Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Other than the obvious with the transfer updates and bits is there anything in particular you are looking forward to when the update is released?

I'm a Saints fan so having a new board in place, someone who actually wants to be at the club and from what has been said willing to back the manager for the right signings so hopefully a bit more money to spend from the off. 

Over to you guys, what are you most looking forward to when it gets released

THIS IS NOT INTENDED AS A "WHEN WILL THIS BE RELEASED" POST, APOLOGIES IN ADVANCE TO THE MODS IF IT GOES THAT WAY

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Iggy Hassan said:

Hopefully see a fix in my teams conversion rate average of 1 in 20 and the AI converting 1 in 5...(or so it seems like!)

Sick to death of every year/save seeing my teams dominate games yet get sucker punched by lesser teams. Happens way too often.

You don't have to guess here. There's a useful stat page that shows you conversion rates in the league. Teams are usually between 7% and 14-15%. If you're on the low side, you can make adjustments to improve this. I'm almost always 11%+. 

It's the same ME for human and AI.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 19/02/2022 at 15:39, managerialmuggle said:

Other than the obvious with the transfer updates and bits is there anything in particular you are looking forward to when the update is released?

I'm a Saints fan so having a new board in place, someone who actually wants to be at the club and from what has been said willing to back the manager for the right signings so hopefully a bit more money to spend from the off. 

Over to you guys, what are you most looking forward to when it gets released

THIS IS NOT INTENDED AS A "WHEN WILL THIS BE RELEASED" POST, APOLOGIES IN ADVANCE TO THE MODS IF IT GOES THAT WAY

I'm a fan of your annoying little brothers down the road afcb, so I'm looking forward to my first afcb save with them on fm22. Have a decent squad already, plus 5 quality additions they made this Jan!

Saints have finished top 5 few years on my now 10 year old current save. Even after I stole ward prose, small and livermento! 

Edited by B80
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, B80 said:

I'm a fan of your annoying little brothers down the road afcb, so I'm looking forward to my first afcb save with them on fm22. Have a decent squad already, plus 5 quality additions they made this Jan!

Saints have finished top 5 few years on my now 10 year old current save. Even after I stole ward prose, small and livermento! 

I gotta be honest, I don't see Bournemouth as a rivalry as such, at worst I'd say friendly rivalry but I know you guys tend to take it more seriously than that. Hope you get promotion this season, will be good to see Bournemouth back in the Prem. As much as I hate them I would love to have Pompey back up and have all 4 main south coast clubs back in the Prem, Saints, Bournemouth, Pompey and Brighton all together in the Prem would be great

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 20/02/2022 at 06:32, ImDaWeasel said:

Look forward to testing out what they say has been fixed, find out after a week the majority of it hasn't, then wait until FM23 to see if it's fixed then.

 

I'm the opposite, instead of a list of things they claimed to have fixed, but haven't, I'd prefer a short few lines like 'we don't know how to fix the bugs, we stopped even trying weeks ago, enjoy the update'. At least that would be honest. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Neil just curious and maybe this too complex to discuss openly, so you can just ignore this, but why don't you use us the community to beta test each release massively like in the prelease beta issuing different beta branches? Optional of course.

I know you have both internal QA and an user based beta team, but the prerelease beta with thousands of users testing the game is proven to find a lot of issues very fast and also from the fan base point of view, we feel part of a process instead of being given a final "all or nothing" version late in Feb/March and to be told to wait until next year if something wrong remains there because nobody found it before or was not tested enough.

Imho either more frequent patches, like monthly, or open beta branches would help the community to appreciate more the continuos work that you guys do instead of feeling abandoned for months. Anyway just my personal appreciation, what do I know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Neil Brock said:

As with every update, each raised internally or externally raised issue is prioritised based on the number of affected users, the severity of said issue, the complications of a fix and potential for knock-ons elsewhere. 

We only have a limited amount of resource and that is used to make sure those of the highest priority are addressed. Whilst every code changed is checked both by other developers in code review and by our QA team, there is potential that when played by hundreds of thousands of players there may be knock-ons or problems that aren't picked up on internally. 

