Is the 'community' isolating the majority ?

[Stephanie McMahon's Secret Lover]

Everyones problems can be sorted by giving the player a choice of "very easy", "easy", "normal","difficult" and "very difficult" game levels. How SI arrive at these levels is up to them.

Displayed in the top left hand corner of course to prevent cheating braggers.

[Trux]

To be fair Lower League Only, your first post wasn't particular constructive.

And we really don't want to turn this thread into "these are the bugs that ruin the game for me", as the thread isn't about that.

So many threads go this way its a shame

[Lower League Only]

Yeh point taken.

I think SI is isolating a lot of people by pumping out half finished products every single year.

I for one have had enough.

[Finknottle]

My only problem is with the definition of the sliders. Do they mean that there are only the three main positions of defensive, normal and attacking? It doesn't matter whether or nor you are on 1,3 or 6 clicks, you are still on defensive and that the individual clicks don't matter. If this is correct then why are there the 1-6, defensive, 7-14 normal and the remainder attacking? If the clicks don't matter, then take them away. All explanations of the definitions gratefully accepted. Kind regards.

[Hammer1000]

The game is no harder now than it was back in the CM days, but the "levellers" that have been added to try to make it more difficult have all but ruined the game and makes the ME look absolutely farcical.

The more you know about football the less you will enjoy this game.

[Lower League Only]

Talking tactics , i for one hate the sliders.

FM has always and always will be at base a maths game.

If you can work the calculations and get the "winning formula" to pardon the pun you will crack the game at any and every level.

Emphasis on the sliders and numbers take this futher into the realms of mathmatical calculations and futher away from "sports sim"

My favourite ever FM / CM feature which was only ever in one or 2 games was the ability to give players on pitch orders and tell them exactly where to be when the ball was in a specific point on the pitch and then you had another option in possesion and off posession.

With this you could place your pace striker in danger areas regardless of play or keep back your sweeper regardless of play.

I sorely miss this option and feel the game is becoming more of a maths sim than a sports game.

[Jase1982]

I agree with everything the OP said about the direction SI are taking FM in.

This game is great for the "geeks" of this world. The people that have time and patience to watch every game and analyse every piece of play and it's become quite clear that the fanbase of football management games has slowly drifted from the casual gamer towards the more involved, the people that are more likely to be playing World of Warcraft...It's not a criticism by the way, just what I can see by viewing many of the posts on this forum. Where as, in the early 90's many of my friends played Championship Manager and Premier Manager etc, they now wouldn't dream of touching the new Football management genre and have drifted towards games such as, Fifa and Pro Evolution Soccer. The fanbase has changed.

I also think that any large corporation that listens too hard to the fans is being very foolish. In theory, "listening to what the fans want" is a great PR campaign and marketing strategy. In reality, the fans are often unrealistic in their thinking and want far too much in terms of complete overall game play.

The bottom line is that the fun has been removed completely from the game. I don't want influential team talks, that are indeed what the OP touched on, more like completing a complex puzzle. However, just when you think you've unlocked the door, it snaps shut on you.

I think on April 24th, when Championship Manager 2009 comes out I will buy it, try it for a few months. If I like it, then that will probably be me done with Football Manager, or if this is the way the genre is going, I'll just relent and play Fifa on my PS3.

[mlp071]

Downloading someone else's tactics that exploits ME flaws and then complaining that game is "cheating"(in '08) or "completely broken" (in '09) , after you lose or draw match even with that, can barely constitute as "having good knowledge of football", imo.Not that i claim that i have one either.

No one is denying that ME is flawed, specially defensively, but is far from "farcical" or "unplayable". It is also more time consuming , then let's say FM 06 or 05, but not harder by much or at all.

But , to each of his own i guess.

[Mitja]

the direction where FM is going is right and it was allways a simulation game which tried to be as realistic as it gets. i'm sure most of us wouldn't like it to be pick'n'play game but i agree FM has become less fun, much less. is it becouse it is too realistic? i don't think the nature of this game is harder as it was 5 or 10 years ago. complexity of this game increased while inteface and features didn't improve and that's what makes it harder. as we can see the majority of complaints are ME/tactics related. for FM to become fun again without loosing the complexity and chalange, tactical interface needs to be rewritten and become more user friendly and most importantly improved/smarter AI. i agree with OP that player quality vs tactics/team talks/media stuff... isn't balanced as it should be (but without loosing difficulty). features (old and new) need to be fixed to work properly, this is something which was constantly ignored in last couple of years and it created a domino effect which is responsible for messy state in which FM is now.

[Hammer1000]

Downloading someone else's tactics that exploits ME flaws and then complaining that game is "cheating"(in '08) or "completely broken" (in '09) , after you lose or draw match even with that, can barely constitute as "having good knowledge of football", imo.Not that i claim that i have one either.

No one is denying that ME is flawed, specially defensively, but is far from "farcical" or "unplayable". It is also more time consuming , then let's say FM 06 or 05, but not harder by much or at all.

But , to each of his own i guess.

I take it you mean me?

Obviously like a lot of people you have missed the whole point, which is that the game is still just as easy, but has coded levellers to make it appear harder instead of a stronger and better ME.

I did initially call this a cheat, but realise now that if it was'nt there the game would be even easier than it is.

[mlp071]

I take it you mean me?

Obviously like a lot of people you have missed the whole point, which is that the game is still just as easy, but has coded levellers to make it appear harder instead of a stronger and better ME.

I did initially call this a cheat, but realise now that if it was'nt there the game would be even easier than it is.

I agree that game is as just easy as before(i have been saying all the time myself), and there are some things that are used to 'help" AI to maintain at least some level of credibility and competition. Problem is that most of those AI "aids" were originally(very likely) planned to be quick fix , but they never got replaced by better code. So now we got bunch of them and they are very visible because of it( i am seeing some same issues that i was seeing in FM 07).

My only argument is that game is still playable, at least much more playable then 08 was.And again that is flawed , fully agree. My hair raises when i see my strikers doing 1v1 against AI over and over again or when i see AI changing positioning 15+ times in less then 10 minutes of game.

However , i found that most of the problems are related to AI sides , because i as human manage to work around those flaws in my defense.In 50+ games i had AI scoring against me by ball over my defensive players maybe 3-4 times at most , and even then it was my mistake that allowed that, for example.

[ndebergerac]

As a player of the series since around 95/96, I also have to admit that I've found FM2009 a whole new ball game compared to even FM2008.

I don't really believe that the tactical side of the game has necessarily become more complex, it's pretty much the same sliders/options as before. My concern is more that the tactics have become more about cracking the codes of the game, rather than genuine tactical knowledge. For so many people, myself included, it seems to be more a case of trial and error until something works, rather than understanding WHY something works.

I'm still a fan of the series and will most likely purchase the next version, but at the same time I don't want to have to spend hours and hours trying to figure out how a 4-4-2 will be successful like I had to this year. I don't believe there is a need for 20 notches on the slider, that's far too many for realism, should there really be a difference between 19 and 20 when it comes to passing or mentality?

