(sic)

Well, let me start off first. Continuing from the last year's version, it's still the same general idea when it comes to the layout. There probably still are a lot of things I want to change and fix. I have to say, I really like the header part from this year's default version, so I'm definitely keeping it. I'm not sure if I'm going to release a skin this year, for a few reasons. Btw, does anyone know if you can resize the data-hub analysis thing? I've barely got it to work, so it fits the entire width of the panel, while being able to scroll down. What I want to do is make it so that a single graph/pie-chart occupies the entire height. The entire thing works really weird, and it's easy to mess it up so it doesn't work at all.

I didn't have such a problem, but it's a bit ridiculous in FM23. That's way too much. This guy isn't Haaland, yet he constantly bags hattricks regularly.

53 goals in a season. I'm fairly sure at least half of them came from balls over the top. It's a bit unreal.

Probably because the game would be even more easy, due to ME issues.

So now that I've played more, I've started noticing certain annoying things in the ME. There are too many balls over the top that result in goals. My striker is on 42 goals, and I still have like 7-8 games left in the season. Too many shots get blocked, then the ball travels in the air for what seems like an eternity, until the GK catches it. Also, not sure if squad planner is bugged or not. I tried removing a player from a position, but he seems to return there after some time, so I have to remove the player again.

It seems like they do it on purpose, when they introduce something new to the ME. Remember a few years ago when they added curved balls? All you could see back then were balls being curved by every player out there, it was so annoying.

It should be the <colour name="title" line, just set the value="rgb(x,x,x)" to whatever you want.

Not an AP, but an AM-S. 5 goals and 2 assists in 4 games. If anything my AMs are performing really well. I've seen through balls in the middle, going either from him or to him.

I like certain things I'm seeing in the ME so far. Players in the wingback position do seem less conservative than before, and they actually push forward earlier. Which makes sense, since they don't have any players in front of them, and they're the width providers. I often struggled with that position, especially in back 3/5 systems, as they were simply not pushing forward early on. IFs/IWs also do seem a bit better. Just certain observations from 2-3 matches that I've played so far. But overall, the game feels exactly the same to play. In previous versions, I felt there have been at least some new features that impacted my gameplay. FM23 so far feels like FM22 with slightly improved UI and ME. I just hope the ME doesn't get ruined on release, like it almost always does.

I usually don't have a long term save, my saves mostly last 2-3 seasons. Usually, Over the span of a year, I do 2 saves that do last for longer, but it's never more than 6-7 seasons. Beta is mostly reserved for the club I support, just doing random bits, mostly trying out new features and tactics. But I don't mind starting a longer save during beta.

ffs I can't buy it until tomorrow can you delay it please, ty

That's because ArenaNet are incompetent when it comes to marketing, trust me I know it They hardly market their game at all, and when they do it's either badly done or hilariously badly done. With good marketing, that game would be a lot more popular than it currently is.

Which is why we're hoping they've already started working on that stuff behind the scenes. Or if they haven't, that they will consider it after seeing the feedback. I'm casually optimistic. You are absolutely right though, and many people do seem to miss that point. Transferring stuff to a new engine isn't easy, and it requires some time. Which is why they should've started doing it already, so that in the near future (2-3 years) we have a brand new game, with a brand new engine to support it. Again, communication would've done wonders here. Just saying we're planning on doing that, don't expect it anytime soon, would've been amazing. Just like what they've done with Women's Football.

Spending 1.5k is ridiculous. If anyone wants to buy a "gaming" system, they should never buy a laptop in the first place. Also, you can get a decent laptop for much cheaper. That's the thing though. They obviously care about visual representation of the game. Hence why they introduced the 3D mode, and why they've made a brand new animation engine last year. But everything about it is just bad for a game in 2022. Animations definitely seem to be better and better, but without textures, lighting, etc. to support that, many of us will continue to play on 2D - because the game still looks bad in 3D. My PC is more than capable of running 3D with max settings, but 3D is horrible. I prefer 2D view anyways, because I can easily see what's going on. But having a decent 3D match representation would definitely encourage me to use it more, at least for highlights, if not for the whole match.

