No longer a 'legend'

[tak]

Peljam your points are silly, no offence intented. You are trying to disagree with me and at the end you are agreeing: Sliders have nothing to do with reality. Adding to that the fact that media and player interaction have nothing to do with reality (and are useless features) and the fact that team talks are very badly made and the fact that the transfer market works nothing AT ALL like in reality we are left with player attributes as the only argument to support that the game is realistic. Let us not forget though, that player attributes have millions of times been strongly doubted as biased in favour of English players. So what are we left with? Nothing really.

[Peljam]

How are media and player interaction nothing at all to do with reality? It's statements like that that come across as silly. Managers and players interact with the media in real life. Managers and players interact with each other in real life. They're not useless either as you can effect things in game with them, such as confidence, player relations, soften the blow of being dropped for a match etc. They can be part of the immersion in the game, in effect it's realism. Can they be better? Yes but just because they're not perfect now is no reason to say they have nothing to do with realism.

I don't think sliders match up to reality as it stands, but I also don't think they aren't realistic at all. They give me a level of control that I would be able to have if I was real manager that isn't there via other methods. It's not unrealistic for me to be able to give precise instructions to a players, the sliders are just one representation of that. As it stands I just have to imagine the interation between me setting a certain area of the team/players tactics and the players, which is something I'd like improved as I said later on in regards to player interactions and roles. The level of control and the way it fits with the match engine is fine, the cosmetic implementation is where it falls down on realism. Maybe I didn't explain myself very well earlier, and for that I apologise.

Doesn't change the fact that you brought up the sliders for some reason, and didn't originally understand how they work in regards to tactics

The accuracy of player attributes can be debated until the cows come home. Some people think they're too high for some, too low for others. If there's a bias then that can be adjusted by the individual. We have editors. That gives us the control to make the changes. And if you have a problem with the player research thats been done then you might be able to help by getting involved in the process.

[tak]

Defending the media and player interaction system is daft, no offence intented. This is a feature that has been dubed as "one of the most broken game features ever" by certain experts and is in the relevant top list published last year. There is no way one can even attempt to defend this ridiculous feature, without becoming a mockery of oneself, no offence intented.

[Peljam]

Did I at any point say the system is perfect? No. In fact I said they could do with improving. That hardly counts as defending the media and player interaction.

You said the media and player interaction had nothing to do with reality. They clearly do. How well they work is seperate point.

It doesn't matter what experts say on how effectively implemented the features were. The fact is the features are part of real football management and if they were effectively implemented then they would add to the over all realism of the game.

[roseboy64]

Well if you read what I originally put.........*sigh*

I still don't like this compared to 07???!!! Why, oh why, did I have to explain that to you when it is clear to read?

Don't think you're understanding that it's necessary to go through those screens considering they affect the match outcome.

[Andriko]

To throw in 2 cents on the sliders. The idea of the system is imo fine, but it is made badly. For example, what is the difference between a player with free role ticked, a player with high creative freedom or a player with alll his instructions on mixed? To me all three are essentially the same. But are they the same as far as the computer is concerned?

As for the media and player interaction - the way it is implemented is definatley not realistic, but that said, i never use either unless the game forces me to. Maybe this could be a tickable option? Shouldn't be too hard surley? Atleast it would cut down on all those 'media' stories that clog the game up.

Get rid of transfer rumours too, they don't work either.

[DivineOne]

I don't think there is a difference with putting all instructions to mixed and max creativity. But does anyone really put everything on mixed? The creative freedom slider is to give some freedom, but not too much.

"Free role" is more allowing the player to leave his position and roam around the pitch and has nothing to do with him ignoring the player instructions..

Get rid of transfer rumours too, they don't work either.

What, get rid of everything that doesn't work as it should be? cm could then get rid of their match engine. Or maybe they should just improve it?

[tak]

Ah the transfer rumours feature. A genius addition that adds at least 200% more realism!

[DivineOne]

Ah the transfer rumours feature. A genius addition that adds at least 200% more realism!