At the same time, I don't want crazy formations that easily manipulate the match engine with curved farrows like FM2008. The series, for me, is very much at the "work in progress" stage with the next couple of versions key to its ongoing success. The correct balance between realism and fun seems to have been lost a little.

I am, for the first time, curious as to what the other football manager sims out there have to offer, though I doubt they can yet compete with FM.

p.s. none of my FM playing friends have ever used these boards and are finding this version (and 2008 to a lesser extent) very difficult to get in to.

[Mitja]

The series, for me, is very much at the "work in progress" stage with the next couple of versions key to its ongoing success. The correct balance between realism and fun seems to have been lost a little.

exactly how it feels for me too. if features, and there are quite many of them, that need serious looking at don't get improved, this game will loose all credability in my eyes. i don't remember when was the last time i played more than 1 season...

[tpm]

One of the biggest problems with the games now is you can't just pick up and play. The fact a 50 page guide has been created on the tactics just shows how poorly designed it is. For a game so focused on realism the sliders just don't fit in with that, they have no real basis in real life management.

I really hope fm10 has a complete overhaul on the tactics side. I like the games but fm09 just isn't fun anymore. I don't know if the next patch might improve this once many of the existing bugs get fixed. I really can't find much positive to say about the current game, for me it's going in the wrong direction. More and more features are being added in that add nothing to the game in a case simply detract from the enjoyment, for example press conferences. The amount of times you answer the same questions over and over you don't even have to read them anymore you just know the answer already, very tedious. You can't ever get the assistant to do it as the whole team gets upset so you're forced to keep repeatedly doing this process.

I really hope fm10 focuses more on getting the game enjoyable again and less on adding loads of features that for the most part don't work as they are meant to and aren't fun.

[mlp071]

One of the biggest problems with the games now is you can't just pick up and play. The fact a 50 page guide has been created on the tactics just shows how poorly designed it is. For a game so focused on realism the sliders just don't fit in with that, they have no real basis in real life management.

When did anyone from SI ever stated that this is suppose to be pick up and play? And 50 page guide...i never touched it , if there is one, since really there is not much need for it.

And bottom line is ..i like it , despite all of the flaws (not saying it's perfect), but still makes me use my brain for something else then my RL. And that is all what i want, since "pick up and play" games make me feel like brainless zombie sitting in front of PC and just doing click , click...now my 4 y/o son can do that.

Let me add quote from WWfan (he was answering on question similar to this ).this can maybe clear some things a little. I hope so that i am not taking it out of contest of whole thread by mistake (if i do then i appologize to wwfan)

Black and white statements. My favourite thing!!

If, when managing Man Utd against WBA, you have gone two up by playing scintillating football and dominating in all areas of the pitch, you can open up and go for the jugular. If, however, you have laboured through a scrappy match and managed to scramble a couple home whilst never looking fully convincing at the back, you'd sit on the lead. That would be making a decision based on the situation unfolding in front of you, more commonly known as management.

Before the arguments about the 'impossible to read ME' raise their heads, it can't be because I do it all the time. Personally, I find it pretty obvious to tell the difference from a quality performance to a workmanlike one, and make the requisite changes. I'm not saying it is easy, but it certainly isn't unachievable. At a guess I open up play and go for it (i.e try to turn a 2-0 into a 4 or 5 goal victory) five or six times per season, and haven't yet failed to win comfortably the times I've tried. However, I'm naturally more tactically cautious than risky (plus I don't have the best team in my division), so I more often decide to sit on a two goal lead.

1: It is still not as it should be, but it is moving in the right direction.

2: Why shouldn't the AssMan give you advice? In real life, he'd be there to help talk things through during the match. It is then up to the manager to listenand agree with him or not. Seems a very strange thing to complain about.

3: So, you'd like the AI managers to be goons that take no effort to beat? I'd argue that FM probably isn't a game you should be playing, if that's the case.

Once more, the general consensus in the mods forum is that things are much quieter this year than they have been over the past two editions of FM. There are some erudite and vocal complainers, but there are far fewer destructive threads than there were for FMs 06-08. With most of the user-started polls in this forum also indicating that FM09 is generally regarded as a superior game to its predecessors, I'd argue that you are some way off the mark here.

NB: THis doesn't mean that I think it is a perfect game with a perfect ME. Far from it. However, it pains me to see such biased opinions and subjective evidence being presented as empirically objective logic. I'm all for a good argument. Unfortunately, this isn't one.

[tpm]

At what point did I say anything about not using your brain? My point is the tactics are extremely poor in design. There is not explanation to what the difference in a couple of notches is. For example passing, theres 5 types it shows you in text yet you have 20 notches. What difference do they make? The game doesn't have anyway to tell you. I could chose direct passing at different notches for players, would they play the same or not, well with the current system I would have no way of knowing.

What I was getting at was the tactics screen isn't user friendly. Well designed software should be intuitive. There shouldn't be a need for a 50 page guide to be written. If done correctly you should just be able to go onto it and easily create the sort of tactic you want without have to resort to guess work. If I want my wingers to cut inside I want to be able to do that not have to move 5 different sliders tick some boxes and hope for the best.

[Insert_Goal_Here]

I got some new shoes today, The Op was good and from then on it was a downward slope

[DLH]

Is the 'community' isolating the majority ?

This is a question that SI surely is interested in. SI is in business to make money and they do that by selling copies of FM. They strike me as being good business minds and customer service oriented. If SI only sold the game to the people who frequent this forums the FM series would cease to exist. They surely do a fair amount of research beyond monitoring these forums to determine what their customer base wants from FM.

People will vote their approval of the game by spending their hard earned money to buy FM or not. I do not know the sales figures for FM but if as has been suggested that the series is still selling well, then I would not expect SI to make any significant changes from the direction they are moving the FM series. If sales of FM start to decrease drastically that will be a red flag to indicate that the masses are not happy with the direction the game has taken.

FM2008 was my first game in this series. I am amazed at the depth and quality of this game. However, I find myself playing FM2009 much less than last years version. It seems I am on these forums more than I am actually playing the game. I enjoy the team building/player acquisition aspects much more than the match day/tactical side of the game. I find that I am forced to spend more time with the match day/tactical aspects in the '09 version of FM. My hope for the 2010 version is that those of us who are tactically challenged will get more help from within the game itself. It would also eliminate some frustration to get some feedback on why your side is underachieving at times when they seemingly should be succeeding. My 2 cents.

[anagain]

Yeh point taken.

I think SI is isolating a lot of people by pumping out half finished products every single year.

I for one have had enough.

If the game was half finished then you wouldn't be able to play it. Relate facts not your unbackable opinions. It astonishes me the number of people who post comments about the development of a game when they have no idea what they are talking about.

Add to that my astonishment at someone commenting on my age when they know not the slightest thing about me. I could be 12 and I'd come across as infinitely more mature than you are doing so.

As it happens I was playing Pong when it was a marvel of modern technology and I was way out of the nappies you mentioned before Kevin Toms' Football Manager hit the shelves.

Not that age really matters.

[anagain]

Talking tactics , i for one hate the sliders.