We're using FIFA MANAGER as an example, not FIFA. A lot of us who are talking about graphics have specifically said we DO NOT need the graphics to be on FIFA's level. Nobody's asking for modern AAA game system requirements. Just an improvement to where the game doesn't look like it came out in 2001. This whole discussion contributes to nothing anyways, and we've been going in circles for 20 pages now. My concern is that at some point, the game simply won't be able to progress forward in any meaningful way, due to relying on users that use bad laptops. Some would argue that's already the case. A lot of future innovation will require more processing power, maybe faster SSDs, better graphics, and all of that means system requirements will go up. If you want to create a realistic representation of football, in terms of AI, ME, Graphics, you need to innovate and raise the requirements. The question is, do SI want to create a realistic game, or are they fine with its current state? It remains to be seen in a few years, and I'm hopeful they have some big things coming in FM24. So it's not all about graphics. I myself still use a PC that I've built 7 years ago. Even then it wasn't any sort of a high-end system, it was a midrange system that I could afford spending money on (It was less than 800eur), that was able to run every game at that time. Nowadays, I probably can't run the latest high-end games, and I'm fine with that. I'm playing games that don't require high-end systems anyways, though having one would certainly help to improve both visuals and performance. I can only imagine what sorts of systems people use, if there's such a pushback against rising the requirements. Another important point, is that you won't need to buy a new PC/Laptop every year in order to play the game. Nobody's asking for that either. But at some point the game has to "level up" and evolve, and that means the hardware that's required to run the game needs to be better. Imagine if in 10 years time, the game still requires the same old hardware that it does now.

Idk how I'm lost in translation. They said they wanted to see LESS tactical flexibility. That would imply removing certain things, or not allowing the players have as many available options, because the AI can't do the same. If anyone wants to use exploit tactics, they're free to do so. They're not impacting your own gameplay in any sort of way. I personally never used those tactics, as there would be 0 challenge, and therefore it wouldn't be interesting to me. In your previous comment, you said it's a "Realism issue". I agree, but because the current tactical creator isn't realistic. You say "FM is based on realism" and I'd argue it's not completely true. It's based on SI's version of realism. The roles are roughly based on what exists in real life, but the roles are also unrealistic. You have very little control over how your players actually move around and play, because the positions and roles are hardcoded to behave in a certain way. The way SI told them to. Not necessarily the way they do in real life. In real life, players aren't hardcoded like that. A CM could drop in the left back or right back spots to help in the buildup, L/Rightbacks could form a back 3 to help in buildup. They wouldn't necessarily ALWAYS do that thing, but only when needed and when it makes sense. WBs in Wingback positions would often play as wingers in possession, often being the furthest forward players, being in line with the striker. And in defense, they would often press high, and/or drop deep to form a back 5. Yet none of these are really possible in FM, because the roles are hardcoded to do certain things. So we can pray that SI introduces new roles that do these things, or that they allow us to have more control over player movement. I'd also agree that the AI needs to be way smarter, but not only the opposition manager's AI. The overall ME AI, the ways players react to things, their "IQ", etc. needs to be massively improved. In real life, you could name a few different "Deep-Lying Playmakers". None of them would play the same. Not only because of their "attributes", but also due to tactical instructions. Tactical instructions that we do not currently have in game. I'm not even completely for having blank roles. But I'm all for having more tactical and player instructions, in order to help us change the way that role plays.

Way to lose a lot of customers. I'd be the first one to never buy the game again if that happened, and I'm sure many more would do the same. Ah yes, taking away features from the game, and limiting human players in what they can do. Glorious indeed. The outrage would be absolutely justified if that were ever to happen.

No, Roam from position is locked for Support and Attack duties. If I used the Defend duty, he wouldn't be positioned as high as I want him to. He would just sit back like a DM would.

Except you're then locked in with preset instructions, and you can't do anything about them. That's the case for a lot of roles. What if I want an Inverted-Wingback who will just sit more centrally, in the midfield, in possession. Well, he's got "Roam from Position" locked, so good luck with that. The roles are presets, and I don't see why they couldn't make it so the AI uses those presets, while allowing for players to customize the role how they want. We're basically at mercy of SI when it comes to new roles being introduced. Not just roles, but also tactical instructions, the way you instruct your players to move at certain phases of play, etc. The problem with that, is that it takes them a few years to introduce such stuff. In FM23 they are finally improving the tactical creator, when it comes to defensive phase of play at least. Before that, in FM22 we got the WCB role. Yet there are many things still missing. WCB has been popular for years before it finally got introduced in FM. There are things in possession that you cannot do in-game, that are also quite popular in real life, especially when it comes to buildup phase of play.

