Zealand's "FM is broken video"

[MichaelNevo]

1 hour ago, NineCloudNine said:

There aren’t any doubters. Pace & acceleration have been very powerful in FM for years, possibly since it was CM. Everyone knows this, no-one disputes it.

It’s also obvious that SI know this because (a) they aren’t stupid, (b) those attributes have very high CA multipliers and (c) they are suppressed from natural levels in lower leagues.

Given all this, either SI think it’s fine (since pace is, in fact, savagely potent in football) or, more likely IMO, they have reached the limit of what can be done about it in the labyrinthine monster that is the current ME code.

People talk here as if there’s just some simple dial that needs to be turned down from 9 to 7. It’s not like that. The aim of the ME is to give a reasonable approximation of a football match within the normal boundaries of gameplay. That’s a fantastically complicated thing to do. It’s a marvel of coding. ‘Fixing’ this ‘problem’ is clearly not possible without breaking other stuff. I trust SI to know more about this than us. They don’t need your tests or Zealand’s video to jolt them into action.

I never once asked SI to use my test. I did the tests through my own curiosity to see what would actually happen and decided to share it with others, so take your attitude somewhere else.

[NineCloudNine]

21 minutes ago, MichaelNevo said:

I never once asked SI to use my test. I did the tests through my own curiosity to see what would actually happen and decided to share it with others, so take your attitude somewhere else.

I never once said that you ever once asked SI to use your test .

The whole premise of your test, the thread you created for it and the post I replied to is that you still see the need to convince the world “once and for all” that pace is OP and the “doubters” are wrong.

No-one needs to be convinced. Pace is OP. It has been for decades. The “doubters” exist only in your imagination. Clearly SI can’t fix it in the current ME without breaking other stuff, or don’t consider it a sufficiently serious problem to devote developer time to. Nothing Zealand puts in a video or you post here tells us or SI anything that’s new.

We all hope that the new engine in FM25 gives a better balance between physical, mental and technical attributes. No-one needs to be convinced that this is a good idea.

[MichaelNevo]

1 minute ago, NineCloudNine said:

I never once said that you ever once asked SI to use your test .

The whole premise of your test, the thread you created for it and the post I replied to is that you still see the need to convince the world “once and for all” that pace is OP and the “doubters” are wrong.

No-one needs to be convinced. Pace is OP. It has been for decades. The “doubters” exist only in your imagination. Clearly SI can’t fix it in the current ME without breaking other stuff, or don’t consider it a sufficiently serious problem to devote developer time to. Nothing Zealand puts in a video or you post here tells us or SI anything that’s new.

We all hope that the new engine in FM25 gives a better balance between physical, mental and technical attributes. No-one needs to be convinced that this is a good idea.

As I said, take your attitude somewhere else. Everybody has the right to post here just as much as you do. If I want to run experiments and share it with people, who are you to tell me otherwise. I see you in many threads with the same attitude, like you're above everyone here. Feel free to quote me again but just know you will be wasting your time as I won't be replying further.

[baris28]

This year priority I see improving UI by removing some functions not used in game so much such as in match shouts(which is improvement) and some social feedback screens. Quick simple access to menus and info perhaps. But thinking of  about more attributes will be usefull in match engine in the next version is naive at best even if they've decided to do that. Perhaps it could take couple more years..

Edited Friday at 22:09 by baris28

[NineCloudNine]

5 hours ago, MichaelNevo said:

As I said, take your attitude somewhere else. Everybody has the right to post here just as much as you do. If I want to run experiments and share it with people, who are you to tell me otherwise. I see you in many threads with the same attitude, like you're above everyone here. Feel free to quote me again but just know you will be wasting your time as I won't be replying further.

You have the right to post whatever you like here and other posters have the right to reply. That’s how free speech works . You carry on creating and posting your experiments and sharing them to your heart’s content and I will carry on critiquing them, at least until moderators tell us to stop, which I suspect we’re close to.

[StephenFMT17]

[El Payaso]

I would like to add one point of view more to this discussion which might be playing a significant role. This is a thing I used to ask often about ten years ago: are through on goal type of goals and scoring chances too common on FM compared to real life? 

I don't have stats on this but based on what I have seen both in the game and in real life, I would claim that they are and always have been.

I remember back in the day playing FM a lot with Chelsea while watching all their games in real life too. And there was always a huge difference especially with these type of scoring chances. In real life they very rarely got those even when having more than capable strikers up front while on FM you had even multiple of them in practically every game. 