FM has always and always will be at base a maths game.

If you can work the calculations and get the "winning formula" to pardon the pun you will crack the game at any and every level.

Emphasis on the sliders and numbers take this futher into the realms of mathmatical calculations and futher away from "sports sim"

My favourite ever FM / CM feature which was only ever in one or 2 games was the ability to give players on pitch orders and tell them exactly where to be when the ball was in a specific point on the pitch and then you had another option in possesion and off posession.

With this you could place your pace striker in danger areas regardless of play or keep back your sweeper regardless of play.

I sorely miss this option and feel the game is becoming more of a maths sim than a sports game.

To a degree I'll agree with you there. The 'with position' and 'without position' feature was great and I believe CM are bringing it back. That will be a kick up the behind for SI, and they may well feel that they have to do something big to counter it. Whether that something big is a huge streamlining of the tactics system or the return of the old feature is anyones guess.

SI will have time to judge as to whether CMs feature works before they have to include it to keep up.

Of course I said I agree with you to a degree. What I don't go with is FM being a maths game. There's no more maths in FM than there is knowing a number sequence. The tactics sliders are just a line of numbers and all you need to know is that 2 is greater than 1. My nephew knows that and he's not even 3.

There was a time when you could learn played out moves on the pitch, and may see a sequence of events. That time was the commentary years. I don't think that you can predict happenings on the pitch now. Everything is different.

I really don't think it's maths.

[anagain]

One of the biggest problems with the games now is you can't just pick up and play. The fact a 50 page guide has been created on the tactics just shows how poorly designed it is. For a game so focused on realism the sliders just don't fit in with that, they have no real basis in real life management.

To me someones need to write a guide shows just how well made and realistic FM can be. It warrants examination of its' finer points over 50 whole pages.

[Kewell08]

Agreed with Anagain. Top flight managers have to do a year-long theory course, TTF is nothing by comparison I haven't read it anyway, for 08 or 09 (not having played versions before that), and I find the game easy and fun to play.

And I'm 15, so don't worry about the "how will the teenagers figure it out?". If they really want to play, they'll figure it out. I have a friend who's pretty average at school and not that smart but good at FM, tweaking his tactics and figuring out what is going on. You just have to -want- it.

Great thread btw.

[Rupal]

It's struck me that a surprisingly large number of posts have defended FM on the grounds that it isn't unplayable. That really isn't a great recommendation, you know! A game can be playable and still rank bad.

I believe that the game is beginning to suffer from over complexity. There are a lot of variables and more seem to be added with each edition. As a number of these aren't actually particularly well done (press conferences and team talks spring to mind, where the procedure is either tediously repetitive or where there is a 'lottery' element about the choice you make - why on earth should it normally be disastrous to tell your team you are 'pleased' when you are 2 goals up for goodness' sake??), it means that the game becomes less responsive to one's direct tactical input.

The tactical system is quirky. Even the TT&F 'bible' is confusing - mentality differences should be 1.....or 2 or everyone should have the same mentality at 11 or......etc, etc, depending upon whether you are modelling your tactics on Wenger or O'Neill or Keegan.......or Uncle Tom Cobleigh and all. To claim that in some way it's a virtue that you need to look at its 50 pages seems very strange to me.

The ME is poor. Whether one describes the various lunacies committed by players as 'bugs' or not is almost irrelevant. The fact is that the more that one looks at the matches, the more dissatisfied one becomes.

The tendency amongst some is to accuse those who criticise the game as being 'bad losers'. It is assumed that such people are tactically inept and just want an easy win. They have no evidence to support this assumption but I see it trotted out time and time again. Or, in similar vein, such people are told that they are 'no brainers' or words to that effect.

Just for the record, I have managed Stenhousemuir to Scottish Div 1 and am unbeaten in my current save with an Italian Serie 2C side predicted to end 15th. I only make this point because of my previous paragraph.

If FM is to progress then it needs to take people's genuine concerns on board. It's always easier to listen to people who DON'T criticise but that's a dangerous way to behave. The 'community' should be listened to but so should those with a different perspective.

[Lower League Only]

If the game was half finished then you wouldn't be able to play it. Relate facts not your unbackable opinions. It astonishes me the number of people who post comments about the development of a game when they have no idea what they are talking about.

Add to that my astonishment at someone commenting on my age when they know not the slightest thing about me. I could be 12 and I'd come across as infinitely more mature than you are doing so.

As it happens I was playing Pong when it was a marvel of modern technology and I was way out of the nappies you mentioned before Kevin Toms' Football Manager hit the shelves.

Not that age really matters.

Then why are you drinking the god damn cool aid ?

Follow the link to the Midfield thread.

Shows you a number of reasons as to why this causes enough problems to make the game un-playable in the long run.

[andyinuk]

In many way, I think it's the older fans that has a problem adapting to the newer series, rather than the newcomers. The older players usually have less time to spend in the games than we had before when we are younger, so we get less patient when things are not working out in the game. Losing a match certainly annoy me a lot more nowadays than a few years ago when i was a student. Mainly because these days I only have half an hour here and half an hour there to play the game, so I don't necessary have the time to develop a tactics which should take a several match to see the effects.

[neilb242]

As as been said, difficulty levels would solve peoples problems, but I just can't see a feasible way to implement this. Best way I can see is have an options page where you can tick/untick what you want i.e press conferences - yes/no and so on. But then of course that opens problems up with how the whole game pans out, how the effect of not having press conferences or having them switched on. Its probably all too complex.

Like so many others I used to play the old CMs of days past. I always could get straight into those games, wasn't aware of forums, tactics downloads etc. I think the only time I did anything on line was to download an update.

FM08 was my first 'modern' version of the game. It took me so long to get into, like 6 months or so, and I needed help from these forums. At least when I did, I really got going, and felt the love return for the series. There were still many problems though, and I always felt that I would have one career game but wouldn't be interested in using what I leant in subsequent career games.

Because I got into it, I faithfully went out and bought FM09. 6 months on, I've still not really even got beyond pre season, but unlike last year, when I really wanted to get going but wasn't at first inspired, I can't see myself ever playing a long game on 09.

Now in relation to this community, as anywhere there are people who have pleasure from acting high and mighty, or just coming on here to insult. But in general I found plenty of people, new and older members willing to offer help, and that is appreciated. But I have seen members also obviously not listening to others, not seeing their point. Personally I'd love a game that had the same playability as around CM 00/01. But also I know I'd miss many of the current features. I've seen people demanding the game to be more complex, harder and so on. Thats what they want, no compromise. Well, fair enough, but thats one person. And so it goes in the other direction, with people wanting it more simple and quicker/easier. I'd like to see more of a compromise in future editions.

09 feels still like a test version of the game. I keep seeing people saying 'oh well it'll improve next year'. Thats all well and good, but I want to buy a game that is as good as it can be now. If something isn't ready, don't put it in. If you want to test it, use this community to do so. The 3-d engine, I cannot like, I understand how complex it is just to get to the point its reached, but it still looks and acts awfully. I'm pleased SI keep looking at ways to improve, it would be worrying if they didn't. But I can't get into a game that feels like a test for the next years version. I know thats kinda how every year is, but to me this year feels even more so.

