Sorry Guys Not Buying FM 2017

[SLB-Dark-Angel]

Dissapointing.... I have bought all the versions since the first one, but I will not buy this version...

*- 3D is "pre-historic", with all this new technology, and the 3D engine is awful and ancient, IRREALISTIC, players or have hair (with some diferent colors) or they are bald, no long hair, no rastas, no ponytails... NO NOTHING...

*- The players don't bump on each other, they pass through each other, like ghosts

*- The ball hit the players like if they are made of wood or metal, NO REALISM HERE...


-------------SAME OLD (Problems from the other versions, STILL) NO REALISM------------------------------------------------------

*- Goalkeepers don't grab easy balls, conciding goals or corners (to much corners in the match, resulting in to many goals)

*- Probably the same old and boring SOUNDS

*- Defenders and GKs looking at the ball passing near them without any reaction resulting in 98% of the (stupid) goals in the match.

*- Stadiuns are all typical british, there are a lot of beautiful stadiuns all over the world but on FM they are all almost the same...

*- Players keep falling (diving) everytime they have a opponent near them, when they should advance  or tackle the ball... (Ok it happens on real life but NOT SO OFTEN)


We ALL the FM saga fans, deserve much BETTER, the game make a lot of money every year, but SI do not invest in a better team and technology to make this game more like FIFA or PES graphics and playability style, the players run like like they are on wheels or skating, the graphics and sounds are 3 out of 10.

Sorry guys but we deserve BETTER after all of this 24 years of the game.


More opinions like mine???? Read the comments
 

 

[Warhawk]

30 minutes ago, SLB-Dark-Angel said:

make this game more like FIFA

A terrifying thought, really.

[keithfc]

this post will be locked very soon

[FrazT]

All forum users are entitled to their opinion and as long as the forum rules are respected, they can express them.  Others will no doubt disagree with that opinion and the same rules apply to them as well.

[phnompenhandy]

I don't want FM to ever be like FIFA, but I agree the graphics could be more like the OP wants. Nevertheless, I'll still happily buy FM17 just like I have every version since CM3. Ultimately, it's not the graphics that make the game so addictive.

[Viking]

I knew the introduction of 3D graphics was going to be a slippery slope for SI. First it was the spectators not moving, and the goal net not moving, and the shoes being the same colour on every player. Now it's hair. Then it will be the face of every player is the same, the hot dog cart is the same on every stadium, the colour of the grass is wrong. It will never end.

I think most people use the graphics as a tool to see what is going on on the pitch, not to get a FIFA-esque experience.

And if FM ever starts to lean towards FIFA, I am done with it.

[Guest]

Football Manager should be about managing not about the graphics, so who cares if the graphics aren't as good as Fifa as long as the management part is good that is what matters

[herne79]

@SLB-Dark-Angel Fair enough.  You seem passionate about the game and have clearly enjoyed the series for a long period of time.  I'd advise a little caution however - making your mind up after watching a brief 10 minute clip of work in progress might be a little hasty.  Perhaps wait for the free demo and try that out instead?

Anyway, just to pick up on your point about the stadia, I agree it would be nice to see more variety although I know there are licensing and legal issues.  Here's what SI said recently about running tracks around pitches for example:

So kinda sucky but at least we know what the reasons are.

[Tony Wright 747]

3 minutes ago, ajj2410 said:

Football Manager should be about managing not about the graphics, so who cares if the graphics aren't as good as Fifa as long as the management part is good that is what matters

Im not sure that is entirely true, if it was why bother with stadiums at all, do away withe the arts department and just have the pitch with no surrounds, Im sure some people would be very happy with this (if so you can always turn the stadiums off) but others like the immersion of a real match

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Tony Wright 747 said:

Im not sure that is entirely true, if it was why bother with stadiums at all, do away withe the arts department and just have the pitch with no surrounds, Im sure some people would be very happy with this (if so you can always turn the stadiums off) but others like the immersion of a real match

I know its better with better graphics but the graphics aren't the main part of the game. The main part of the game is about management.