Yes, cause there are NO transfer rumours AT ALL in real.

[Peljam]

Ah the transfer rumours feature. A genius addition that adds at least 200% more realism!

So transfer rumours are just figments of my imagination? So when I was looking at the BBC Sport football rumours page earlier today I was actually just staring at a blank screen?

[celebritykiller]

So why don't SI do something about it?

I find it hard to believe that if SI do own the rights and did produce the games that they wouldnt lay claim to them....or at least stop CM from saying they did.

Eidos own the rights but had no input on any of the games or had any rights to any past databases or programming (just the name and ui), hence the reason why since the split all CM's have been a load of manure as essentially it's a game from scratch with a famous name tagged on.

[Andriko]

I don't think there is a difference with putting all instructions to mixed and max creativity. But does anyone really put everything on mixed? The creative freedom slider is to give some freedom, but not too much.

"Free role" is more allowing the player to leave his position and roam around the pitch and has nothing to do with him ignoring the player instructions..

What, get rid of everything that doesn't work as it should be? cm could then get rid of their match engine. Or maybe they should just improve it?

Actually, I found that using mostly mixed for everyone was the best way. Just make what you don't want happening rare and leave the rest. Either way, my point was that the current tactic system can be very self contradictory sometimes.

As for transfer rumours, when i say it didn't work i was being rash. I mean more that it is a feature which dosen't add anything, because I never remember seeing one of the rumours come true, but i do remember getting message after message about them. In the old days, all that happened was you'd get a memo if someone bid for or declared intrest in a player on your shortlist. That seems simple and perfect to me.

[DivineOne]

Now it may not add much, but I believe when it works at it should, it will add something. You could maybe find a good player for your team because he's rumored to join you.

[Leeds_Leeds_Leeds!]

Don't think you're understanding that it's necessary to go through those screens considering they affect the match outcome.

Don't be ridiculous. So if you don't set opposition instructions when playing as Real Madrid and you are up against a B4 team you will lose?

[tak]

Peljam, no offence intented, you are saying that, OK, all those features are broken, but when they are fixed the game will be closer to reality. Which means that now is as isolated from it as they are badly designed. Which means that the game is thousands of miles away form reality, as I said at the very beginning...

[Peljam]

I'm not saying all the features are broken. I'm saying they can be improved.

They all work well enough for me. I don't avoid the press conferences, team talks or talking to players if I need to. I don't have problems selling players generally, and in fact I don't see any game breaking problems with the transfer system in general. Things aren't perfect, and they can be improved to add even more to the realism.

FM isn't terribly far from reality. It's not like playing it is like a bad LSD trip. It's the most realistic football management game out there and it's getting better.

And Tak, if you think those features are broken what does it matter to you? You've already said that media and player interaction have nothing to do with reality

[tak]

And the transfer market, and the rumours, and the finances of clubs and many many others. The way they are represented in the game has nothing to do with reality. They do not "add realism", they reduce any chance of the game being remotely close to reality. They work against realism making the game less real than ever.

Thus, the game has nothing to do with reality. Let me give you an example: In 2009/2010 in a save of mine, Peter Crouch won the golden boot. I rest my case...

[Peljam]

I'm not seeing how all those features detach the game from realism? Or are we on different wavelengths? Do you want the game to be 'true to life' or a realistic football management simulation/game?

If it's true to life then no football management game will ever live up to that the moment someone starts playing it. The moment someone interacts with the game as a player, or the AI starts to make changes then the game will deviate from what happens in actuality. But if you want everything to happen just as it does in real life then you might as well just watch the TV and see what happens. If that's what you want then it sounds like you want everyones game to have the same things happen.

If you want a game that models and simulates it though then FM is the way forward, with all it's features. They might not work perfectly but they add to realism. There are transfer rumours in real life football, there are press conferences, there are team talks, there are tactical tweaks and changes by managers (in game and out) and there are interactions between staff and players. The game models those to create a realistic football management simulation.