This community is a good thing, and its good for the series that there are so many people who care passionately about it. But you have to remember that everyone is different, what you want is not what everyone else wants. This game has always been associated as a bit geeky to those that don't get it, you see in reviews "its like a glorified spreadsheet." But if you get into it, its sucks you in good and proper. I'm just finding it harder to be sucked in this year, maybe because the community hardcore has convinced SI to go the more complex route. I know personally that if the game was made 'harder' or more detailed to the point where it no longer felt like a game, then I won't be buying again. And no, I don't want to buy CM or FIFA. I wish people wouldn't say that. we love FM, we just want our own perfect version. So next time someone says they want it easier or whatever, at least try to see their side of it.

[Ryds]

Civilization is very formulaic and you can therefore always work out why something has happened. The amount of resources gathered, population growth, building speed, and so on can all be worked out exactly and there is no random element. Even with battles it tells you the % probability of victory.

FM09 on the other hand is not like this. You can be on a good run then suddenly you won't score for several games, even against weak opposition. Strikers with easy chances will miss where previously they would score. Changing personnel doesn't help. Is this due to the AI working out your tactics, bad team talks, players not getting on, fitness, morale, something else? The cause of people's unhappiness is that they can't tell.

I'm terrible at FM09. I have tried my own tactics and training or downloaded ones. I follow the advised (on this forum) team talks. Yet as Palace I struggle to get in the top half of the table despite a media prediction of 3rd (with 9.2).

This is clearly down to me. Others cope and I don't. But the point is that if there is no feedback to say why I'm doing so badly then I can't really improve. I don't want to be able to win everything easily, but I want to be able to do OK. As I can't I have (as of today) given up playing the game. I'll restart when 9.3 is released, but if I can't get to grips with it then they'll lose a customer for FM10 (especially if the CM09 demo is good).

That is exactly how I feel also. I have won it all with my fav Championship team but I could only do it by using and slightly tweaking moj's role theory tactics. Every now and again, when I'm feeling confident that I know the game, I will attempt to create my own tactic and it is always rubbish.

I just cannot reconcile the fact that I do (think at least) know all about how sliders, instructions, mentality, harmony etc come together to create a good tactic but when I logically try to do it, they don't work.

It really does my head in tbh, what is it I'm missing?!! If I was a new player to the series I would (as I actually did when 09 was released) come on here and say that the game is illogical, unrealistic, unintuitive etc etc, so I can understand where these people are coming from when you see those posts/replies - I now understand that it is in fact me -I am rubbish at making tactics for FM09, but I know loads about real life football tactics.

That is I think the main frustration, the gulf between what people expect from real life football knowledge and the representation on it in FM.

Now the 'isolation' I feel is from all the people who are able to master the game (thankfully a lot of them come here to help such as me), I think they have insulated SI from real feedback about the direction the series has taken because they are great at FM, understand it and get a lot from it, and that has clouded the feedback that SI have recieved, sending this game down a path that a lot of people are taking issues with.

[wwfan]

I think people are over-estimating the influence the community has on development. SI draw some inspiration from the forums, but they have been pursuing the same vision for years now. In the three-four years I have been providing feedback, only once has something I suggested become part of the game, and that only after much internal and external debate in SI and the FML forums. As far as I know, the tactical system has never been influenced at all in those years, bar the above mentioned removal of arrows, and my feedback has largely been reactive to the changes made internally (i.e the increased sensitivity of mentality). The community has only ever tried to better explain FM as it became more and more complex, not to make it more and more complex. For example, removing arrows actually reduces the complexity of tactical instrutions, as it is one less input, but because people relied on them to 'undo' the ME, it seems that the sliders have become more complicated, not less. Actually, they are working pretty much exactly as they were in FM07, just without arrows. However, it meant that sliders needed more careful descriptions, because people suddenly had to understand tactics holistically and couldn't use arrows to patch/exploit ME holes. The community reacts to that and provides it. The T&T forum is producing some wonderful stuff right now, way, way better than it did during 08.

I think the real issue here is in how FM is being conceptualised by the developers. Historically, it has been a learning simulation in which they give users the tools and a description of the tools and let them get on with using them. However, as it has become more complex, simply supplying tools isn't enough. You need to add conceptualisations of the tools in holistic action and in context for them to have any use whatsoever. FM has tipped in balance from just requiring descriptions of tools to needing conceptualisations of management systems, which was always going to happen, but SI haven't caught up with the changed requirements as yet. For a management simulation, there needs to be a fine balance between giving away too much and not giving enough information. With FM09, SI have slipped into the latter position. I don't think we can blame them for this. It's a fine balance and every little step can tip you over the edge.

Those involved in making the game will not have the required distance from it to know when the balance is shifting. They know its mechanics, so, naturally, they understand how it works and aren't able to conceptualise in advance what the user base needs. This is a pretty standard issue in product development. Things that they see as obvious will be totally masked to the user base. As such, it almost needed external eyes and ideas to make explicit the roadblock they were facing. TT&F has expanded upon the tactical concepts that were driving development and pulled individual slider explanations into a holistic methodology in which various different playing patterns are conceptualised. It has almost certainly achieved it in a better manner than SI employees could manage simply because it was external to their processes and thus not blinded by them. The enthusiasm of user response to TT&F will ensure that future tactical directions will focus on rounded conceptualisations of tactics rather than explaining individual sliders, which is exactly what the game needs to take it to the next level.

The other issue people have is the ME and its perceived paucity. Although I'll argue as to its general excellence all day, I accept it is and always will be flawed, and that many of the bugs people report exist and cause much frustration. However, damning the ME as 'terrible', 'nothing like real football', having 'coded levelers', and programmed by people who have 'don't understand football' etc, etc, is not going to get SI to listen to you. ME feedback is a complicated task, which requires picking tiny little errors in one area that impact upon another. Stating 'there are two many one on ones' or 'I dominate statistically and thus should nearly always win' doesn't help at all. You have to work out why there are too many, which might mean discovering five or six causal factors that, at first glance, wouldn't seem related to an over abundance of one on ones at all. Big picture obserations are useless. Detailed, exact feedback, with pkms uploaded to the bug servers, will get you listened to and the bugs fixed. Big picture moaning will isolate your thoughts from ever getting the attention they might deserve.

[Mitja]

there were and still are good debates, plenty of feedback, detailed, constructive feedback, tons of pkms were uploaded and all that. (eventhough i don't understand why some PKM needs to be uploaded when the problem is obvious after 2 matches) FM has achieved high levels of (cosmetical due to features not working) complexity. but they don't listen to us (well, why would they anyway), almost nothing has been changed (tactics, training, teamtalks, transfers, interaction, AI, regens, ) or impovements are almost marginal (arrows gone, what else?). what we got in last couple ov FMs? facegen, 3D? boring press conferences? new colourfull form system, what else?

i have some understanding for SI but i really don't believe your post reflects their thinking. unfortunatly.