[Cannes]

The guy commentating the video is completely off his rocker imo.

The issues he has with the 3D representation and match engine are massive improvements over previous iterations.

He has an issue with the goalkeeper jogging slowly forward with the ball taking it out of the penalty area before sending it up-pitch? wtf?! This is exactly how it happens 10's of times every single rl football match. Has he never watched a live game?

[Woolly]

It's your choice whether you buy the game or not, and no one should try to change your mind. However, if better graphics result in the actual game play deteriorating it won't help the game in the long term. The gaming business is full of failures with 'pretty' graphics but no gameplay. Graphics will lure people into the game but gameplay makes them stay.

[Spedding]

 

[BoxToBox]

48 minutes ago, Viking said:

the hot dog cart is the same on every stadium,

I'm apoplectic that there are no pizza stands. Joke of a situation.

[santy001]

As far as I'm aware, the graphics of the match engine are developed in house and belong to SI directly rather than buying the rights to use it for X amount of titles and so on. It would be nice if they were amazing right now but it's going to take time to get there. FIFA has frostbite which is used across a wide array of titles, it means there's far more money going into developing and tweaking that than there can be for studios like SI who don't develop anywhere near as many games.

There's a couple of huge issues with trying to expedite this problem which aren't just limited to the cost.

- Firstly just adding more staff doesn't fix the problem, new staff need time to learn the systems, the procedures in place, you may get someone who walks in and Day 1 blows the doors off with how amazing the work he/she can do but even then, they're just 1 person.

- Secondly its an utterly horrible thing for a company to hire people en masse just to use and dump, once the graphics get to a good place and it no longer needs this enormous development team a lot of recently hired, just for this, people are out of work.

I actually think the second point is more likely to be a larger barrier to SI than the first. It's not a nice way to run any company, even if they hired 200 people and it took them just 2 years to do it (which is extremely unlikely given the stuff in the first point) once its at a good place you probably only need 10% of that for maintaining and tweaking going forward. It's never a good thing to lose what would then be specialised staff, but it wouldn't be financially viable to keep them sat around the office twiddling their thumbs for 5/6 years until the next big overhaul of graphics. 

Sometimes it does help to step back and take a look at the bigger picture of just what goes into the process. Even here this is just an incredibly basic "things I see" type post, and hardly reflective of even more factors that could come into play along the way.

[Just-Wool]

Failing SI upgrading the look at the 3D models themselves (I'm content with them making sure the actual engine runs like a football match) then I'd love to see them opening those assets to mods. I'm sure the people who mod would make this game look Ridiculously realistic if they could do it. 

 

SI are not a studio with ridiculous budgets who can licence all the things you'll need for realistic and accurate looking players and stadia. Even if EA hadn't got those exclusivity agreements locked down it'd be difficult. Especially with the amount of teams and leagues that they have.

[fmfan74]

I love the game for playing a lot of seasons in a short period of time.
I love the game for the intelligence you have to use in all aspects of the game.
The game does need improvement but then again you tell me if theres ever such a thing like a perfect marriage.

Did you contribute to Beta Testing ???
Did you upload countless video bugs ???

I spent countless hours pumping up video correction footage during beta stages and yes i keep posting on forums about improvement.  Maybe you might want to revisit your thoughts and note down improvement points in more detail and add them to "suggestions/recommendations" section of the forums like i have.  We all have a right to our own opinion but the game can only improve from our own thoughts right.  Constructive criticism means something right.

[talhak]

4 hours ago, FrazT said:

All forum users are entitled to their opinion and as long as the forum rules are respected, they can express them.  Others will no doubt disagree with that opinion and the same rules apply to them as well.

Great to see this tolerance from a mod here - especially after my topic is recently closed despite it doesn't contain anything harsh I think. Will be really happy if someone describes the reason behind it. You know closing thread is not something friendly unless there is a real reason.

