.

I said there are two ways of playing that pop up very frequently, almost regardless of what you asked them to do.

Anyway, how can they flesh out non-tackling defending when CBs have been sloppy for 10+ years, full-backs can't cover on the far side to save their life and/or can't seen to properly cover a cross (unless the year they blocked literally everything, as a side-effect of a 'fix' for said problem).

 

Again, stacking more stuff over an imperfect (and apparently unfixable) foundation is a rather futile effort IMO. Sooner or later it'll collapse under its weight.

 

Ok, maybe the concepts need to stay, but with a much better-defined role and explaination. And they're still part of the bigger problem IMO.  How much freedom and leeway do we actually have? Is the ME's core still modern enough to allow for all the progress we hope and expect?

You said there were two main game plans that pop up in regards to getting players to do what you want, and anything else requires an insane amount of tinkering. This is inherently not true. I drive this point home because it's misinformation

They can flesh it out because they are linked in many way, ie defenders using their physical mass to shut off space to run into. Real life doesn't need to model the physics of this, because it simply exists. But a game does. Also this idea that centre backs have been sloppy for 10 years isn't true either. It's a constant balancing act. 

It's quite literally not stacking upon an imperfect foundation, the development is modular, but one will impact the other and vice versa It is all interdependent because football as a game is contextual. Modelling a curling shot is as much about getting the ball physics right as it making sure techniques and the relevant attributes work together in the ME.

 

How much freedom and leeway do we have? Quite a lot actually, and we can even more, it's definitely not close to its limits, and SI need to make more of it. 

Is the core of the ME modern enough for the progress we hope and expect? That's a vague question, because there's no uniform stance of "we", nor said hopes and expectations. But the this ME certainly has the capacity for a lot more. 

Your interpretation of the ME is very narrow focused, which makes interpretation of aspects inaccurate, which I have pointed out repeatedly before. The Me is absolutely not without its flaws and limitations, but I think you really needed to move beyond a very binary view of it in discussion. 

[XaW]

I've already pre-ordered. Now, I'm usually one of the "don't pre-order!" people, but FM have a sweet spot in my gaming heart. I've played thousands of hours of this game in it's various editions since the early 90's and I have most editions either on Steam or a physical copy. FM is one of the few games I buy that I actually play enough to get good value for my money, it's also a game I never tire of (the game itself, I do tire of certain saves, but then I always start a new one shortly after). According to Steam I currently have 1150 hours on FM18, and I still play it daily, if I can. For me this means that I'm buying it no matter, and unless this disappoints me a lot, I'll continue to do so in the future.

[Svenc]

15 hours ago, GerdMuller said:

And that is just what happened with and killed EAs manager game, there was a point i guess when the development team saw the ME needs major investment so the game keeps being relevant , but EA demanded flashy things to "sell" the game ...and it came to a point where that logic actually lost the core market, basically the real buyers were smarter than EA thought. And the team itself got lost in that divide itself i guess.

That's not what's happened. The market for them never hugely changed, the game sold roughly the same copies all throughout. Fifa/Fussball Manager was about to be canned by EA in 2005ish already. If it hadn't been for the formation of Bright Future as an independent studio (rather than the guys developing it as an internal EA team), it would have been canned way before -- and was basically living on borrowed time for its remaining years. Football Management games in general are comparably niche, sell most of their copies on PC (and still do) -- and EA had already shifted focus someplace else, which is console and multiplatform blockbuster type of games, which given their structure, makes sense. I.e. even if they had conquered the international markets before, they wouldn't have invested much, at least not from 2005ish onwards. Not their kind of product.

As for the topic at hand, depends (same procedure as every year, Miss Sophie). There's a finite amount of time, I don't actually buy that many video games as in my teens, and this falls competition includes games such as Underworld Ascendant, Call Of Cthulhu, The Occupaition and I've still got Mankind Divided and Prey:Mooncrash (suick it down Bioshock) to play. I'm in a minority though, as management games as such have never traditionally appealed to "gamers", but primarily "football fans", though there can be the odd overlap. For many though, FM is exclusively the only thing they'll ever play, which is also why the game is still coded to work on twenty years old clunkers, provided they have enough RAM and saw a semi-recent OS upgrade.

[Neotropolis]

2 hours ago, XaW said:

According to Steam I currently have 1150 hours on FM18, and I still play it daily, if I can.

Funnily enough, this is the exact same amount of time as me!

[forameuss]

16 hours ago, Serj said:

It's almost as if customer feedback is something necessary that forces companies to improve their product...

FM is a game close to my heart for the last 20 years but I lose interest with every edition. It's more scripted than ever and, for a stats-based game, shows little sign of realism. AI scoring with every shot on target, away matches being completely different to home, league rubber-banding. I'm sure they're all designed to keep people playing but they just add to the frustration. Anybody should be able to pick up, and be successful with FM. You shouldn't need a degree in how to manipulate the AI (assuming results aren't pre-determined anyway). The game is supposed to be fun to play, not full of ********.

FM was once great but I'll never buy another one. SI will get the sales they deserve.

Of course it is, but it has to be valid and useful feedback.  There's scores and scores of people who do just that, who gather reams of examples of bugs they're seeing and bring them to SI's attention.  Then there's the group that would rather passive-aggressively post with nothing to back it up.  Not only does it make someone look desperate for attention, it also holds absolutely no value.  To anyone.  SI can't do anything about a written post (where do they plug that into the game to get a reproducible example?), so what benefit does it give?  I suppose you'll have raised examples of all of those?  By no means mandatory, of course, but you kind of lose the right to complain about SI never fixing anything (which is demonstrably untrue) when you make no effort to actually give them the tools to actually fix them.

And since I expect most people will just go down the tired "OMG FANBOI" route, most of the hours I've put into FM18 have been testing editor files that I never got into, and I'd probably number the actually playing hours with the game in the low two figures.  My interest and desire to play the game has been diminishing for a few editions now.  I'll probably get 19 in the hope that it's better, and I'm lucky enough that 30 quid isn't going to make much difference if it ends up being wasted.  I realise that won't fit into the narrative most have, but I'm sure you'll get over it.

[westy8chimp]

8 hours ago, Federico said:

And I'm confident it'll be the greatest FM ever, or at least can't be worse than FM18.

build em up, then knock em down!

[Svenc]

17 hours ago, Serj said:

It's more scripted than ever and, for a stats-based game, shows little sign of realism. AI scoring with every shot on target, away matches being completely different to home, league rubber-banding.

What FM actually needs isn't an upgrade, but a downgrade.

[XaW]

51 minutes ago, Svenc said:

same procedure as every year, Miss Sophie

16 minutes ago, Neotropolis said:

Funnily enough, this is the exact same amount of time as me!

To be fair, it actually have topped any other FMs for me on Steam. I just can't help it, I think I have an addiction...

[Neotropolis]

10 minutes ago, XaW said:

To be fair, it actually have topped any other FMs for me on Steam. I just can't help it, I think I have an addiction...

FM18 is actually the one I have the least hours on with 1150 (and counting).

FM17: 1318

FM16: 1610

FM15: 2173

FM14: 2448

So that's 8699 hours in total. Or 362.46 days. So I've spent almost a year of my life playing this game!