[Mitja]

double post

[Golden28]

I totally agree with the OP.

I have played CM and FM for nigh on 10 years now and am finding that, these days, in order to have any success I need to read and digest page upon page of posts from WWFan, MattBuck and the like. I personally don't mind this as I have plenty of time on my hands and also have an obsessive compulsive desire to be successful at FM.

And using their help (especially Matts teamtalk tactics) I have become very successful on a regular basis.

However, back to topic. From a new players persepective it must be mind boggling trying to piece together a winning tactic/team. The whole sliders issue is a major concern for most (and me) and I really think needs to be addressed. It is far too ambiguous and 'finnicky'

Example, creative freedom. Should be treated as a direct instruction, as if you were talking to the player, 3 options would suffice ie; 1. Be extravagant as you want son 2. Look to use your flair, but try the simple ball if in doubt 3. Play it nice and simple, no risky stuff.

This kind of player interaction could be applied to all instructions that require multiple slider ticks, such as mentality. I think it would add much more immersion into the game rather than clicking 3 ticks to the right or 7 ticks to the left.

If I had a player such as C.Ronaldo I could say "Be as extravagant as you want" if we were chasing a game and needed to find a goal and then, if we were ahead by 2, could bring Owen Hargreaves on and say "Play simple, no risky stuff" This to me, is so much easier and more sensible/logical than clicking Ronaldo's creative freedom 2 notches from the right and then clicking Hargreaves down several notches. It's too ambiguous and leaves you second guessing yourself, thinking, should I have clicked it three notches instead of two?

As I said, I'm not complaining as I'm one of the lucky ones that has got the hang of this game. I just think that over the years the game has become almost too in depth and has taken away from what is the essence of football management, giving 11 men simple instructions to play a simple game. A successful team is more about fitness, morale and talent than crazily over tinkered tactic screens that make you tweak and tweak little sliders until you finally chance upon the correct one for any given match.

I say let's bring FM back to basics tactically and focus more on the mentality side of things. Fergie is no tactical genius. He buys very good players, plays them in their proper positions, but most importantly, gets it into their heads that they are unstoppable. He certainly does not tell Wayne Rooney to play seven clicks here and two clicks there. He would say, your'e up front with Berbatov. Drop into midfield when possible to pick up the ball and look to make things happen, play your natural game. It really isn't (and shouldn't) be much more compicated than that.

[wwfan]

there were and still are good debates, plenty of feedback, detailed, constructive feedback, tons of pkms were uploaded and all that. (eventhough i don't understand why some PKM needs to be uploaded when the problem is obvious after 2 matches) FM has achieved high levels of (cosmetical due to features not working) complexity. but they don't listen to us (well, why would they anyway), almost nothing has been changed (tactics, training, teamtalks, transfers, interaction, AI, regens, ) or impovements are almost marginal (arrows gone, what else?). what we got in last couple ov FMs? facegen, 3D? boring press conferences? new colourfull form system, what else?

i have some understanding for SI but i really don't believe your post reflects their thinking. unfortunatly.

All bugs need pkms. It could be a rare bug that your combination of sliders/hardware configuration is causing that simply doesn't occur in everybody/anybody else's matches. Therefore, uploading a pkm detailing the bug and its time stamp is necessary. It might also be that what you are complaining about is the effect, not the cause, of a different issue. Allowing the programmer access to the times at which it happens will help him pinpoint exactly what is going wrong. As I suggested above, one on ones might have 6 determining factors that need chasing down. The more examples of the bug happening, the more likely each will be solved.

Personally, I don't think the ME was sophisticated enough to need a new tactical interface until now, which is probably why it hasn't been a high priority. When you can destroy the AI simply by dragging a few weird arrows around, fixing that comes first. Now the ME is stable and its holes marginal (despite what others might say) then perhaps it is time for a new tactical system. Some of Paul's recent posts have hinted as much.

@ Golden28: The function of the sliders is to translate such instructions into the ME. That this translation is overly ambiguous has been discussed ad infinitum. How ambiguous it should be is something that causes considerable disagreement.

[Bababui]

I think the really big issue here is the Sega/SI philosophy: Play the game our way or dont play at all.

If the game came with more options/ways to play, they could satisfy a far wider swath of customers. For some reason, SI are dead set against letting people tweak the way they want to play.

Please, SI, keep this difficult, hard core gameplay; but also add other options for people who want to play the game differently.

[Guest Shogizzle]

This poster is bang on. I've played this game since CM93 and i have to say that i really feel like throwing this one in the bin. I've lost count of the amount of times i've given up and restarted only to give up in sheer frustration. I introduced my flatmate to FM for 08 last year, he's not a regular PC user or gamer but loves football and picked it up immediatley, but this just baffled him. The points the original poster makes are completly valid and only the sycophantic fan boys will have the neck to disagree (as usual). I've been thru all the TT+F which seemed to make only a slight difference as (IMO) my tactics were not bad already. But ultimately it seems if tactical failure doesnt get you then injuries or something else will.

I believe SI need to take a year out and come back in 2011 with a properly completed, fully developed, non-patch requiring BUG FREE game similiar to the classic genius of years gone by we all fell in love with. I wont stand for another year of a game which comes out with pap like this - As spurs manager, i had this run of results - ManU (a) win, Arsenal (h) win, Chelsea (a) draw, Hull (h) Lose, Wigan (h) lose. Now i have a good spurs team! 7 points out of 9 against top teams then pumped by at home by wigan + hull!! Get it sorted or thanks for the memories.

WE DESERVE BETTER.

[thesandman]

......Even when it came to the activation fiasco that was FM 09 launch, Miles et al put up their hands and apologised for the mess up and gave their assurances that they would take a good hard look at the process and try to deliver a much better launch for FM 2010.

In my books, SI have never been known for belligerently messing about with their customer base really. They know the customers have made them into what they are today and I think they would cherish that too much to throw it all away.

Well, that's fine. But in my case it was a case of terrible timing. The last game I enjoyed was CM 01/02 after getting hooked on 93/94. AFter the fiasco that was the release of CM4, I said at the time that I would never, ever buy another SI produced game after the woeful game, and IMO, the poor way it was handled by SI.

I bought FM08 second hand after getting 'the itch' again, with an eye to getting FM09 when released. Well, after following the release of FM09, and my last abiding memory being CM4..... all I can say is not much has changed.

Having said that, I'm enjoying 08. But still doubtful I'll buy another one.

FM is never going to be scientifically beatable, the issue at the moment is a lack of intuitiveness of where you're going wrong.

Couldn't agree more. Lack of actual usable feedback is the problem. Simple console games provide more feedback - particularly visually about the match - than FM.

PES 6 provides an image post game of the parts of the pitch where play took place by shading sections of the pitch - all over the pitch. Not just a 10 year old bar graph split into 3 parts that do nothing to show if a side spreads it wide, or just bangs it through the middle.

It also has a display that shows where on the pitch all shots were taken from, and the preceding pass. Info like that would be golden in FM - sadly, it's nowhere to be seen. YOu could see in an instant where the shots (and goals) are coming from for both sides. Easy to fix too many long shots - or not enough etc. Now in FM you either watch the whole game, or guess. (and even then, have to remember or watch replays).