[dspeters]

I actually think this thread is a great compliment to SI. For once someone isn´t moaning about the ME, only about the graphical representation of it. Sounds like a huge step forward to me.

[themadsheep2001]

20 minutes ago, talhak said:

Great to see this tolerance from a mod here - especially after my topic is recently closed despite it doesn't contain anything harsh I think. Will be really happy if someone describes the reason behind it. You know closing thread is not something friendly unless there is a real reason.

Read the last two posts of that thread, that's why it was closed. 

[talhak]

Just now, themadsheep2001 said:

Read the last two posts of that thread, that's why it was closed. 

I do not agree this is a valid reason to lock my thread. Did I say something disrespectful? We have been just speaking about players who are expected a radical improvement in FM17. Was a friendly environment.

[themadsheep2001]

8 minutes ago, talhak said:

I do not agree this is a valid reason to lock my thread. Did I say something disrespectful? We have been just speaking about players who are expected a radical improvement in FM17. Was a friendly environment.

With respect, whether you agree or not isn't really the point. Apart from it being in the wrong place (should be in data Forums), researchers aren't going to discuss upcoming game release data. That's pretty much the end of it 

[talhak]

7 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

With respect, whether you agree or not isn't really the point. Apart from it being in the wrong place (should be in data Forums), researchers aren't going to discuss upcoming game release data. That's pretty much the end of it 

As I said in the topic, it was a topic for us - the fans that play the game; not for researchers. Don't we have a chance to discuss something together? Anyway, do not wait a friendly approach from you. No worries. Was speaking with @FrazT

[FrazT]

10 minutes ago, talhak said:

As I said in the topic, it was a topic for us - the fans that play the game; not for researchers. Don't we have a chance to discuss something together? Anyway, do not wait a friendly approach from you. No worries. Was speaking with @FrazT

This has nothing to do with this thread, so move on please.

[bababooey]

I'll be patient with SI on this one because I genuinely like some aspects of FM16. Pro zone was a great addition, having touch mode sold separately, etc.  

But here's the REALLY big issue that SI should be thinking long and hard about: 

what kind of game is FM going to be in the future?  Is it going in the direction of FIFA? Or, is it going in the direction of something like OOTPB? Or will it be a mix of the two, or something entirely different?

People seem to genuinely not give a crap about the 3D match engine, and I'm in agreement with that. What I'd love to see is the mechanics of the game improve each year, with a much smaller emphasis put on the 3D stuff. The whole idea is to MANAGE not to play the match itself.  

For instance, look at the reviews of OOTPB each year compared to FM going back, let's say, 5 years. OOTPB makes steady improvements and FM seems to be all over the place.  FM14 was better than 15. 16 was better than 15, but maybe not as good as 14. 13 was okay but 12 was probably better; see what I mean? It's silly.

I think that if SI focused on the inner workings of the match engine as the #1 priority of their development the game would be better off for years to come.  

[themadsheep2001]

11 minutes ago, bababooey said:

I'll be patient with SI on this one because I genuinely like some aspects of FM16. Pro zone was a great addition, having touch mode sold separately, etc.  

But here's the REALLY big issue that SI should be thinking long and hard about: 

what kind of game is FM going to be in the future?  Is it going in the direction of FIFA? Or, is it going in the direction of something like OOTPB? Or will it be a mix of the two, or something entirely different?

People seem to genuinely not give a crap about the 3D match engine, and I'm in agreement with that. What I'd love to see is the mechanics of the game improve each year, with a much smaller emphasis put on the 3D stuff. The whole idea is to MANAGE not to play the match itself.  

For instance, look at the reviews of OOTPB each year compared to FM going back, let's say, 5 years. OOTPB makes steady improvements and FM seems to be all over the place.  FM14 was better than 15. 16 was better than 15, but maybe not as good as 14. 13 was okay but 12 was probably better; see what I mean? It's silly.

I think that if SI focused on the inner workings of the match engine as the #1 priority of their development the game would be better off for years to come.  

