jmlima

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.

Yeah, like 90% of the things in this thread this is speculation but, if they really go for mobile / consoles and, a lighter game proves more marketable (not unlikely at all) then I could see more in depth features being behind DLCs, as much as the 1% of total players that post here would cry murder. Again, it's all down to business decisions and cost-benefit analysis. I mean, if you embark of a big change like the one they have embarked on, pretty certain nothing was left off-the-table in terms of ideas to grow the brand and market share. Edit - To say, even in this very same forum there are a not small number of people wanting a more streamlined, less bloated, less filled with fake depth game. So... even the faithful are being converted.

I mean, entirely agree with economic viability but... cannot remember which football management was that had a basic stat analysis pack and you could pay (back then was an external thing) to get a full professional stat analysis pack. Right of the top of my head, same could be done with training and create a club. Probably something could be done with scouting. The in game editor is already a DLC and keeps being released so it must sell in sufficient numbers to be worth the hassle and the pile on steam negative reviews it receives every year.

It has been very well explained before but it's worth repeating, the single biggest advantage of unity is multi-platform deployment and portability. Unity by itself brings no performance or visual enhancement. Prob quite the opposite in some areas, just wait until you are saddled with updates that are the same size as the install.

Sorry, I failed again at explaining my reasoning. You are correct of course, but I was alluding to it being two different games in terms of development. That's where I'm saying they are not. They are variations on a theme. Some people seem to be making a big fuss they are developing two games, I'm pointing out they are not, they are developing variations on a theme.

Ah, I'm with you now. I always took that to be a huge misunderstanding of what they meant. What they are saying (correctly) is that they cannot merely grab the code for man's football, tack-on female players to it and presto. What I always understood they are saying is that the code for female football is derived from man's football (logic) but adds / alters parts as required to make it truly representative (also logic). My view, is this really two games? Not really.