Peter Crouch winning the Golden Boot doesn't mean the game is broken or unrealistic. It's unlikely that he will win it, but it's still possible. He's a striker, he scores goals and he gets selected internationally. If he has a good season and other strikers don't then he could win it.

In fact it would be unrealistic for the game not to consider the possibility that he could. I'm sure that'll get a 'WTF' from you but think about it. In real life the golden boot isn't awarded on opinion or who has won it in the past. It's awarded to the player who gets the goals, and so long as Crouch or any other player is in the situation to get the goals then they have a chance. The game takes that into account.

[tak]

Features like the press conferences, team talks, rumours etc are added every now and then for marketing purposes. It is not viable for the game manufacturer to release a new version without having something new to offer. Thus, they come up with things like those, which are meant to fool the customer, no offence intented, into thinking that something exciting was added.

However, the manager being asked the exact same questions at every press conference as long as his career lasts is not adding to realism. On the contrary, it makes the game more artificial and fake and in this way it subtracts realism. The argument "OK the feature is not perfect but at least it exists" is wrong; exactly because this feature exists the game looks like a game for 3-year-olds, where the toddler repeats the same movement over and over again.

I hope you realise, no offence intented, that those features have nearly destroyed a generaly fun game.

As for Peter Crouch, I know and you know that if his nationality was different, his attributes would be halved (to bring them down to their real values) and not only he would not be able to win the golden boot, but he would probably get the boot from any team he went.

[Ainu]

And the transfer market, and the rumours, and the finances of clubs and many many others. The way they are represented in the game has nothing to do with reality. They do not "add realism", they reduce any chance of the game being remotely close to reality. They work against realism making the game less real than ever.

Thus, the game has nothing to do with reality. Let me give you an example: In 2009/2010 in a save of mine, Peter Crouch won the golden boot. I rest my case...

And yet, Football Manager manages to produce the most realistic virtual representation of the footballing world in the gaming industry. Perhaps you should not look at the supposed realism on its own, but appreciate the fact that it's ridiculously hard to recreate this sort of realism, and SI have done the best job so far. And they're always striving to improve things. If you can't appreciate that, you're welcome to just stop playing football management games as you quite clearly don't enjoy them. Or if you think there's a game with a more realistic representation of the footballing world out there, get that one and take your exclusively destructive comments elsewhere.

Most of us, while appreciating the game as it is, realize it's far from perfect or realistic. We'd all like to see dozens of features added and improved to ultimately create an enormously realistic and enjoyable football management sim. Rather than focus on what's not there or what's not implemented well, I like to enjoy what's available to me. And there's a lot more to enjoy and appreciate than in any other similar game.

[tak]

You are wrong to think that I am not enjoying the game. I've been playing it for many years now and I am having a great time playing it. I realise though, that it is only a game and not a realistic representation of football. In the past I left big teams that are "pre-destined" to win, without coaches and training for the whole season and yet they won the league. I have conducted various other experiments but this was the most fun. Try it too. You will be surprised.

As a big fan of the game, I always welcome nice touches and improvements. As a big fan of the game though, I criticise broken and gimmicky features. Thankfully, there are a few people who do. I like to think of us as the true FM supporters, the ones who will say that truth without fear and will not blindly obey everything.

[Leeds_Leeds_Leeds!]

Tak, you should know by now that if you criticise on here, you are regarded as a dimwit who doesn't understand the game and a trouble causer! Isn't that obvious to see, I mean how, if you enjoy something, can you want it to improve still!

I think if you want to suggest something should improve, then judging by the standards on here you have to praise the game to high heaven and then say in tiny writing at the bottom of your post what you think, possibly, maybe, might, could be improved, but it's only a suggestion cos you love the game, followed by two kisses. If you don't do this you are a nugget.

[Ainu]

I like to think of us as the true FM supporters, the ones who will say that truth without fear and will not blindly obey everything.