Exactly what happens every year, this has never changed.

SI simply want to improve how you see and interpret a increasingly complex match engine.

There are those who rely on the visuals to manage.

[bababooey]

A little sidenote on the way SI handles reviews:

 

When FM16 was first revealed on social media (Screenshots and etc) people were pretty disappointed with the new tactics screen, myself included.  So I made a comment about it on their facebook post, and it garnered the most likes of anyone in the thread. Did SI respond? I had hundreds of people responding to me, but not SI.  The point here is that for a smaller company like SI, you HAVE to listen to your audience. You just have to. We don't want better 3D, we want a better overall product.  To name a few improvements:

- Can we please finally fix the absolute GARBAGE interactions with staff and players? You praise a young lad and he basically tells you to **** off.  Or worse yet, you praise your team for winning 10 in a row and it "had an overall negative impact."  What?!?

- The tactics screen is an absolute mess. It looks like some weird 1980's themed thing where they're trying to cram as much info into it as possible.  Why not just use something elegant and simple like the pre-match formation screens? You know, the ones that show the kits and the player names + roles/duties? It's very pleasing.  

- Obviously you could write a book on the match engine itself but there are so many silly things that have never really been fixed..  GK distribution, goals scored from bad post-set piece positioning, CD's stepping out of line, fullbacks being horribly positioned, wide men being over powered, central players underpowered, passing %'s are unrealistically low for great players, etc. etc. etc.  It's the same old story. 

- The transfer market sucks. AI clubs routinely sign players for great deals compared to the users. That isn't right.  As soon as you become successful big clubs will try to poach your best players, which on the surface is okay, but they offer you so much money you'd be stupid not to sell.  It's unrealistic. Who would pay like 30 million for marcos rojo?  Real Madrid would if he played well! Or Barcelona would be trying to nab Chancel Mbemba from Newcastle off of a few good matches played... Jesus.

Here's a really cool idea.  Instead of working on 3D stuff and adding more staff members like a "data analyst" why not focus on the tactical side of the game which has fallen by the wayside for years now? Sure we're away from sliders which is nice. But where are we really?  Support/Attack/Defend/Auto ?  Meh.  I want to have a better way to visualize what my players are going to be doing. I want to have variable pressing and triggers that initiate instructions. I want to see the tactics screen become more like PES and less like whatever it is now . Multiple formations and less "roles." It shouldn't be about creating a "tactic." It should be about creating a system of play that gets tweaked over time, like in real life.

 

I'll be waiting. 

[bababooey]

Just now, themadsheep2001 said:

Exactly what happens ever year.

And even though that may be the case, when is it ever discussed? For example, when the FM17 feature video / info is released (soon?) will there be more talk of 3D graphics, or actual changes to how the game works? My guess is the former.  

[themadsheep2001]

Listening =/= responding to every single comment.

It also doesnt mean that they have to neccessarily agree with every point a customer makes, especially when what one person wants contradicts anothers

[Kwanzaa-Bot]

Personally, the 3D engine means nothing to me. It's nice that it's there for those that want it, but I've continued using the classic match engine since 3D was first introduced. For me it's the most accurate version of what FM is.

Surely nobody is playing FM for aesthetic realism. FM is 100% about immersive gameplay, that's what I want, that's what I get.

[themadsheep2001]

1 minute ago, bababooey said:

And even though that may be the case, when is it ever discussed? For example, when the FM17 feature video / info is released (soon?) will there be more talk of 3D graphics, or actual changes to how the game works? My guess is the former.  

Considering you've not sen the video, it's pointless to speculate.

It doesn't matter if it was discussed, the case is still that's the main priority, then what you want hasn't been affected. It's mentioned every year, time and again.

[bababooey]

1 minute ago, themadsheep2001 said:

Listening =/= responding to every single comment.