That's why we really appreciate anyone who takes the time to raise anything via our Bug Trackers

Every year after our final planned update is released, any outstanding issues will be looked at and reviewed for future versions of the game. Some of these may not be fixed directly, but incorporated and addressed in new features or revamps of existing areas. 

That’s great to hear. Assume the IW/IF and regen issues will be fixed, as those affect everyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Icy said:

Neil just curious and maybe this too complex to discuss openly, so you can just ignore this, but why don't you use us the community to beta test each release massively like in the prelease beta issuing different beta branches? Optional of course.

I know you have both internal QA and an user based beta team, but the prerelease beta with thousands of users testing the game is proven to find a lot of issues very fast and also from the fan base point of view, we feel part of a process instead of being given a final "all or nothing" version late in Feb/March and to be told to wait until next year if something wrong remains there because nobody found it before or was not tested enough.

Imho either more frequent patches, like monthly, or open beta branches would help the community to appreciate more the continuos work that you guys do instead of feeling abandoned for months. Anyway just my personal appreciation, what do I know.

Because people don't beta test it. That's why the public whole period one from a couple of years ago disappeared, shame because in theory it was a very good idea

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, managerialmuggle said:

I gotta be honest, I don't see Bournemouth as a rivalry as such, at worst I'd say friendly rivalry but I know you guys tend to take it more seriously than that. Hope you get promotion this season, will be good to see Bournemouth back in the Prem. As much as I hate them I would love to have Pompey back up and have all 4 main south coast clubs back in the Prem, Saints, Bournemouth, Pompey and Brighton all together in the Prem would be great

Yeah it's not a proper rivalry, no where near scale of you and pompey. Many afcb fans don't care tbh, just a little extra spice when we play as relatively close.

I think if we had actually turned up at yours a few years ago and effectively sent you down near end of season or some other stuff like that it may have started to ramp things up a bit. Witnessed a fair few scuffles, fights etc, but nothing close to what almost look like riots when you played Pompey in the top flight.

A few afcb fans have a bit of an issue as some rom bournemouth abandoned afcb to watch saints over the decades due to you being in top tier, with us in league 1 or 2 most of the time. They tend to get a rougher ride/banter at work, wherever.

 

Edited by B80
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tdocwra83 said:

Stupid question, but what's the IF/IW issue?

So obviously an IF/IW is a left footer playing on the right/right footer playing on the left.   Naturally when the ball is passed to them on their stronger foot they'll want to cut inside ie. Ziyech for us when he plays on the right always comes on to his left,  Hazard primarily right footed so plays on the left and tends to come inside, Coutinho right footed on the left etc etc

 

On FM22 they more often than not receive the ball and try going down the outside more than they try cut inside.  So they tend to play as a winger would...

I think thats the issue.... I still see players come inside so its not a major problem for me, but obviously you want the role to be represented properly in the ME, so on that basis i agree it needs fixing

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
22 minutes ago, beachbod said:

I hope they fixed an issue i face with so many FK going in. Seems every other game theres always a FK going in and not necessarily scored by high rated Fk taker

Looking at the match engine statistics it's roughly 2-3% of all goals come from direct free kicks, which is in-line with real life figures. Also there are a number of elements which tie into the FK attribute stats to make someone a successful free kick converter, so would suggest not just looking at that one stat.

Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Neil Brock said:

Looking at the match engine statistics it's roughly 2-3% of all goals come from direct free kicks, which is in-line with real life figures. Also there are a number of elements which tie into the FK attribute stats to make someone a successful free kick converter, so would suggest not just looking at that one stat.

Is update out today mate? Might aswell ask ha

Link to post
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, beachbod said:

I hope they fixed an issue i face with so many FK going in. Seems every other game theres always a FK going in and not necessarily scored by high rated Fk taker

I think, the reason why you have such an impression is that you probably watch Key Highlights. Hence, it will be very likely that freekicks shown in Key Highlights are those that result in a goal. Same applies to your freekicks as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m curious and this has been talked about on this forums before: has SI, especially in these changing time of openness and customer intimacy, thought about more transparently talking about what you guys are working on? Obviously it’s the biggest issues but we have no idea what has been addressed only until the patch is actually released. Other companies talk about working on maps or player models or matchmaking or performance or at least naming any of the big topics addressed in future patches. 