This is common especially when using a striker duo where one of them is a striker who drops deep and the second one works as the runner. It used to be at its worst on FM 2017 and 2018 where a simple deep lying forward or false nine combined with runners would break the match engine. It is nowadays better but it is a rarity to see a match without a single scoring chance like this. Sometimes you might get 4-7 and even against an opposition with defensive approach. 

If we look at for example Haaland in real life, I think he only scored three or four goals last season in the Premier league by getting through ob goal. One if those was gifted by Manchester United defenders and in one a Sheffield United(?) defender slipped allowing Haaland to dribble past him before scoring. Would be interesting to see how many of these type of goals he scores on FM, especially under human manager. 

[MWoolf]

On 15/06/2024 at 14:46, perpetua said:

So this is a joint test of not only attributes but also the AI's ability to nullify the very real threat of pace by deploying tactics designed to do just that.

A more salient test would be to play human vs. human against this pacy team and discover the conditions under which the pacy team thrives or suffers in order to pinpoint the underlying issue.  Play a more risky, more high tempo game against the pacier team and you're playing to their hand.  Play a more cautious style that forces them to use their weak skills more frequently and you're playing to their weakness.  The real question is, does the AI manager know to do that?

I agree 100%.  And to follow the thought:

This is ultimately a game first and a simulation second, and Zealand's video shows up the fracture between those two goals for SI.  I don't think that is a bug or a sign that the game is "broken."

Making a game that allows average-skill players to win the Prem means making a game that is exploitable.  It has to be that way.

So....I would file this under: "Be careful what you wish for." If SI "fixes" the game so that City and Arsenal reliably crush teams like this, it's not going to be much fun for the average player to play FM.  Goodbye "Park to Prem" and "Road to Glory."

[El Payaso]

1 hour ago, MWoolf said:

So....I would file this under: "Be careful what you wish for." If SI "fixes" the game so that City and Arsenal reliably crush teams like this, it's not going to be much fun for the average player to play FM.  Goodbye "Park to Prem" and "Road to Glory."

Why? Obviously I do understand that if winning and overachieving equals fun, then this would be the case. But in my opinion every adult should be able to get used to the fact that you're not always going to win. Based on what I have read for example on reddit, many people would like to experience this new kind of FM. 

[MWoolf]

2 hours ago, El Payaso said:

Why? Obviously I do understand that if winning and overachieving equals fun, then this would be the case. But in my opinion every adult should be able to get used to the fact that you're not always going to win. Based on what I have read for example on reddit, many people would like to experience this new kind of FM. 

If you want to see average teams with average budgets and average managers have mid-table or worse finishes every year, you can just turn on the TV or read the paper.  No need to spend money on a video game.

Every adult is used to not winning most of the time.  It's called *real life*, and we get plenty of it day in and day out. 

The average gamer plays games to escape the disappointing outcomes in reality, not to have those outcomes happen again and again, but this time feel responsible because they were in charge.

[baris28]

If you don't want to see 40 attributes  in use you play only casually why do you quate Perpetua Turkish researcher? What is  'you wish for'.? For younger players my advice to think abaut your opinions before posting.

Edited Saturday at 22:32 by baris28

[NineCloudNine]

6 hours ago, MWoolf said:

If you want to see average teams with average budgets and average managers have mid-table or worse finishes every year, you can just turn on the TV or read the paper.  No need to spend money on a video game.

Every adult is used to not winning most of the time.  It's called *real life*, and we get plenty of it day in and day out. 

The average gamer plays games to escape the disappointing outcomes in reality, not to have those outcomes happen again and again, but this time feel responsible because they were in charge.

I wish I could give this post 100 rep points.

[El Payaso]

10 hours ago, MWoolf said:

If you want to see average teams with average budgets and average managers have mid-table or worse finishes every year, you can just turn on the TV or read the paper.  No need to spend money on a video game.

Every adult is used to not winning most of the time.  It's called *real life*, and we get plenty of it day in and day out. 

The average gamer plays games to escape the disappointing outcomes in reality, not to have those outcomes happen again and again, but this time feel responsible because they were in charge.

Obviously I am not saying that seeing progress and being able to achieve things eventually isn't important part of the game. It might even be the most important. 

Then on the other hand a somewhat realistic simulation shouldn't work so that you will win the league in season one or even two with a team predicted to finish in mid-table. 

I don't understand the appealance in such game where you always know you are going to be successful. Okay, this might appeal to children but for adults... 

And please do not play down the outcome that you mention in the first part of your text. Outcome like that is quite a bit more loyal to the main idea of FM and for example I would love that kind of gameplay: being in mid-table for years, slowly developing the youth academy and eventually being able to take the next step with our own youth. 