It also doesnt mean that they have to neccessarily agree with every point a customer makes, especially when what one person wants contradicts anothers

I agree. But this wasn't just a single tweet to SI or something. This was the top rated comment on a major facebook post where SI were supposed to be showing off the new tactics screen. The feedback was bad, and they had to have noticed. 

[themadsheep2001]

I think it's often forgotten that SI don't just sit here at gamers beck and call. They have an idea of the game they want to develop. Sure they can and do take on feedback, but at the end of the day, they will have ideas and plans they want to create.

[bababooey]

1 minute ago, themadsheep2001 said:

I think it's often forgotten that SI don't just sit here at gamers beck and call. They have an idea of the game they want to develop. Sure they can and do take on feedback, but at the end of the day, they will have ideas and plans they want to create.

Yes.  You're right.  And the success/failure of their ideas and developments will be reflected in the reviews and sales numbers for the game.  OOTPB is the prime example of what happens when you listen to your target audience and combine that with a solid foundation for moving forward in development. 

I do love FM don't get me wrong. I just think that the emphasis on 3D stuff is the wrong direction, and many others feel that way too. 

[themadsheep2001]

Just now, bababooey said:

Yes.  You're right.  And the success/failure of their ideas and developments will be reflected in the reviews and sales numbers for the game.  OOTPB is the prime example of what happens when you listen to your target audience and combine that with a solid foundation for moving forward in development. 

I do love FM don't get me wrong. I just think that the emphasis on 3D stuff is the wrong direction, and many others feel that way too. 

And given the ever increasing numbers of FM, they've been getting it right overall. 

How  many is many? and what % of the market? And even then, is it something SI want to have any way as part of their overall plan?  

[Arkim]

I've switched back to 2D for FM 16 and if I must be honest, it's due to the 3D engine itself. Personally, I've found it to get worse each year (my main issue is floating, terrible player movement and terrible representation of physics, if that makes sense).

I fully agree with those saying the core features/game play itself should be the focus rather than the 3D match engine. I'd like to see much more player and manager/staff contract clauses, transfer and loan options, a more intuitive tactics system, better immersion into the game world to name a few. The list can obviously go on for pages. For me, if they went with a Sensible Soccer style "3D" match view/engine, I think a number of problems would be solved and it would look much better but that's just my opinion. I am well aware that FM's 3D will never be so fluid and well designed due to many factors, including but not limited to, budgets and staff which is why I think a different direction with regards to the 3D would be a wise choice and a better investment overall. In addition to Sensible Soccer style graphics, another game that comes to mind; New Star Soccer which is an Indie game that has managed to showcase a great graphical representation of the the way a match plays out. The type of graphics that game has would be much more suited to a series like FM rather than trying to have a full blown 3D match engine. That's just my taste though.

I highly doubt we will see a change in direction with regards to the 3D match engine. They seem fully invested and intent on going about it the way they have. Unfortunately, it's at the expense of the core game play.  All my opinion of course.

[themadsheep2001]

There's no such thing as the 3D match engine.

There's the match engine, and there's the 2D and 3D graphics, both of which represent the same things in the match engine.

Working on both doesn't stop them working on the other core parts of the game.

If people what to use 2D, then use to 2D, those who want 3D, will use it

 

[Arkim]

I think you know quite well what people mean when they refer to the 3D graphics/engine/whatever you would like to call it.

Edit: For what it's worth, I also believe the fact that there is no real worthy competitor for SI, things are easier for them with regards to development. When it's a one-horse race, you don't have to worry about losing sales as much. 

[themadsheep2001]

1 minute ago, Arkim said:

I think you know quite well what people mean when they refer to the 3D graphics/engine/whatever you would like to call it.

Actually people get them confused often, and think there is more than one match engine. There isnt. Accuracy is important in discussing stuff like this,

[Tony Wright 747]

16 minutes ago, bababooey said:

Yes.  You're right.  And the success/failure of their ideas and developments will be reflected in the reviews and sales numbers for the game.  OOTPB is the prime example of what happens when you listen to your target audience and combine that with a solid foundation for moving forward in development. 