Example, creative freedom. Should be treated as a direct instruction, as if you were talking to the player, 3 options would suffice ie; 1. Be extravagant as you want son 2. Look to use your flair, but try the simple ball if in doubt 3. Play it nice and simple, no risky stuff.

... He buys very good players, plays them in their proper positions, but most importantly, gets it into their heads that they are unstoppable. He certainly does not tell Wayne Rooney to play seven clicks here and two clicks there. He would say, your'e up front with Berbatov. Drop into midfield when possible to pick up the ball and look to make things happen, play your natural game. It really isn't (and shouldn't) be much more compicated than that.

Couldn't agree more. Managers - even super hands on -drill their teams how to play (formation, positioning etc), and gave them basic instructions to follow during the game.

The current way of getting football ideas into the teams with the multitude of sliders and options available is mind boggling, and ridiculously complex.

When you can destroy the AI simply by dragging a few weird arrows around, fixing that comes first. Now the ME is stable and its holes marginal (despite what others might say) then perhaps it is time for a new tactical system. Some of Paul's recent posts have hinted as much.

@ Golden28: The function of the sliders is to translate such instructions into the ME. That this translation is overly ambiguous has been discussed ad infinitum. How ambiguous it should be is something that causes considerable disagreement.

It seems crazy that SI are so worried about people 'cracking' the ME - and then give them so many tools to do it.

If a player wants to 'crack' the ME by having some super bizarro formation and tactic - then IMO, that's up to them. So what? I try and play the game realistically, but the game is mired in becoming some sort of maths war, and is moving further and further away being enjoyable.

I want to tell my defenders to just bl00dy defend, tackle hard, and welly it whenever they get near the ball.

EG - what is the difference between direct passing 1 notch above mixed - or one notch below long ball???? Does a manager say "play the ball direct, but no passes over 35 metres..no hang on, slide one more.. 38 metres.." - or just tell the team to play a direct style of game?

[Rupal]

Whilst I always respect wwfan's posts very much, I really am uncertain here about whether he has fully taken on board the problem which I, for one, have with the match engine. I'm not sure that it's altogether a matter of bugs.

Put very simply, the match engine does not produce realistic football. Far too many goals are scored as a result of bad play rather than good. So you get a succession of basic player mistakes such as missed interceptions or DCs rushing to tackle and leaving gaps, players standing still and allowing other players to take the ball from them, combined with irrational player behaviour such as running away from the ball thus allowing an opponent to reach it first, or full backs running parallel with the opposing winger for ages before getting out of his way to allow a cross.....etc, etc. There appear also to be weaknesses countered by other weaknesses; for example, the ME doesn't seem capable of producing sufficient goals through co-ordinated play and so instead, to end up with a realistic final result, allows too many simple one on ones and an unrealistic number of misses when these arise.

Are these bugs? If so, they surely can't be something that should have been missed in testing as they are extremely frequent in occurrence and widespread across the board of FM players, judging from the number of times that they have been mentioned in posts. I would be honestly amazed if SI were unaware of them before the game came out. If they were, then it shows an inadequate testing regime before marketing. For goodness' sake, you only have to watch a match for 5 minutes to see the problems, it's not a matter of something which only happens very rarely.

Most of us know little about game design and can't help to analyse why these things happen, but happen they do. It's really not altogether fair to say that it doesn't help for us to point these weaknesses out because that's all that we can do. With great respect, the examples which I have given are so obvious that I don't think it's a simple question of 'ah, here's a bug, let's provide a pkm'. Put very simply, if SI weren't aware of these things before the game came out, they certainly must be by now and it's up to them to sort them out.

It honestly seems to me to be more a question of a basically inadequate ME which needs a fundamental revision rather than a basically good ME which is flawed by a number of bugs. But then, I'm not a game designer, so what do I know?

[Officer Rex Bishop]

I've never played FM before, and I've led Bolton to a 7th and 5th place finish. It can't be that bad.

[Hammer1000]

I am at the point now in which i just cannot watch the matches at all, such is the ludicrousness of the gameplay.

I'll set the game off and then scour the net for five minutes, or even read a book, checking back in at HT to make any necessary changes.

As for the way the AI calculates results, well thats just as laughable, even between AI teams.

For example, i was looking at Wigan in a recent save who had a great start and won their first 5 games, i checked their match stats and they were lucky to get a point let alone 15. I check again after another 5 games and they have lost them all, but when i check the stats this time, they could easily have won those matches???

This epitomises the game for me in its current condition.

[CaptainPlanet]

PES 6 provides an image post game of the parts of the pitch where play took place by shading sections of the pitch - all over the pitch. Not just a 10 year old bar graph split into 3 parts that do nothing to show if a side spreads it wide, or just bangs it through the middle.

I think this could be a good suggestion for an improvement.

[Serdar]

"People want to win games, but they want to feel like they've earned the right to win them." by CaptainPlanet

This sums it up nicely. I think it is not about the amount of options and sliders the game has. The problem is; feedback we get from the game is sometimes exteremely weak or empty. Even when we are winning in the game we can not be confident about do we have optimal traning schedules or do we have optimal slider values.

I can live with losing, I can even enjoy it as long as I know what went wrong and I have reasonable ideas to improve it but recently in FM many things I(and all the FM players I personally know) do are without proper reasons. I have control over transfer market, budget, match day squad, high level tactical scheme but thats mostly it.

I dont feel like I'm doing anything meaningful when it comes to training, media interaction, player moral, individual tactical options, etc.... and this is mostly because I just can not observe the affect of my changes either in a good or bad way. One can suggest, ok just skip them and play with what you like. Actually I'm sure thats what most player are doing in the end, but then after a while you start to feel sorry about it because all these features are there but you just dont how to use them and it just feels wrong. Looking manual does not help since it does not mention much about these features, it rather suggests us to use our common sense. Some of the players (I believe minority) come to community for answers and even after reading topics for hours it is not easy to get clear answers, not to mention it should not be neccessary for us to come here and learn how to play the game.

How to solve this? I think answer can be found by the talent SI has. They developed this masterpiece and I'm sure they can fix it, they just need to recognise the issue. My guesses are; much better Assistant manager, more detailed tip-texts all over the interface, reasons which can be directly linked to available options when the moral and stats of players are going up/down, and maybe just remove some of the options which are not adding value to game, etc... Dont get me wrong, I dont have the magic formula to improve these issues and I dont need to have. I believe in SI to have it and thats why I support them and their product with my ~40€ a year. I'm sure they can solve these all if and when they want and prioritise it.

On my behalf I can not say if the game is difficult or not, is ME and tactical settings are good or bad because I just dont think most of us are capable of understanding how to play this game with all the features included and thats something SI really needs to focus on. The game can be hard, complex, challanging and deep but user interaction(both input and feedback) must be very clear amd simple.

It can be hard to win but it should not be hard to play.