There's two extremes here, blindly "obeying" and blindly critisizing. In an ideal world (or rather forum) posters would show their appreciation of some parts of the game while criticising other parts, both in a sensible and constructive manner. I've seen lots of constructive posts that criticise the game and offer ideas to improve it on this forum. If you make such posts, instead of just stating how terrible something is, you've a much greater chance of getting heard.

[tak]

Nicely said. I was just looking at the screens of '10. It seems that all us pure FM fans are finaly heard. The useless tweaking of 20 positions in one slider (!) is over. Furthermore, you are now able to shout to your players during the game and tell them what to do. (it was a big minus that you could not dictate the game from the bench). I welcome those changes and I have to say congratulations to all us "criticisers" who have managed to improve the game. As for the "obeyers", I am sure they will obey once more and proclaim how fantastic the game is as soon as it's out.

[Leeds_Leeds_Leeds!]

Yes probably so, I wonder how long it will be before we hear, 'I can't see anything wrong with the game and all these bugs people talk about don't affect me, I just enjoy playing a superb game'....

*Vomit*

[Ainu]

Yes probably so, I wonder how long it will be before we hear, 'I can't see anything wrong with the game and all these bugs people talk about don't affect me, I just enjoy playing a superb game'....

*Vomit*

Probably about as long before we'll hear "This game is terrible, nothing works, the AI cheats" etc.

[Peljam]

Features like the press conferences, team talks, rumours etc are added every now and then for marketing purposes. It is not viable for the game manufacturer to release a new version without having something new to offer. Thus, they come up with things like those, which are meant to fool the customer, no offence intented, into thinking that something exciting was added.

However, the manager being asked the exact same questions at every press conference as long as his career lasts is not adding to realism. On the contrary, it makes the game more artificial and fake and in this way it subtracts realism. The argument "OK the feature is not perfect but at least it exists" is wrong; exactly because this feature exists the game looks like a game for 3-year-olds, where the toddler repeats the same movement over and over again.

I hope you realise, no offence intented, that those features have nearly destroyed a generaly fun game.

As for Peter Crouch, I know and you know that if his nationality was different, his attributes would be halved (to bring them down to their real values) and not only he would not be able to win the golden boot, but he would probably get the boot from any team he went.

Games developers add features as part of a marketing process? Shock Horror! Yes part of the reason any feature is added to a long running game is to keep it fresh and marketable. But that's not the only reason features are added. It's not some sort of conspiracy to catch those customers not wearing their tin foil hats out.

Features get added to a game to improve the game as a whole and drive it towards the goal that the company has. In this case it's realism, detail and depth.

If a feature isn't added then it won't be developed and there'll be no added realism at all, for anyone. Considering the complexity and the level of interactions between different modules it's unlikely that most features will work perfectly at the first attempt. But if that first attempt isn't made then progess is a step back instead of the step forward it could be.

Take the press conferences for example. Yes it gets repetative, yes that could detract from the experience over a long enough game but now the features been out there and there's been feedback there'll no doubt be improved for the next edition. The improvement and feedback wouldn't have been possible without it being included as a feature in the first place. So yes, having a feature exsist despite imperfections is a good thing in my opinion. You can't make a second step without taking the first.

The features haven't destroyed a fun game for me. I hope you realise that's a difference of opinion there that niether of us will be able to convince the other differently of. You clearly don't like the new features for whatever reason. I like the new features and they add to the enjoyment for me now, and will even more as they improve. My main thrust through all of this is that heading in the direction of more realism is a good thing and I think you need these steps and features for that.

Tak, despite the nice debate , you confuse me sometimes. You seem to keep changing the goal posts throughout this thread. Maybe it's because of some initial misunderstanding on both our parts, I don't know. But it just seems like you started off with the opinion that certain features weren't realisitc and shouldn't be included at all and then changed to they are realistic elements of football but need to work better for the purpose of realism.

So just to clear things up which are you for? For FM to head in the direction of increased realism or not?