I do love FM don't get me wrong. I just think that the emphasis on 3D stuff is the wrong direction, and many others feel that way too. 

The thing is many others don't share your views

[Pingdinho]

I would never have played FM at all if it didn't have a 3D match view. I like it and think it looks pretty good. Not perfect, but perfectly acceptable to me. Anyway, I just wanted to speak up for those of us who do use the 3D view as I think too often we seem to be sneered upon unnecessarily. 

I don't see why SI can't work on improving all aspects of the game. Indeed, my impression has always been that is exactly what they do. Anyway, that's my view.

[Just-Wool]

You have to also keep in mind in terms of the 3D graphics that a fair amount of people will buy FM and have less than great 3D capabilities on their PCs. If they want to play the game and not use the 2D match graphics, they would struggle if SI suddenly made everything a lot more graphically intensive. Some are having problems running the 3D graphics even now. 

 

I'm not sure that SI would be happy with that as one of their main things seems to be make this game available to as many people as possible and not many people would be able do a full upgrade of their PC to play FM. 

[Tony Wright 747]

2 minutes ago, monkeywool said:

You have to also keep in mind in terms of the 3D graphics that a fair amount of people will buy FM and have less than great 3D capabilities on their PCs. If they want to play the game and not use the 2D match graphics, they would struggle if SI suddenly made everything a lot more graphically intensive. Some are having problems running the 3D graphics even now. 

 

I'm not sure that SI would be happy with that as one of their main things seems to be make this game available to as many people as possible and not many people would be able do a full upgrade of their PC to play FM. 

Whilst i agree with you up to a point, if the graphics are going to continue to improve, there is going to come a time when 3D will not be playable on some low end machines

[Double0Seven]

Are people seriously thinking SI will improve 3D that much that it wont be playable on low end machines? You guys still thinking properly? Most likely will be able to set that 3D off or lower if you want to play on low end machines. Im pretty sure people with a low end machine playing FM will not buy it for the sick 3D graphics(cus you have a low end machine) and will always have the option to lower the 3d graphics or play 2d. Im pretty sure SI is smart enough to keep including those options. Come on guys, believe in SI a bit they know what they are doing(some might disagree). 

[Just-Wool]

5 minutes ago, Tony Wright 747 said:

Whilst i agree with you up to a point, if the graphics are going to continue to improve, there is going to come a time when 3D will not be playable on some low end machines

This is what SI might want to avoid. Yeah all good getting some fancy dan 3D graphics on the go, but what about the low end guys?

1 minute ago, Double0Seven said:

Are people seriously thinking SI will improve 3D that much that it wont be playable on low end machines? You guys still thinking properly? Most likely will be able to set that 3D off or lower if you want to play on low end machines. Im pretty sure people with a low end machine playing FM will not buy it for the sick 3D graphics(cus you have a low end machine) and will always have the option to lower the 3d graphics or play 2d. Im pretty sure SI is smart enough to keep including those options. Come on guys, believe in SI a bit they know what they are doing(some might disagree). 

If 3D is improved to the degree some people are wanting, then yes. It'll improve to the point it won't be playable on some machines. Even as it is now, on the weeks after launch you get numerous threads complaining they can't play on even the basic 3D setting. If you overhaul the whole 3D graphics side of things to make max settings look beautiful and "FIFA like" which is what some people are asking for, then the low end 3D version of that will still be too much for some right now. 

[Double0Seven]

3 minutes ago, monkeywool said:

This is what SI might want to avoid. Yeah all good getting some fancy dan 3D graphics on the go, but what about the low end guys?

If 3D is improved to the degree some people are wanting, then yes. It'll improve to the point it won't be playable on some machines. Even as it is now, on the weeks after launch you get numerous threads complaining they can't play on even the basic 3D setting. If you overhaul the whole 3D graphics side of things to make max settings look beautiful and "FIFA like" which is what some people are asking for, then the low end 3D version of that will still be too much for some right now. 