[Ruskij]

I think the handbook should be improved. Maybe there should be an improved online manual (e.g. the "help"-section in the game) where you can study some of the advice given by developers, testers, etc. That would help the user to get a better overview on the game. The manual delivered with the software ist quite poor, given the complexity of the game.

[Golden28]

I want to tell my defenders to just bl00dy defend, tackle hard, and welly it whenever they get near the ball.

EG - what is the difference between direct passing 1 notch above mixed - or one notch below long ball???? Does a manager say "play the ball direct, but no passes over 35 metres..no hang on, slide one more.. 38 metres.." - or just tell the team to play a direct style of game?

Spot on. Then, if John Terry screws the ball two yards away, I know it's because he f****d it up, not because I forgot to set the slider seven clicks to the right.

[AmA Deo]

@topic

I like this thread because I have thought about the same thing many times.

To answer the question I would say Yes, because of two things. The first is that the game has become pretty complicated. The second thing I think are the loadings. To play 10-20 hours for a season - you have to be dedicated to play this game, and time is vital - if you don't got it FM will be forgotten : - (

Among my friends I'm almost the only one who play the game - my friends and I started like 10+ years ago, so we have some experience. It's definetly my two theories that have gotten my friends out of their 'FM addiction' (who dared to think that people could get out of a 'CM/FM addiction'?!). Personally I haven't played the game for 1-2 months now - I'm very time limited and therefore I will only create a new savegame when the new patch is out...

[Scath]

This is my take on the way the game is now, it's not going to perfect, but it's coming from my own perspective.

I've been playing the game since CM 01/02. Rarely has a game ever been that much fun. It rocked.

Like everyone, I've drifted in and out of the game, I played FM 05 religiously, having been bored by most of the versions preceeding it, and yet 06 failed to catch my attention in the same way.

Where I really began to play the game again was when I ended up going out with a girl who had to live in a different country. This meant often enough I'd be on my laptop, chatting to her on msn or skype etc, and I needed something engrossing that you don't always have to concentrate 100% on. For that reason, FM's ideal. Hence me really getting into it.

In FM 07 I had a tactic that worked wonders for me, it wasn't perfect, but allow me to outline it - I was Barcelona, I played a midfield diamond, DMC, MR/L, AMC and two STs. I used a deep defensive line, direct passing and high tempo. This meant that the ball was being pinged up front to two lethally fast strikers and an equally good AMC by a coterie of magnificent midfielders. It's not the most subtle of tactics, but with the players I had, it worked wonderfully for me. And that seemed to me to be a happy place. I had the right players, a suitable tactic, and therefore, I was winning, constantly.

My problems began to manifest in FM 08 - that was the first time since 01/02 that I ever downloaded a tactic that someone else developed. I just could not find one that worked for me. And I must confess, I was really disappointed by that.

This brings me on to the major problem - not the tactics system, but the implementation of it. The entire system is based on bars, which is logical, but the complexity is not. For example, most people would assume that their strikers should be on attacking mentality, and defenders on defensive - because that's so obvious it hurts. The idea that that creates massive gaps between my players is not what the bar suggests to me. Ergo, a create a seemingly logical tactic, and then my beautifully crafted, meticulously assembled Manchester United/Barcelona/Inter Milan side then loses 5-0 to a third division side. And I end up sitting there in total confusion, without a clue what's happened.

The obvious desire I would have would be a narrower range of options - take mentality - there are 20 (or is it 21?) options for a players mentality. Why so many? Added to that, I need to know what kind of effect they will have. Here's a simple idea - if I have a 4 - 4 - 2 with universal mentality, why not have the game automatically tell me what the distance will be between my various lines of players - and then what that's going to do. Tell me my defence is too close to my midfield and my strikers are isolated. Tell me the defence is on its own and being torn asunder. Tell me there's a great big gap between my left back and centre back and that;s being torn asunder.

I'm not stupid, I know a fair bit about football too. I should be able to do alright. Give me the best players and I should be able to win. Give me average players and I should be able to do averagely. Give me bad players and I should do badly. The manager should only have a proportionate effect, be it 20% 40% 50% or even 90% but it cannot and should not be 100% which appears to be the games way of thinking.

There are two obvious paths to take - either simplify the game, or keep it as complicated as it is, but explain it more. Tell me that the only reason my defence is working is because my centre back has 20 pace which negates teh gap. Or tell me my striker keeps on failing to score because he's not strong enough to take advantage of the balls my team is giving him.

For the record, I love this game. It's as good a simulation of football as I've ever seen. It creates a wonderful footballing world, that can truly engross you. I'm still playing it, but only because I found a tactic someone else devised that works for me, and that saddens me.

[Loversleaper]

After reading a lot of the posts here has got me wondering if people actually forgotten that this is a Computer game. No one here is actually speaking to John Terry or any one else for that matter... you are giving instructions to a computer simulated 'being'. To translate this into 'valuables' the SI have decided that it could be implemented with a Procentage System (the sliders) which then translates onto a ME creating the different scenarios that one could encounter during any given game. This system they built is actually the most logical way that 'components' in the game can be made most fair for all parties envolved (the FM Gamer and the AI). The 20 sliders on the Mentality bar just indicates how much you are Attacking or Defending (procent-wise), and it is NOT a question of "should it be 12 or 13 and how will I know which one it is", it is more a question of 12 in conjuntion with what (other slider) and what is your overall gameplan (are you better or worse than opponent and how much)?

This is not I, Robot we are dealing with here. The system was made (like chess, for example) to be fair. They can simplify this but then many things will be out of our control, which many gamers will find more annoying than ever before. If they do simplify the ME and people still get the same results will only cause the same dilemma that some of you are already in.

I have played other games on the market and I admit I am not good at some of them, I have gotten over it all the same. In World of Warcraft we (some friends and I) failed miserably most of the time and reading the whole thing takes a darn lot longer than this game. In the shooting games I was always dead last and haven't argued that just because I pointed my virtual gun in the right direction I would automatically hit my target...practice makes better. If people can't read a little to understand a more complex game then I don't see the point of a lot of the discusion here. It shouldn't take anybody a degree in anything to read anything in the manual or forums, because if it did then the standard of schooling these days would be alarmingly low. I don't have a degree in anything other than life and I have not read 50 page tactical manuals here or seen any.

I have heard how beautiful and how terrrible the ME is. I think it is a personal matter, but the negative is always more loud in it's nature...

[Golden28]

After reading a lot of the posts here has got me wondering if people actually forgotten that this is a Computer game. No one here is actually speaking to John Terry or any one else for that matter... you are giving instructions to a computer simulated 'being'. To translate this into 'valuables' the SI have decided that it could be implemented with a Procentage System (the sliders) which then translates onto a ME creating the different scenarios that one could encounter during any given game. This system they built is actually the most logical way that 'components' in the game can be made most fair for all parties envolved (the FM Gamer and the AI). The 20 sliders on the Mentality bar just indicates how much you are Attacking or Defending (procent-wise), and it is NOT a question of "should it be 12 or 13 and how will I know which one it is", it is more a question of 12 in conjuntion with what (other slider) and what is your overall gameplan (are you better or worse than opponent and how much)?