And that tweet has missed the point, as the replies have pointed out. Nobody's playing FM for the graphics, but the graphics would enhance the experience MASSIVELY. Obviously I'd also like for ME and AI to improve, but at certain point you have to also improve the visuals. Just one word: immersion. I think we are at that point where graphics need to improve, they've already done a large leap forward with animations, but now there's other stuff like textures, lighting, etc. But at this point, we are going in circles. Since this is it for FM23, I'm already looking forward to what FM24 brings to the table.

Nobody's arguing that graphics are more important than gameplay though. I'm sure 99% of us here would agree on that. But FM already has the gameplay part figured out. It's been figured out for years and years now, so it's only logical that other parts of the game level up as well. I'd rather have a nice and shiny graphics, and modern UI/UX, on top of the already great gameplay, rather than what we have now.

I'm not saying game isn't successful currently. It is successful and it is relatively popular. Though you could always improve that, especially in the future, and I just argued that having better graphics is one way of doing it. Whether it's bringing back the old players, or getting new players in. The younger audience would generally be anyone under 25-30 in a broader sense, alternatively (and more specifically) teenagers / people under 20. Regardless of other demographics. My original point was about the distant future, not the right now, anyways. It's not even something worth arguing about.

It's not a representative, but you constantly hear about this all the time on forums. It has probably been mentioned in this thread already. There's no reason to believe it's not true. You can easily draw conclusions without having the exact data. The same people who use old laptops to play this game, and the same people who use those laptops only to play FM, are probably and generally the people that are 30+, rather than teenagers/early 20s people. I'm not saying it's the case for everyone, but it probably is for majority of people. Minecraft has a unique pixelated style, and I wouldn't necessarily say those graphics are that bad. Besides, there are a ton of mods and stuff that can make that game look incredible (and very hardware demanding). Also there are many reasons why a game like Minecraft might appeal to a really young audience, the same reasons a game like FM might not. I'm not claiming something wild here. The game does need to grow, and it does need new and better graphics. It also isn't wild to assume that improved visuals/graphics are going to help with capturing some of the younger audience. Obviously there are other reasons why younger people might not want to play FM, but having better graphics would help in attracting them. I don't care if only SI can give the exact answer with hard proof. That doesn't mean I'm wrong at all. It just means that I don't have hard proof, that you seem to want. But again, I think you can make some observations and come to conclusions without having that proof.

Idk, some stuff is pretty straight forward, without needing to do market research and analysis. I never claimed I knew more than the SI, so idk where that's coming from. I'm not sure why you're trying to counter every single criticism of the game with arguments. I think it's a well known fact that FM attracts audience that's, on average, older than most other games. Just looking at that poll, it says ~70% of players are 30+. I know that it isn't really a representative of the whole playerbase, but I don't think it's much different from reality. I think it's also fair to say younger audiences are used to having certain level and quality of graphics when it comes to games, so it's not a wild thing to assume that they're going to have a harder time getting into FM, compared to other games, that feel and look more modern. Sure, there are some people who like to play older games, even though they didn't grow up with them, but those players are a minority. I don't know, it just makes sense that improving the graphics would attract more people to the game. Now whether it's worth doing, is completely another question. And we have discussed this previously. But you can't argue that the game doesn't look dated.

Graphics by themselves don't mean much if you don't have great gameplay, systems, etc. to go with them. FM already has all of those things, except graphics. Graphics will only help with immersion, and enjoyment of the game, while also potentially attracting new players. You can't solely rely on the "older" audience for that long, you also have to attract the younger audience in some ways. In 2022 it's shocking how bad this game looks in terms of graphics. I keep repeating this point, but it's on the level of games that came out 10-20 years ago. Upgrading graphics will definitely attract younger audience, especially some FIFA players who are more interested in management side of things.