You dont seem to get my point, SI are surely not gonna want to lose potential users/buyers of the game. If they improve the 3d good enough that it will attract more people then the amount of low end pc people that they lose. Then sure, why not do it? Its only a win-win situation. More people play FM and better 3D. They wont improve 3D only because 'some people are wanting'. That is just ridicoulous from a company point of view. They will look at it financially Im pretty sure. 

[bababooey]

Here are the reviews for FM 16, 15, 14, and 13 respectively.  

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/football-manager-2016/user-reviews   user score: 6.9

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/football-manager-2015 user score: 6.0

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/football-manager-2014 user score: 5.5

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/football-manager-2013 user score: 6.8

Go look at the steam community for even more.  Or check the comments on social media when new features are released.

The point I'm making is SI aren't doing a great job of listening to their target audience. People will buy the game because it's the only legitimate football manager type sim on the market. Anything else is mostly irrelevant at this point. There is no PES to FM's FIFA. There is just FM. 

The last time SI made a game that people universally rated well was FM 12!!!   http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/football-manager-2012

Please note that the defining factor here is the reviews for FM12 where people say: "this game is great, it could use some work, but it's good."  Now it's become, this game is being held back by issues XYZ. That's a significant difference.  People aren't sure it's going in the right direction, or that it's worth the money at this point. This is 4 straight releases that have been underwhelming. 4! That's crazy for a product that is so popular, don't you think? 

Compare this all to OOTPB and my point is made. You have to listen to the audience. 

[Just-Wool]

6 minutes ago, Double0Seven said:

You dont seem to get my point, SI are surely not gonna want to lose potential users/buyers of the game. If they improve the 3d good enough that it will attract more people then the amount of low end pc people that they lose. Then sure, why not do it? Its only a win-win situation. More people play FM and better 3D. They wont improve 3D only because 'some people are wanting'. That is just ridicoulous from a company point of view. They will look at it financially Im pretty sure. 

I get your point, it's the same as I'm making but from the opposite angle. I'd argue though that the number of people who'd buy FM because of fancy 3D graphics wouldn't necessarily outweigh the amount who wouldn't upgrade their PC for it. It's a niche game after all and it wouldn't be financially viable to invest heavily in really top quality HD 3D stuff which would look glorious from all angles when you wouldn't get too many new customers for it. 

 

That being said, Miles has said in the past that they are looking at making this game as realistic as possible and broadcasting/presentation is one of the things they need to improve on massively at one point. I think he even said last year that within 5 years you shouldn't be able to distinguish between TV and FM. 

[Tony Wright 747]

44 minutes ago, Double0Seven said:

Are people seriously thinking SI will improve 3D that much that it wont be playable on low end machines? You guys still thinking properly? Most likely will be able to set that 3D off or lower if you want to play on low end machines. Im pretty sure people with a low end machine playing FM will not buy it for the sick 3D graphics(cus you have a low end machine) and will always have the option to lower the 3d graphics or play 2d. Im pretty sure SI is smart enough to keep including those options. Come on guys, believe in SI a bit they know what they are doing(some might disagree). 

SI have made the graphics available to lower end machines for some time, but I think most gamers know that that they have to upgrade their graphic cards over the years as graphics improve for most games, all i am saying is that eventually FM will require this

[Cougar2010]

12 minutes ago, bababooey said:

Go look at the steam community for even more.  Or check the comments on social media when new features are released.

I would question how useful overall the communities and social media are.

First you have those with an agenda because SI won't listen to them, then you have a section who rate it negatively because they don't even understand it, third you have those that have an idea what they are doing but simply don't understand where they are going wrong & fourth are those that rate the game entirely on how it looks with no thought for the depth or how it plays.  Finally you have the bad losers who only rate games highly when they win and rate games down when they lose.

Those that do understand the game even to a basic level are generally in the minority and a lot of their comments get lost in the ether unless its a site like this or other fan site.