This is not I, Robot we are dealing with here. The system was made (like chess, for example) to be fair. They can simplify this but then many things will be out of our control, which many gamers will find more annoying than ever before. If they do simplify the ME and people still get the same results will only cause the same dilemma that some of you are already in.

I have played other games on the market and I admit I am not good at some of them, I have gotten over it all the same. In World of Warcraft we (some friends and I) failed miserably most of the time and reading the whole thing takes a darn lot longer than this game. In the shooting games I was always dead last and haven't argued that just because I pointed my virtual gun in the right direction I would automatically hit my target...practice makes better. If people can't read a little to understand a more complex game then I don't see the point of a lot of the discusion here. It shouldn't take anybody a degree in anything to read anything in the manual or forums, because if it did then the standard of schooling these days would be alarmingly low. I don't have a degree in anything other than life and I have not read 50 page tactical manuals here or seen any.

I have heard how beautiful and how terrrible the ME is. I think it is a personal matter, but the negative is always more loud in it's nature...

A salient point, well made.

You must agree though that all the sliders have taken away a little from the immersion factor of this simulation. A newer, more intuitive list of player and team instructions cannot be too far in the future. One that actually can make you think you are talking to John Terry.

After all, that's what simulations by their very nature try to do...blur the lines between reality and the virtual world.

[Mitja]

After reading a lot of the posts here has got me wondering if people actually forgotten that this is a Computer game. No one here is actually speaking to John Terry or any one else for that matter... you are giving instructions to a computer simulated 'being'. To translate this into 'valuables' the SI have decided that it could be implemented with a Procentage System (the sliders) which then translates onto a ME creating the different scenarios that one could encounter during any given game. This system they built is actually the most logical way that 'components' in the game can be made most fair for all parties envolved (the FM Gamer and the AI). The 20 sliders on the Mentality bar just indicates how much you are Attacking or Defending (procent-wise), and it is NOT a question of "should it be 12 or 13 and how will I know which one it is", it is more a question of 12 in conjuntion with what (other slider) and what is your overall gameplan (are you better or worse than opponent and how much)?

This is not I, Robot we are dealing with here. The system was made (like chess, for example) to be fair. They can simplify this but then many things will be out of our control, which many gamers will find more annoying than ever before. If they do simplify the ME and people still get the same results will only cause the same dilemma that some of you are already in.

I have played other games on the market and I admit I am not good at some of them, I have gotten over it all the same. In World of Warcraft we (some friends and I) failed miserably most of the time and reading the whole thing takes a darn lot longer than this game. In the shooting games I was always dead last and haven't argued that just because I pointed my virtual gun in the right direction I would automatically hit my target...practice makes better. If people can't read a little to understand a more complex game then I don't see the point of a lot of the discusion here. It shouldn't take anybody a degree in anything to read anything in the manual or forums, because if it did then the standard of schooling these days would be alarmingly low. I don't have a degree in anything other than life and I have not read 50 page tactical manuals here or seen any.

I have heard how beautiful and how terrrible the ME is. I think it is a personal matter, but the negative is always more loud in it's nature...

some fair points here but i believe almost every person in this thread understands how sliders work - that it is a value improving with each click. what we're discussing here is it's complexity, realism, interaction with other sliders and so on. it hasn't changed for years now and that's a fact. with other features having (too much) influence on final score, i think it's fair to say tacics are far from being user friendly.

it's defenetly not realistic or user friendly to experiment with 3 or 4 sliders, just to ask team to play posessional football for example. i also agree with people who claim it's stupid that some sliders have 20 notches, creatice freedom, mentality and especially time wasting spring to my mind. some basic football things like double marking, cutting in, coming deep or playing 1-touch football can't be achieved with sldier combination. on the other hand it should be as easy as clicking one tick-box or something. we should had such options included by now. i believe (maybe i'm wrong), by simplyfing things you make life easier and nicer without loosing complexity...

[BARNESDON]

difficulty settings at the start of the game are when you can set your previous experience as international football which would be easy, rite up to sunday league player which would be the hard difficulty setting.

personaly, since 9.2.0 came out, i've found this game alot more fun than 2008.

[GersFan]

The whole sliders issue is a major concern for most (and me) and I really think needs to be addressed. It is far too ambiguous and 'finnicky'

Example, creative freedom. Should be treated as a direct instruction, as if you were talking to the player, 3 options would suffice ie; 1. Be extravagant as you want son 2. Look to use your flair, but try the simple ball if in doubt 3. Play it nice and simple, no risky stuff.

This kind of player interaction could be applied to all instructions that require multiple slider ticks, such as mentality. I think it would add much more immersion into the game rather than clicking 3 ticks to the right or 7 ticks to the left.

If I had a player such as C.Ronaldo I could say "Be as extravagant as you want" if we were chasing a game and needed to find a goal and then, if we were ahead by 2, could bring Owen Hargreaves on and say "Play simple, no risky stuff" This to me, is so much easier and more sensible/logical than clicking Ronaldo's creative freedom 2 notches from the right and then clicking Hargreaves down several notches. It's too ambiguous and leaves you second guessing yourself, thinking, should I have clicked it three notches instead of two?

As I said, I'm not complaining as I'm one of the lucky ones that has got the hang of this game. I just think that over the years the game has become almost too in depth and has taken away from what is the essence of football management, giving 11 men simple instructions to play a simple game. A successful team is more about fitness, morale and talent than crazily over tinkered tactic screens that make you tweak and tweak little sliders until you finally chance upon the correct one for any given match.

I say let's bring FM back to basics tactically and focus more on the mentality side of things. Fergie is no tactical genius. He buys very good players, plays them in their proper positions, but most importantly, gets it into their heads that they are unstoppable. He certainly does not tell Wayne Rooney to play seven clicks here and two clicks there. He would say, your'e up front with Berbatov. Drop into midfield when possible to pick up the ball and look to make things happen, play your natural game. It really isn't (and shouldn't) be much more compicated than that.

Excellent post, Golden28. Strongly agree with everything you have said there.

[qualitystreet]

SI are in a difficult position, if they make the game too easy, too difficult, too random, the top teams being too strong, too weak, there will be complaints. Its how to manage what is a complex world football context/economy with what is reality.

My friend gave me a Rugby 08, not knowing a single thing about the game when I started, I progressed well. The manual was well written, giving tactical hints and tips and I soon learned what I had to do to avoid getting beaten. My sticking points were x,y,z and so you have a chance to work on those points.

I lose so many games on FM09 but still couldn't tell you where I had to improve. I don't know why I won or lost.

Computer games work by giving the user a buzz from success (very often lots of little buzzes over a short time, thats what psycologically makes the game addictive), and providing a challenge which is surmountable.

Another point: I have to agree with sliders frustration, the best way forward for me, would be to have maybe 5 different notches where you could specify how your players played. The main variables in setting up tactics is venue (home or away), strength of opposition (No Chance, underdogs, balanced, favorites, heavy favorites), so 10 different tactics. However, I feel most people would find that dull and like playing that old board game, Wembley.