I think it would be an enormous step towards the loyal fans on here and elsewhere to have at least a global idea of what is being done. And things might not get fixed in the end because of various reasons but then when announcing stuff you can always address that it might not end up in the patch if something pops up.

Like if you say the top 5 you are working on: regens and development, IF in the ME as an example or say you are happy with the current state of the ME and only working on some role tweaks or anything in between, we globally can follow and know the direction to look at! The fact you work in agile sprints now should also give a better forecast on what will get in the patch or not (seeing you prioritize those things highest on the list) it will add so much value to connect the worlds of your hard work and the loyal customers together.

I don’t need a yes or no now, but I would love it if you guys at least took it with you as a topic for discussion internally :) 

Edited by DoubleR
Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Neil Brock said:

That is something we've talked about internally and from a Community and Customer Experience (CCE) perspective, ideally at some point in the future we may be able to release more of a visible long term roadmap - this is of course something that would require buy in across the entire studio, so sadly isn't within my influence to definitively say whether it will or not. In terms of specific issues, our CCE team have made an effort to be more responsive to bugs raised via the tracker and inform when issues are investigated. Saying that, currently we try and avoid making assurances on specific issues, as sometimes there's complications which could leave us looking like we've promised something and not delivered.

Case in point, an issue we were discussing over the last few days. On paper would think it's a pretty straight-forward borderline low/medium priority issue, so was marked as something we'd address for a forthcoming update. Developers investigated further and attempted a fix, but upon testing was found there were unexpected knock-ons and a problem balancing it. There were a few more attempts to fix made and more time spent by QA testing it before it was realised that it'd probably require a rewrite of a larger area for us to improve it. Something which would require larger scale design and a lot of time, way beyond the resource level we could justify for a borderline low/medium issue at a point where the whole team is working towards a pretty tight deadline (people want their data update!).  

Unfortunately this so-called straight forward issue cost us quite a bit of development time across both the coding team and QA which could have been utilised elsewhere. Whilst to take some positives from it, at least it does it help us for longer term planning in this game area, in terms of tangible benefits for this update, there isn't really one. Now consider if we'd replied to that thread or publicly said we were working on it. Now there's the double whammy of time wasted and the potential player disappointment of something we'd called out not being addressed. 

That's not to say we haven't already started being a bit more open about what's being worked on - we've been very clear about a new Versus Mode coming in a future update and at times we have been able to say in specific bug forum/tracker threads that a certain issue will be addressed as soon as possible - certainly we've done so with technical issues/crashes in the past. And prior to releases we're trying to produce better quality content informing people about what to expect (such as the feature videos we did prior to FM22). So all the above is basically a longform way of saying never say never ;) 

 

Nice post, that's all we really want a bit of transparency about progression. I believe the community will be understanding and patient if informed there are issues along the way of attempting fixes and data updates even if SI come and out and apologise for a delay even if a deadline isn't reached that would go a long way in building better rapport with the community  instead of being left completely in the dark about what's going on. 

Edited by Metal
Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite a few things I'm hoping are addressed in the update/

Most years I read people on the forums screaming, 'the game is broken. It's a disgrace. It's unplayable', and as someone who follows the progress of people playing in a variety of leagues, I think, well, it seems pretty much ok to me.

But this year, I'm the one who feels like screaming, while others seem to be complaining about bugs less than usual, with a few obvious exceptions. (I think this may be because the majority of saves I read about are in commonly played leagues).

I appreciate that SI can't promise that a particular issue will be fixed, for the reasons Neil has cited above, but my concern is that sometimes it seems SI don't acknowledge that there is a problem. I'm spending time collecting screenshots and trying to replicate issues in order to to prove that some things are a problem because I feel as though SI have to some extent brushed the issue off, or don't really appreciate the problem.

