Hello community,
Everyone's talking about it at the moment.
Wouldn't it be a good idea to (finally!) reduce the length of matches?
I don't think I'm the only one who finds it very long...
It also puts off a lot of new players!
As for the right length, I'm not sure, but at least half would be good.

What do the Vfian community think? :)

For me, though, it's still the DNA of the game, even if it annoys me in some matches.

After that, would reducing the playing time make it more attractive if the mdm stays the same? With less time to react in case of a problem?

Yes yes and yes my Kevin! 😘

On the other hand, I think it's the charm of the game

New players are certainly not put off by the length of the matches

The new generation is very often about everything, right away. It's not really the same as spending 1h30 in front of the screen for so little, that's for sure.

Totally for the idea.

But that's precisely the charm of this game.
A player is under no obligation to follow the whole game.
The advantage of a1h30 is also that you have more time to adjust your tactics. Let's imagine a 30-minute match. If you're not available, you're dead in the water.

no one is obliged to stay in front of a full match, those who don't want to can connect once the match is over

Nevertheless, without altering the nature of the game or removing the 'tactical' aspect, reducing the duration of matches to 45 or even 30 minutes could be a plus in terms of appealing to the new generation in a hurry, while not frustrating the tacticians and relieving the carrot lovers who won't have wasted 'too much' of their time.

I say this all the more freely because I have long been, and always have been, an advocate of real-time matches.

When you're winning against a tough opponent... Your only prayer is that the match ends quickly... But I'm totally against it, and if we had to add extra time at each half-time it would be great..

i'm not new to the game and my opponents know it = after 20 minutes (especially given the very limited tactics) I'm fed up with wiping the floor and I give up. Shorter matches would suit me. I'm sure that new players would appreciate it too, but it's tricky to say because the reason why they chose not to play VF remains unknown. Of course, many people will say that it's part of the charm of the game, but that's the opinion of those who play it. What would be great would be to hear the opinions of those who don't play... or no longer do!

PS: aymeric should send an email to the players who have given up to find out their opinion

We're not saying that it's THE reason to flee, but that it should contribute to it.

When I was playing as a teenager, no worries, but now I'm 35, with a job, a family and obligations, it's no longer possible 🤷🏻‍♂️ There's no need to list everything that's involved 🥵 Spending 1hr30 on a game, and I stress the word, is completely ridiculous! Imagine your wife, your kids seeing you fussing over your smartphone all that time while you're driving home from work, bathing the kids, cooking, spending time with the family.

I thought about quitting for a long time because it didn't fit in with my life any more, but I'm still attached to it because building a team takes time and you don't want to throw everything away. At the moment, I'm no longer able to allocate all that time to attacking on the left and defending on the right, and so I'm suffering defeats because in the top flight, that's unforgiving, but at the same time I don't want to stop.

Reducing the length of the match would allow me to stick to this game and I don't think that adapting to our fans, who have also evolved, would be detrimental to this game, quite the contrary in fact. The 90-minute diehards will get used to it 😉😘

A little poll 🙂

Against, we would have to add the time for the changes, the injuries and the power cuts (humour, eh?) but against all the same

Cons. Real-time matches are an added bonus compared to the bland and quickly forgotten matches in rival games.

The new generation argument is a good one when people in their thirties, forties and over are asking for shorter matches. ^^

If your aim is to retain new players, it's more towards the points mentioned by sora that you should be looking.

I find the affinity system, as it is, far more damaging to enjoyment and stickiness than match time... In addition to the tactical panel which, as Guanta points out, wipes the slate clean every minute, it's as interesting as playing rattle at 15, the stylish players who make no sense, in short to discourage old and new players, if there was only game time, VF would have been first on the stores for a decade.
Game time is only for the regulars and the prize winners... the others are content to live most of the time (yeah, they're not winners, shame on them, that's for sure)
VF will be celebrating its 20th anniversary next year (we'll probably get 1M as a gift on this occasion, yippee ^^), if this game was going to break through, it would have done so already.
That said, I'm not against this proposal, knowing that whatever new features are introduced, whether I like them or not, I don't give a shit anymore, so my credibility is doubled.

45-minute match... remove taxes and affinity and let's have some fun!

Personally, I'm not hiding behind the newcomers' excuse because yes, that would suit me just as well.
For the reasons outlined by Djaiss, I'm in the same situation!
After that, whether it's accepted or not isn't up to me, but seeing the pros and cons, the debate is open and that's the main thing.