Maybe I am just different but in general I don't get the idea why is it so important to win imagenary champions league trophies and then cry every time when the AI happens to beat you. This is not to mock anyone but actual reality that you see for example on YouTube. Grown up people actually raging when losing. 

[MichaelNevo]

It does exist in some forms, but it probably won't ever happen in a proper way on football manager. In other games there are difficulty levels to the AI and that would satisfy the needs for all to escape from reality how they want to escape. One person's escape isn't another person's escape because we're all different.

However, for now we have to create our own difficulty levels in how we play the game.

[perpetua]

11 hours ago, MWoolf said:

If you want to see average teams with average budgets and average managers have mid-table or worse finishes every year, you can just turn on the TV or read the paper.  No need to spend money on a video game.

Every adult is used to not winning most of the time.  It's called *real life*, and we get plenty of it day in and day out. 

The average gamer plays games to escape the disappointing outcomes in reality, not to have those outcomes happen again and again, but this time feel responsible because they were in charge.

One issue that I see with this argument.

A newcomer to the game is going to struggle regardless because the game has a pretty big learning curve.  However a relatively less sophisticated AI reduces the level of interest of more seasoned FM players if they don't feel challenged.  The sweet spot seems to be for those in between, those who have gotten past the learning curve but are yet to decipher the AI's patterns and can experience slight overperformance peppered with occasional disappointment to keep them interested in the game.  Those in the sweet spot will eventually move into the seasoned FM player stage and likely fail to find a reason to keep playing.  So for the sake of continuity, getting newcomers through the learning curve and into the sweet spot, then keeping them in the sweet spot as long as possible should probably be the objective.

Edited Sunday at 08:36 by perpetua

[El Payaso]

24 minutes ago, MichaelNevo said:

It does exist in some forms, but it probably won't ever happen in a proper way on football manager. In other games there are difficulty levels to the AI and that would satisfy the needs for all to escape from reality how they want to escape. One person's escape isn't another person's escape because we're all different.

However, for now we have to create our own difficulty levels in how we play the game.

This goes totally off-topic but as we already are there. 

I personally don't understand why even experienced FM players and community users are endorsing this type of approach and style of playing when it is 0% loyal to the main idea of the game which is supposed to be at least somewhat realistic simulation of a career. 

This kind of approach also prevents FM to ever take steps forward. SI can introduce all the fancy and exciting new features to the game but only see a minority of players using them because they are not forcing people to do it to be able to survive in the game world. 

You can criticise my views as much as you want but remember that mine are completely aligned with the general idea of the game while the opposite points of views are not. 

Yeah, you can always talk about sales. Including Russia still as a playable league in the game is probably a good call for the sales but does that make it acceptable? 

[MichaelNevo]

32 minutes ago, El Payaso said:

This goes totally off-topic but as we already are there. 

I personally don't understand why even experienced FM players and community users are endorsing this type of approach and style of playing when it is 0% loyal to the main idea of the game which is supposed to be at least somewhat realistic simulation of a career. 

This kind of approach also prevents FM to ever take steps forward. SI can introduce all the fancy and exciting new features to the game but only see a minority of players using them because they are not forcing people to do it to be able to survive in the game world. 

You can criticise my views as much as you want but remember that mine are completely aligned with the general idea of the game while the opposite points of views are not. 

Yeah, you can always talk about sales. Including Russia still as a playable league in the game is probably a good call for the sales but does that make it acceptable? 

I didnt criticise your views... why would you assume this? I was merely pointing out that each individual has different needs to enjoy something and you are right as well about the approach and that is why I said it would probably never happen.

Just because I like the idea of something, that doesn't mean that my idea is the right approach.

[El Payaso]

2 minutes ago, MichaelNevo said:

I didnt criticise your views... why would you assume this? I was merely pointing out that each individual has different needs to enjoy something and you are right as well about the approach and that is why I said it would probably never happen.

Just because I like the idea of something, that doesn't mean that my idea is the right approach.

I wasn't talking about you, sorry if you got that impression. 

Was just anticipating the feedback that I will be getting for my post.

As this thing has been discussed so many times already, I'm not going to go there again. 

[MichaelNevo]

2 minutes ago, El Payaso said:

I wasn't talking about you, sorry if you got that impression. 

Was just anticipating the feedback that I will be getting for my post.

As this thing has been discussed so many times already, I'm not going to go there again. 

