jmlima

Loba was already doing analytics even before the 90s. And he wasn't the only one. By mid-late 90s analytics were already coming into football. Yes, VHS tape style, but nevertheless. Caveman football really started to end by the late 70s. Heck, even direct football had a basis on percentages so that can potentially already be said to be analytics.

Finally something I actually know about. Funds are complex. You are looking at funding and build times from a perspective. In some countries stadiums are part funded by the taxpayer (don't even ask why...) in other countries, some clubs will get fully subsidized stadiums. If the new stadium is part of an overall larger event (say an Euro), funding happens even quicker. I mean, Euro 2004 had a bucket load of state handouts, and clubs got in massive debt, that they offloaded to the clubs, not the football bits. Some of them are still paying the stadiums, some interest only (!), the stadiums also bust several clubs. This is just to illustrate how complex these things are and how far they are from a 'one solution for all'. The financing bit is, well, better abstracted as FM does not have a chance in hell of ever reproducing the myriad different ways the financing operates. One thing we can say. A club with 100m will not just suddenly throw those 100m into a 100m stadium. They would still finance it over a period of time so, strictly from a cash flow perspective, what you see going out would not be those 100m but the regular payments over the course of many years. Re design and building, you don't need a 4 year build. Again, in some countries, the design can take 6-9 months, approvals can be fiendishly complex (months, years, who knows?) or rubber stamped, depending on country, club, ownership, etc. Design may stagger a bit if the stadium is integrated with the inevitable associated shopping centres, office blocks, resi blocks, and so on. But, a competent and well resourced design team can still pull all of this in under a year (if the brief does not change... which it probably will as investors come on board...). Build time, anything over 2 years and you are slower than you need to be. I mean, depends on size, 2 years for a full blown major stadium, for one of those regional 5-15000 seats affairs, anything over 9 months and it's too slow. In short, yeah, 4 years but from design to completion (not just build). If for an event like an Euro, probably less as things can be compressed, approvals fast-tracked and so on. These days, because the decision on hosting is made a decade in advance, all these things can be properly planned and staggered over a longer period, which makes the process much more cost effective and allows investors to be brought on board in a more effective manner.

Facilities are totally abstracted in FM. They are nothing but an adjective and (presumably) some form of code bonus to development, ticket sales. But, to your point. Facilities can be downgraded easily. It just takes a novel development and presto. To give you an example from stadium design. Your UEFA graded facility can be easily downgraded by the simple action of UEFA changing the standard of what is an UEFA graded facility.

Double bluff! Some 5d chess mastery from Miles.

Uffff. It will be a lean game then. No more pressers, interactions, social media, etc. Actually. That's a great idea.

Yup. They had (or so their story goes) to code it from scratch since the code was with other people (presumably those that did CM4).

He's probably just meaning you win a fur coat for your in game-avatar. You know, for all the Big Mal fans out there.

It's the much expected crossover - Football Pachinko Manager

You did misunderstand.

If they don;t have the rights to put a player in the profile they would not have them to put him on the pitch. As with at least 50% of things in the game, a lot would just be 3d gens, not real images, same as FIFA.

Not sure. CM5 was not that much a break in gaming terms. It was easily recognizable as the same game. This time it seems they are really going for broke into making it a console game first and foremost. I mean, I will probably hate it, which is why I got FM24, but, I understand their plight and it's irrespective if they wanted to do it or not, they had to take this step to move from selling to the declining crusty moaners into selling to the increasing 5mins players. That's the way gaming is going in every single area (even wargaming which the one I know best).

Yeah. I think there's something on that front that could be done with this new push to better the graphics. Even something like having the 3d model of the player on display in their profile page. Alas, you are probably right in your initial guess and might just be progress-by-torturous-cliking.

100% But, we need to qualify the risks. The real risk to SI is not that the users suddenly move en-masse to a competitor product. There is none. They may sell marginally less but, less face it, they have a monopoly on a product with solid demand. Their biggest risk is if Sega Sammy's management decides they are dead wood. Which means, if you have to cut things that may **** 5% of players but that will please your boss because you achieve your (revised) deadline, it shall be done. It's business. I'm actually rather surprised there are not more in-game features going into the 'we are not happy with them so they will be back at a later date' bin. That actually speaks rather highly of how they managed this code transition.

Welcome to a game's forum, where some people will love and post-rationalize every single developer decision, some will hate every decision, some will be non-committal at every opportunity, all whilst the developers try to navigate between 'we don't need to justify any decision' and 'we need to provide an excruciatingly detailed explanation, including some personal anecdotes' to justify a minor and random thing. All been going strong since the internet came to exist.

The argument is pointless but, it made me wonder yet again just how much fake depth really is in the game. How many more things we see and do in the game are meaningless and serve little to no purpose under the hood.

Oh, that's agreed. Someone actually points out the percentage and it's nearly 50% of the database without weight but, my point was that's not the reason given by them to remove it (it prob should have been ages ago but that's another discussion...). In the update they never mention 'lack of data' which, albeit by omission, seems to imply they had data (not all certainly, but let's assume 50% same as with the male database).

Guys, the reason is stated in the blog clearly: It's not related to some kind of conspiracy, nor unavailable data. In fact their statement seems to imply they have the data. (how nobody in their development team seemed to know this very basic anatomical fact is another story)

Interesting point. I was just checking and, in the case of sporting cp, as an example, men's football (sporting cp sad) seems to be an entirely independent unit , which means the female football is tied to the club itself (sporting cp) not to the sporting cp sad. Never realized but beginning to suspect this is going to be quite variable from country to country.

Na.. Actually quite a fan. But no blinkers hence can see the good and the bad.

Big? Ah. Unity is the king of big patches. 1gb, 2gb, 7gb, for a 7gb app is nothing new. Edit - To say, of course, heavily dependent on much you keep updating graphics, sounds and back of the house stuff.

I mean, subscription are associated with being cheaper than buying the full content individually so, unless they break the game into parts, not sure what the subscription would entail. I can see how it can be broken into parts (3d, 2d, analytics, visual content, etc) but it's hard to see this being popular. Having said that, WOTC survived killing entirely an entire online game where people had spent a lot of money. There's no lack of players on their new online game, despite the precedent. I guess fools are easily parted with their money.

You can already move saves between versions.

Well, I use similar gamey tactics for the team talks and team meetings, so... for example, if you start a team meeting, introduce yourself and immediately end the meeting, you always get a positive effect. Truth is, it's very hard if not impossible to prevent people from finding the way to exploit a feature.

Sort of but yeah. You don't own anything in digital only games, most of all those that require a server where 'your' assets are stored. There's always something in the EULA noting that the assets are not your own and can be withdrawn at any time by the provider. Just ask the people that invested in Duels of the Planeswalkers.

Idle 5mins speculation but, they way I would envisage that scenario it would be, in the 'normal' game every single of your pressers would be reduced to a single interaction, but you could not delegate them. In the 'dlc' mode, a development would have been made (and it would have to one heck of a development!) and the pressers would be full bloat and... you could delegate them. So, in 'dlc', there would be two incentives, you would gain the further depth of the pressers and the ability to delegate them... Would this be economically feasible? In this particular instance, doubt it. Can the model be made to work? Yes. Are SI interested / considering this? There are zero indications of that thus far.