As lebaygue says, it won't change my life either whether it's 1hr30mins or 45mins for a VF match :)

But I'm convinced that few people are attracted to following a "match" behind a screen for 1h30 and doing left right centre at every news item. So yes, you don't have to follow it for 1hr30mins, but if you do, it's impossible to play properly (see djaiss's post).

From my point of view, I'd rather play for 45 minutes against another active manager, than play for 1.5 hours against an AFK guy, or one who co's every 20 minutes.

Everyone has their own vision and I respect those who absolutely want a 1h30 match, no worries about that!

Rather favourably, you could very well reduce it to 30 minutes with an update every minute. That would be more or less the same.
With less time wasted by managers, and more people attending matches.

The news is already every minute.

Yes, but back then it was every 3. Now it's every 1, so maybe even if we reduce the match time by determining 1 real minute = 3 match minutes. With possibly several actions in that minute.

It would be shorter and there would be more people present. In short, I'm in favour.

So I'm still against it, but a little clarification: at a time when everyone is complaining about the mdm, shortening game time won't do you any good because you won't be able to manage anything, it's a management game. By shortening time, you also reduce the possibility of solving your team's problems during the match

Also against!

Özel turnuva ve etkinlikte denenirse kısa süreli maçlar beğenilebilir.

You're the one who doesn't want to understand that everything is correlated. The physical aspect, as you say, would remain the same with a loss. You just change the effective time of a match.

If that's work, I don't know, I'm not a programmer.

i'm pretty much against it, but I'm starting to think why not. 😅

A new poll? Hahah
Personally it's complicated 90min in front of your laptop almost every day. I understand 90min matches on important matches (final, IS and why not IE) but 90min div5 championship matches ... maybe bring a bit of logic on the matches

On the other hand, I think we should look at affinity, which I don't think is very useful, and especially style players. Having players with 1 NG shouldn't be that advantageous, it's pointless, there's no consistency.

Guys, since you've been playing, you've all been sitting in front of your laptop for 1.5 hours, and if it goes to 1 hour or 30 minutes, you'll be the same
Following your match for 1h30 is part of the charm of the game, not many management games allow you to follow your match in its entirety, and then for me shortening the time of the game will serve no purpose if you want to stop whether it's 30mn or 1h30 it will serve no purpose you'll stop the same
If it's to connect to make the team and 2 minutes later you have the result frankly there are plenty of games like that

Nobody is talking about 2 minutes. But at the moment we have 90 minutes with 1 minute for the game to update the stats... so in the end, you're potentially changing tactics every minute. The idea is to speed that up a bit. It could be an update every 30 seconds, and a 45-minute match. You'd have the same number of tactical possibilities, except that you'd have to be quicker
I think that saying no won't change anything, I think that's wrong, today there are a lot of 30-40 year olds in the game (the majority) and who can't spend 1h30 in front of the laptop (I'm one of them) and I think that the game can also evolve. It's not a regression, it's simply an evolution in relation to the players of the game. And also perhaps to reach out to younger players (it would be cool to get a few more young people to join in, for the good of the game)

You don't need to understand the mdm to change tactics every few minutes...

Overhaul of the match engine... reduction in game time... soon we'll also be asking you to change the name... It's another game you want, maybe we should create one in your image..

An admin to launch a poll? 😁

Reducing the playing time from 90 to 30 minutes on Virtua Foot would be a huge mistake. It would destroy the realism, tactical management and intensity of the matches. No more turnarounds, no more stamina to manage, and strategic adjustments would become pointless. Worse still, the match engine, designed for 90 minutes, would become totally unstable, with distorted stats, random results and inconsistencies galore. In the end, it would be a game without depth, without suspense and full of bugs. A false good idea that would ruin the gaming experience.
And let's not forget the plans for improvements that this will provoke xD.

Opening up a polling opportunity means opening up all requests for change to a vote

Only Aymeric 45 decides. With or without a poll

Personally, as a manager with over 17 years' experience of the game, I've often wondered about playing time, and from the IRL's point of view it's understandable and logically fair.

But in terms of management and especially training, I'm against it because reducing match time also means reducing the amount of xp players gain during matches, which also means extending player training time (which is already long when you're trying to do your best to get the best, most resilient players possible).

In addition, it should not be forgotten that with each change, when there is a positive side, there is also a negative side for the balance and fairness of all. For the old clubs, the seasons are short, but for the young clubs, they are long when there is no official competition

The subject is 2nd in the list of improvement projects. Aymeric will have a chance to see it and we'll see (or not) what he thinks of it.