No problem, I just thought that because you had quoted me. You're probably right though, it's best left at that, back on topic 

[jcafcwbb]

I think with Aston Villa you have been shown that team can achieve big things with an average budget. Two seasons ago you would not have thought that they would be a Champions League team finishing above teams with a bigger budget - Man Utd, Chelsea, Tottenham and Newcastle. The Champions League money now will help them compete more.

There is also the fact that for other team's supporters winning the FA Cup was the same as winning the league. I know when my team did it in 1988 it felt wonderful. Getting that piece of silverware. There was always league teams and cup teams. If I took over someone like Brighton I would want to play good football - focus on the domestic cups and the the European ones. The league has been bought and paid for by City, unless United get their act together,  so that will never be the focus.

[MichaelNevo]

58 minutes ago, jcafcwbb said:

I think with Aston Villa you have been shown that team can achieve big things with an average budget. Two seasons ago you would not have thought that they would be a Champions League team finishing above teams with a bigger budget - Man Utd, Chelsea, Tottenham and Newcastle. The Champions League money now will help them compete more.

There is also the fact that for other team's supporters winning the FA Cup was the same as winning the league. I know when my team did it in 1988 it felt wonderful. Getting that piece of silverware. There was always league teams and cup teams. If I took over someone like Brighton I would want to play good football - focus on the domestic cups and the the European ones. The league has been bought and paid for by City, unless United get their act together,  so that will never be the focus.

Don't get too excited about Aston villa, Leicester City should be a very good example of what to expect. Ironically Leicester had a very pacy player at the time.

[MWoolf]

4 hours ago, perpetua said:

One issue that I see with this argument.

A newcomer to the game is going to struggle regardless because the game has a pretty big learning curve.  However a relatively less sophisticated AI reduces the level of interest of more seasoned FM players if they don't feel challenged.  The sweet spot seems to be for those in between, those who have gotten past the learning curve but are yet to decipher the AI's patterns and can experience slight overperformance peppered with occasional disappointment to keep them interested in the game.  Those in the sweet spot will eventually move into the seasoned FM player stage and likely fail to find a reason to keep playing.  So for the sake of continuity, getting newcomers through the learning curve and into the sweet spot, then keeping them in the sweet spot as long as possible should probably be the objective.

I completely agree that a game without challenge is boring, and people stop playing.  And I think your summation of the "player's journey" of FM is right on the money.

What you are describing is still not a faithful simulation of reality though.  It's a game with exploitability, but where the ways to exploit adapt over time to keep the player engaged and learning.

Having a robust debate over how to keep the game interesting for seasoned players makes sense to me.

Demanding that the game faithfully simulate reality instead of being a game, with game-like mechanics and exploitabilities, does not make sense to me. (I realize this is not what you are arguing, but some definitely have).

[MWoolf]

6 hours ago, El Payaso said:

Obviously I am not saying that seeing progress and being able to achieve things eventually isn't important part of the game. It might even be the most important. 

Then on the other hand a somewhat realistic simulation shouldn't work so that you will win the league in season one or even two with a team predicted to finish in mid-table. 

I don't understand the appealance in such game where you always know you are going to be successful. Okay, this might appeal to children but for adults... 

And please do not play down the outcome that you mention in the first part of your text. Outcome like that is quite a bit more loyal to the main idea of FM and for example I would love that kind of gameplay: being in mid-table for years, slowly developing the youth academy and eventually being able to take the next step with our own youth. 

Maybe I am just different but in general I don't get the idea why is it so important to win imagenary champions league trophies and then cry every time when the AI happens to beat you. This is not to mock anyone but actual reality that you see for example on YouTube. Grown up people actually raging when losing. 

Why is it important to people that real teams win real silverware? Adults rage when their real-life favorite team chokes at the end of the season, too. Why?

Sports and games arouse different levels of passion in different people.  That doesn't mean there is something wrong with the people who are more passionate about games.

You have a very strong idea of how you would like FM to be, and that is great!

But you are very dismissive of--and borderline insulting to--people who want a different game experience than you want.  And that is not so good.

[El Payaso]

10 minutes ago, MWoolf said:

Why is it important to people that real teams win real silverware? Adults rage when their real-life favorite team chokes at the end of the season, too. Why?

Sports and games arouse different levels of passion in different people.  That doesn't mean there is something wrong with the people who are more passionate about games.

You have a very strong idea of how you would like FM to be, and that is great!

But you are very dismissive of--and borderline insulting to--people who want a different game experience than you want.  And that is not so good.

Because that is what you call simulation. I think nobody wants to see a totally unrealistic game-world as this totally destroys the immersion. 