Again with Peter Crouch, for the record, the disparity in stats is partly a matter of opinion and partly a matter of research. The English leagues are the most well researched and as such there's always going to be something of a gap. That can be remedied by altering stats yourself or getting involved in what research you can in other leagues, if possible. But at the end of the day there's always going to be a difference in opinion over how good certain players are and it's up to you whether to roll with the stats as they are given or make alterations.

Tak, you should know by now that if you criticise on here, you are regarded as a dimwit who doesn't understand the game and a trouble causer! Isn't that obvious to see, I mean how, if you enjoy something, can you want it to improve still!

I think if you want to suggest something should improve, then judging by the standards on here you have to praise the game to high heaven and then say in tiny writing at the bottom of your post what you think, possibly, maybe, might, could be improved, but it's only a suggestion cos you love the game, followed by two kisses. If you don't do this you are a nugget.

Generally people aren't seen as dimwits for having suggestions or constructive criticism. I certaintly don't think Tak or even you are dimwits because we don't share an opinion. We just disagree and a passionate enough about the game to discuss that.

The reason why suggestions are recieved better with some praise along side isn't because the forum is a mass of fanboys and aloof staff (although there are a few rabid supporters of the game!) but because it's easier to catch flies with honey than vinegar. A lot of suggestions and criticism are shot down because of the way it's made. You don't have to show deference to the game, that'd be daft, but it doesn't hurt to be polite about it and respect other peoples opinions. Something that is often missed by both sides of the debate.

All that needs doing is looking for it. You can see plenty of very vocal critics about the game and they are able to get their opinion out there and discuss it because they keep it polite and constructive (like you and Tak). And I guess keep in mind the fact that if there wasn't something good about the game at some level they wouldn't be on a forum trying to improve it.

Usually it's when someone makes a long moaning post that isn't well researched, argued or helpful in anyway that gets slapped down by the masses.

Nicely said. I was just looking at the screens of '10. It seems that all us pure FM fans are finaly heard. The useless tweaking of 20 positions in one slider (!) is over. Furthermore, you are now able to shout to your players during the game and tell them what to do. (it was a big minus that you could not dictate the game from the bench). I welcome those changes and I have to say congratulations to all us "criticisers" who have managed to improve the game. As for the "obeyers", I am sure they will obey once more and proclaim how fantastic the game is as soon as it's out.

I'm glad you're liking the new features Tak

Don't see how it helps to divide people into criticers and obeyers though. Otherwise it gets to the situation where if you're for something you're a fanboy and therefore in denial of the problems, OR you're against something and therefore in denial of whats good about the game because you're a moaner. Neither helps.

Constructive criticism helps push the game forward, but so does praise. Otherwise efforts and areas would be left by the wayside without appropriate recognition for their importance.

[Dekker2]

I have to be honest and say I think you have totally missed the point here. Totally. The guy explaining his point agrees that non of us are football managers. That was one of his points, he doesn't want to be a football manager. Why you have to then say none of us are football managers is beyond me, still it appears you have cut and paste very select parts of most posts here.

He said that the game should be fun and about escapism, I pointed out that its very premise makes it escapism by default - perfectly valid point.

And given how long my post already was, didn't think I should quote the entirety of other people's also - but for you, I'll relent.

Lose the bold for a start, if anything it makes me ignore it rather than emphasising it to me. Maybe my point was a bit sweeping by implying all fans wanted it. What I meant is that BGS are including more fun elements which have been suggested by the fans, certainly more fun elements than SI consider as they go down the realism route. By fun I mean less serious aspects of the game btw, some may call them gimmicks, I wouldn't.

Why do you take offense at writing in bold? I'm just indicating words which my tone of voice would emphasise in speech - it's not an insult.

"a bit" sweeping, when you've decided to speak for all fans of the game based on your individual experience is a major cop-out - which I would normally also highlight in bold.

I view all aspects of the game as equally trivial - it's a game after all. You can't label the bits you find boring as "serious" and other bits as "fun." It completely prejudices the argument.