It's really nice when SI say, this is a known issue and we're addressing it. If it turns out that the issue can't be fixed, then ok. Like Neil says, if it can't be fixed in the update, let's see what happens with the next version. Not all problems can be fixed, especially quickly. I understand this, but there's instances where this acknowledgement still hasn't happened.

What I could do with is a way to cite an issue and SI to say

Yes, this is an issue we're aware of

or

We accept that it's not ideal, and the UI is misleading etc, but don't accept this is an issue.

Also, a date by which we need to provide irrefutable proof to SI of an issue in order for it to be addressed or not by the update, (because some issues unfold over a longer period of time).

Sometimes I have to choose whether to leapfrog on to somebody else's issue with extra info or raise a new thread that's almost but not quite identical to the existing one.  Sometimes it's hard to judge if 2 issues are really the same, but exhibiting in different ways.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

41 minuti fa, akinozcan ha scritto:

If something did not change in two days, i do not think so. Cos Neil Brock said "Main Winter Update" in a thread two days ago.

I understand but as far as I know the latter transfer window (Ukraine) will close the 2nd of March. Today is 24th of February, I would be surprised if they would release an update now and a second on the next week. 

Unless they want to make an update on 15th of April including the transfers in Brazil...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
1 hour ago, vikeologist said:

Quite a few things I'm hoping are addressed in the update/

Most years I read people on the forums screaming, 'the game is broken. It's a disgrace. It's unplayable', and as someone who follows the progress of people playing in a variety of leagues, I think, well, it seems pretty much ok to me.

But this year, I'm the one who feels like screaming, while others seem to be complaining about bugs less than usual, with a few obvious exceptions. (I think this may be because the majority of saves I read about are in commonly played leagues).

I appreciate that SI can't promise that a particular issue will be fixed, for the reasons Neil has cited above, but my concern is that sometimes it seems SI don't acknowledge that there is a problem. I'm spending time collecting screenshots and trying to replicate issues in order to to prove that some things are a problem because I feel as though SI have to some extent brushed the issue off, or don't really appreciate the problem.

It's really nice when SI say, this is a known issue and we're addressing it. If it turns out that the issue can't be fixed, then ok. Like Neil says, if it can't be fixed in the update, let's see what happens with the next version. Not all problems can be fixed, especially quickly. I understand this, but there's instances where this acknowledgement still hasn't happened.

What I could do with is a way to cite an issue and SI to say

Yes, this is an issue we're aware of

or

We accept that it's not ideal, and the UI is misleading etc, but don't accept this is an issue.

Also, a date by which we need to provide irrefutable proof to SI of an issue in order for it to be addressed or not by the update, (because some issues unfold over a longer period of time).

Sometimes I have to choose whether to leapfrog on to somebody else's issue with extra info or raise a new thread that's almost but not quite identical to the existing one.  Sometimes it's hard to judge if 2 issues are really the same, but exhibiting in different ways.

If something isn't a bug, we pretty much always will try to say so and explain why. 

What we haven't really been able to do is explain when a bug is a considered a certain priority and won't necessarily be addressed. There's a few reasons why this is currently the case. Sometimes it's  partly down to instances where we do deem it a high priority, but for various reasons that I've touched upon in previous posts, we're unable to do so. Then there are times when an convincing explanation would give away trade/code secrets so to speak. But there's always going to be an element of not wanting to appear dismissive of an issue someone has taken their own time to flag and raise on our forums when we won't have the resource to address it in an update. We say it's being investigated as the hope is that all raised issues will be fixed - it just comes down to time, resource and the complexity of the specific issue. 

We could look to make our internal priority of a bug publicly visible to manage expectations a bit better, but again would be a huge shift and something which would need to be discussed. Again there's always that risk of marking something as a high priority issue and some really significant reasons why it can't be updated or addressed and that being used as a bit of a stick to beat us with.  

There generally isn't a deadline for when a severe issue can be raised and we can look at it for a future update, but feel it's generally accepted that anything raised after our 'Final Winter Update' would then only be addressed in a future version of FM. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...