My views have nothing to do with what I personally want. They are just aligned with the fact that FM is supposed to be at least a semi realistic simulation of football management. These are not opinions but rather cold facts that no-one should be able to disagree on.

I don't understand how I am insulting people if I mention that I don't understand adults who are unable to take a defeat in a video game. 

[baris28]

People playing very complicated wargames and scenarios such as 2nd Marne battles in JTS games in clubs. They have a job. Removing difficulty doesn't mean less stress from real life. But don't worry you'll have easy game for full price.

[Rodrigogc]

I've never seen simulators that are easy to play like FM. I've played some like Victoria, Flight Simulator X, all games from Paradox Studios, and all of them are hard to learn and still hard for seaesoned players. In my opinion a simulator should always be difficult, because that's what real life is. Real life football is very hard, even for top coaches in big teams. The learning experience for newcomers playing FM might be difficult, but you only need a couple of videos and tutorials to get a basic understanding of the game that is enough to win titles, because tools like the Data Hub and in depth scouting are not really necessary to win. That what frustrates seasoned players, I suppose. 

We've never had so many tools to mess with in FM like these days, but they are still unnecessary to win trophies. Once you find what works and what doesn't, you have to pretend you haven't found the best newgen in the game and buy a 3rd grade one with a 200M budget because you know the game will be easy if you buy the best one. 

There are plenty of hard games out there that are popular, dumbing down a game is underestimating the capacity of people to overcome challenges. In any activity you engage in, having challenge is core to be immersed. 

Playing FM for seasoned players these days is like being able to play a 9min Iron Maiden song on the guitar, but instead having to play a 4 chord hit song because your child likes it.

[andu1]

The only "broken" thing i run into the last 2 or 3 FM's are the Goalkeepers.

They are just horrible. I cant believe they've done nothing to improve them since not playing in 6 months.. they are as horrible as i remembered.

Unreal

[Feddo]

I've been reading this topic since the video came out and at a certain point i started wondering. 

I'm currently playing with my local team and i'm a good 20 years into the future. In my bank account theres 1.1 billion euro's. I got a couple of CL's under my belt and some of the best players in the world stay at my squad.

And I just use scouting, training and selling to propell my team,  like "the game was intendend". No quick fix strategy. How is that not a sign that its a game where some stuff is "broken". Its a complete unrealistic scenario and clearly something is OP. 

So thats why I wonder: how much does it care that pace and acceleration is OP? Ingame there's allways gonna be something that gives a human an advantage over the AI and therefore give the human a way of exploiting it. I dont think there's gonna be any game without it.

It does however gives us fuel for some interessting heated debates 😉 

[Spallo]

vor 8 Stunden schrieb El Payaso:

My views have nothing to do with what I personally want. They are just aligned with the fact that FM is supposed to be at least a semi realistic simulation of football management. These are not opinions but rather cold facts that no-one should be able to disagree on.

What hybris - amazing glimpse of someone who would rly like to be a despot 

and if FM is not at least semi-realistic I don’t know what is 

Edited Sunday at 22:55 by Spallo

[obongwati]

This reminds me when long shots are nerfed so much due to players constantly scoring bangers in the 2004-2013 FM, not exactly those version but those period. 

Remembered players like Veron, Ronaldo, Beckham just curling the ball from 30-40 yards and they have 18-20 stats rating on long shots.

Now, the best long shooters doesnt have 20 stat but a more 15-17. FYI, Ronaldo had a 20 long shot and if you compare that with players like Xabi, Hakan, Valverde in newer FM who have 16-17 rating is insane! Even then, they're not scoring long shots on this ME.

[El Payaso]

9 hours ago, Spallo said:

What hybris - amazing glimpse of someone who would rly like to be a despot 

and if FM is not at least semi-realistic I don’t know what is 

Don't follow. 

FM is a simulation, yes and it does simulate real world better way better than it used to do in the past. 

Features like totally randomly working simulation of real life and human players' need to overachieve are not features that a simulation type of game should have. 

[Spallo]

vor 21 Stunden schrieb El Payaso:

They are just aligned with the fact that FM is supposed to be at least a semi realistic simulation of football management. These are not opinions but rather cold facts that no-one should be able to disagree on.

In context you dont think FM now is at least semi-realistic, because what you said earlier.

And such a statement is just hybris on your part which has nothing to do with the topic. You not just only clearly have not the slightest idea what the difference between facts and opinions is - no - you are obviously voicing an opinion on what the game supposed to be which "no-one should be able to disagree on". If thats not despotic in nature than I dont know what is. 

And thats it on this one, because arguing with someone like you is pointless 

Edited Monday at 12:34 by Spallo