If you mean quick and easy touches, then I would say that the core fundamentals of the game - the transfer market, the actions of players on the pitch, and man management - should be by far a priority because they are the unpredictable and thus frustrating base for the game. IRL you could offer a reasonable guess as to what players Aston Villa would be pursuing this summer - on FM09, you'd be hard-pushed. This messes up the very heart of the game.

This'll never be perfect, but there's room for improvement.

Nice touches should be finishing touches - not the priority.

I think you have exaggerated slightly there to get your point across. Yes people post suggestions on the forums but anyone with a right mind can sort the strong ideas from the poor, it's plain to see for anyone apart from the dopey buggers putting the silly requests up. It will also be these silly people who haven't got what they want who complain about the game. I would imagine these people complain no matter what. The people who go on about the same things which are clearly needed, and lets face it there are loads of serious issues which lots and lots of people agree need to be implemented/changed, are the ones who should be listened to, they also never complain much, just say what they feel. The trouble is if it is criticism they are classed as moaning a lot on here.

Except I gave an exact example of the forum generating SI action - given that they record all the suggestions they like and go over them before new releases (see the blog) I'd say they do listen. Once again you're implying that because they don't implement suggestions YOU like, then they're not implementing any suggestions at all.

And people openly disagreeing with you doesn't mean they're branding you a moaner. It's precisely because SI actually watches these forums that debates get heated. If they're going to judge "the fans"" opinions by reading the boards, people want them to know what opinions are popular and which not.

The "you're a fanboy"/"you're an anti-SI troll" stuff is annoying, I admit.

You may as well have saved your time here because you have got your assumption wrong. The moment you put 'if you're referring' you may as well have stopped typing because all what you put is just plain daft again and obviously used to exaggerate your point yet again.

If you can't be bothered to be clear, then I have to guess at your meaning - in this case, incorrectly. There's no "exaggeration" by the way, that feature request has cropped up many times on this forum, presumably from posters "in their right mind" as well. The bit about filling out paperwork is argument ad absurdum - perfectly valid tool of argument

By personal level I was referring to the fact that you can manage a team for 30 seasons then decide to leave and nothing happens. Whether it be a simple stat which appears on your profile, a visual thing, perhaps your rep in the game could change? I don't know but it needs looking at. If Fergie left those scum bags would it be forgotten in a day? I doubt it. If, and I know he wouldn't, but if he managed another team would there always be the Man Utd connection with him? It should appear somewhere or you should have a note put on the teams information screen other than just favoured people etc. This is the same for a long serving player, they need to be more recognised for their contribution rather than just fade away to nothing. These little touches would make it more personal IMO. Obviously not the daft stuff you came up with.

As I said, I didn't come up with it.

As to your idea - it's a good one, one I completely agree with now that you've taken the time to actually explain it.

However, it seems you overestimate their ability to change the game from year to year. That doesn't mean that they don't listen to the forums - they record people's suggestions and try to work them in - it just means that they do not have unlimited time, manpower or resources.

I played the CM demo and saw the consequences of your approach: there are some awesome graphics in the match engine, some smooth animation, but the players do completely the wrong things at the wrong times. It's infuriating - because they've clearly put a lot of effort into the game, but not into the most important areas. I'd prefer it the other way around.

Obviously, it would be better if we could have both. Maybe one day SI and BSG will come together in a big love-in - and with double the resources they could make an enormous leap forward, with BSG working on the finery, and SI on the fundamentals.

That hasn't happened yet, Until then, choices have to be made, and SI can't listen to their whole fanbase - so they listen to some of them. BSG, attempting to win some of the market, have logically targeted the desires that SI hasn't accommodated yet. It doesn't make one lot more fan-centric than another, it just makes them different - which is good, because it gives us, the consumers, a choice.

You can refer to my arguments as "exaggerated" and "daft" again but I'd prefer it if you could actually try and refute them with rational argument. ( I almost put some of that in bold, but then thought better of it).