retired_donnie

I also doubt that Wenger was telling Dixon to 'make sure his creative freedom notch was half an inch to the left'

Players in this game have zero AI of their own ability.

retired_danig6484

and

....and several earlier posts are about a very specific issue that leads to a general frustration for a lot of FM fans. I'm not surprised this is still an issue in 07 (I'm still playing 06) and remember with some embarrassment our long debates (or should I say my long rants?) last winter about this in 06.

Some say "I don't want to have to be a tactical genius" and mean "I want an easier game"

But I think most people mean "I want to be able to develop skill at this game" or "I appreciate the ambiguity of tactics, but I just want to know what the sliders are telling my players", etc..

Always, Always, this kind of thread gets the reponse "So play a different game". Please, we heard ya. That isn't what this is about. I don't think the OP, or any of the other "whiners" just want to be coddled with an easy game. They, we, want a satisfying game where we feel that our efforts may have some relation with our results.

This year, I appreciate more, WWFAN's comment about about enjoying the ambiguity of the slider system, but I still feel that a complex game does best with less ambiguity in the interface, and more ambiguity in the actual strategy end of things.

Chess is a good example, often raised. The game would certainly be no better if you were never sure how far you could move your Queen, or just what would happen if you pushed up the slider for 'Castle Often when threatened'. Threatened by what?

The longer post above also makes the significant point that even the language of the sliders themselves may be actually opposite of what players will try. And with very little feedback to the manager about what effect the slider is producing or attempting to produce, these false interpretations of sliders make for long campaigning using the wrong end of the sharp pointy thing all the while.

Glad to see its still debated. Sad to see that it isn't yet addressed by SI. ("It" being the complex and nebulous issue of being able to implement tactics with better understanding of their effect or attempted effect).

-Smack

retired_mgavlick

Great first post (or is it, as you suggested you had posted before??).

I'm not sure about the chess analogy, because chess players control inanimate objects, where as we are trying to control AI animates with human-coded qualities. Some of the 'tactical errors' are human error coded into the engine which no reduction of slider ambiguity will correct.

The increasing complexity of management tools in the game or the real world, and the resulting stress/frustration/moments of exhilaration is part of life. We must remember that SI prides itself on accurate simulation. A manager who takes the Keegan grenade approach runs into deep water eventually. With FM, maybe the eventually hits too fast, but a lot of the complaints seem to be 'this game is too difficult, yet I had loads of success over my first two seasons.' Learn, adapt, enact. It's the way of the world!

retired_tuhina

Having been involved in a couple of those long threads about the inadequacies of tactical slider definitions, I'll chime in briefly. I'm very much on Smack's side of this argument, but I am willing to accept half a loaf from SI on these questions. The manual for FM07 appears to be a quarter-loaf IMO, with an honest attempt to describe the intended meaning of each tactical setting, albeit one that falls short of the mark in several ways.

wwfan, I find myself deeply indebted to you and your compatriots for all the empirical work you have done with the engine. It is only by combining your TT&F guidelines with the new manual that I have been able to get a decent level of comfort with the tactical instructions. However, while it may now be possible for me and others like me (with a strong desire to analyze the tactics but little time to spend testing the match engine) to enjoy the game once we read these threads on the boards, there are undoubtedly many other customers who are still not able to get their minds wrapped around the game because they haven't run across these threads. So, IMO, SI still have some work to do.

retired_tuhina

Incidentally, I assume that Smac was "smacksim," the starter of the last, longest "inadequate manual" thread that appears to have finally gotten SI's attention.

retired_mgavlick

I think he probably is. I assumed that seconds after I posted!!! Too late to alter it though!

I can nver fully contribute to any manual discussion as I am an avid manual non-reader. I skimmed through the '06 manual to see the relevance of complaints, and it isn't great, but I haven't even opened the '07 one. Bearing in mind that because of using the worst haulage agent in the world, I can't even play FM because of a smashed-up PC, I would much prefer struggling with playing it than writing theoretical assumptions. However, at least it breaks up the day.

I like ambiguity and complexity. It challenges me and I love a challenge. However, others may not want what I want from a game, and SI obviously haven't addressed that. But what can we expect? Have you EVER read a tech guide that is both readable and helpful. Me neither.

retired_tuhina

Well, we're not really on different sides here... I also love ambiguity and complexity. I just think the game has much more than enough ambiguity and complexity even if we had full knowledge of exactly what every tactics setting does. (To be clear, I mean full knowledge in a human language sense, i.e. What am I saying to my players?... not full knowledge in a programming sense, which would be disastrous overkill even if SI were willing to provide it.) The (mis)interpretation of instructions by low decisions/low teamwork players, the hidden ratings, the effects of opponents/weather/styles/training/morale, the butterfly effects of minor actions on the field, not to mention the inevitable complexities of interactions between tactical instructions, which SI could never define for us fully even if they tried... the sim just doesn't need ambiguity in term definitions to be fun. I think it's still hurting this product in the marketplace, making for unnecessary frustration.

But, as you say, tech manuals never really deliver. It shouldn't stop them from trying, though.

For all the criticisms, I suspect you will find FM07 to be highly entertaining once you can run it. I skipped FM06... the improvement from 05 to 07 is very impressive. There's just a lot more polish to this one. If they can get rid of some of the more pernicious bugs (set piece instructions and the like), I think they'll have made me a happy customer for the first time since CM 01/02.

retired_tashat

The impression I get after reading this thread (admittedly skim reading the second page) is that the likes of Cleon and wwfan expect everybody to want to play the game they do, and will see no argument against it.

I love FM and i love Football. The problem is, when i sit down to play a game after an 18 hour shift at work I do NOT want to spend hour upon hour tweaking a small slider to stop myself losing against teams that in reality, it would be impossible, whatever the formation or tactic, to lose against. Or to have totally unrealistic results coming from defender mistakes and idiot goalkeepers.

Not trying to disrespect your works, but i SURE as HELL dont want to have to read through a thousand word dirge just o be able to enjoy my game.

People like me want to pick a team. play with formations, some tactical adjustments and train, buy and sell players. Our favourite franchise should elt us do this. It seems like SIGames have got to the point were they just want to prove they can. Stick two fingers up at Eidos and say 'oooo weare realistic...oh, but only 4 people out of 10 enjoy our game'.

Cleon, surely you see that the majority, and i mean that, the majority, are what can be described as casual fmgamers. Lower thyself from that highhorse a little.

*And your wait for tha patch comment earlier gets me angry aswell, although not the thread to discuss this. SIGames should finish their products before releasing them*

retired_elpata

Nope you are totally wrong. You can enjoy the game in many ways. The thing that I want people to do is stop moaning when they cannot win a game or loose so many in a row. The game is not designed to be very easy, its supposed to be hard for a reason.

You don't have to spend hours tweaking at all, maybe a few minutes every game. I don't know where people get off thinking you need to spend hours tweaking. Imagine if that was true, no-one would ever reach the end of season.

You do not have to, but if you are stuck then yeah reading might help you.

Can you show me the actual stats to back that claim up, where did you get the 4/10 info from? Unless its just an assumption you made.

I wouldn't say the majority of people where just casual gamers who buy this game. If that was so, then most people would only play an hour or so a day. Thats a casual gamer imo. But from looking around SI alone, most gamers play quite a few hours a night.

You do realise that every single game released by a developer has bugs aren't you?

Anyways closed, im sick of the personal attacks.