OOTP 18 Discussion: Head-to-Head / Online Gaming - Page 3

dave1927p · 10-01-2016, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adamj

I have absolutely zero interest in any type of head-to-head play. Those features would not appeal to me at all.

That's what I thought when I heard about OOTP's 2d engine....but was I wrong there!

Painmantle · 10-01-2016, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

No, this is technically impossible. In OOTP there is way too much going on between days, this cannot be faked and then applied to the current league status of the two users.

Yeah, I get that, DMB was just a game simulator, nothing actually happening daily... didn't really think it all the way through before posting

dewelar · 10-01-2016, 04:32 PM

#2 would be very handy for the fictional league I play with my wife. My current DMB league has chosen not to migrate to OOTP due to the lack of head-to-head play, but it sounds like the type of play we do now wouldn't work, so that's unfortunate. #1 would be cool to have but I don't know how often I'd use it, and I'd have no use for #3.

Habsfan18 · 10-01-2016, 04:47 PM

Not sure a Diamond Dynasty style mode would really work in a text sim. Plus, adding DLC style microtransactions to OOTP scares the hell out of me. In-game purchases are killing the gaming industry in some ways, although I suppose it makes sense from a business standpoint.

I'm just really really hoping OOTP steers clear of things like that. Just my feelings, not sure if others agree.

I suppose I can handle it for JUST this mode (which I probably wouldn't even play) but like I've said before..the day the game introduces the option of a $.50 bonus to improve hitting for a few games or $1.00 to refill player stamina is the day I stop playing OOTP. Obviously I know nobody is forced to do this, but many games these days use the "pay to win" formula and I just don't want OOTP going down that road.

As for the other options, I suppose having a friend or a buddy on the forums here controlling one of the teams in my fictional league for an exhibition game would be pretty cool. That is if I'm understanding the concept.

zappa1 · 10-01-2016, 07:02 PM

I'm not a big fan for playing any game online. I've been down that road before with other games. I've had games that require you to have internet in order to even play it. No more. If I'm forced to have internet access to play a game, I'm out. I'm not stopping anybody else if that's what they like. Have at it. It's only an option for next release. If it ever became mandatory that you need the internet to play, I'll be gone in a New York second.

So, I won't use any of it. But if others want it, great.

BKL · 10-01-2016, 07:43 PM

Head to head in online leagues.

endgame · 10-01-2016, 09:17 PM

While many may enjoy the social aspects of 'gaming', there's a reason I have a solo league. It's solo. No interest in any of these.

daves · 10-02-2016, 06:14 PM

Challenge a friend in exhibition mode to start. Like to create teams to go against historical teams or other player created teams.

Is there a league challenge mode? For instance, someone makes a league for single player only, (Ex. 1977 Seattle expansion or a fictional league setup). All functions are locked besides simming and being a GM. Highest GM scores in 5 seasons?

plannine · 10-02-2016, 06:25 PM

No interest in any of the three....

MorseMoose · 10-02-2016, 07:49 PM

#2 would be interesting, but #1 would be a start. No interest in #3.

PutIntoPlay · 10-02-2016, 09:39 PM

I like the idea of playing live, in the context of having an online league where all members get together once a week in real life, play a week's worth of games over the day and then part ways, and the commissioner takes in all the game files, updates the game through a server, so that everyone goes home, updates their rosters, lineups, etc, and comes together again to repeat the process.

What I just suggested is complicated, and I know that. But to me, that's about the only practical use for such an option, in terms of what the expectations of game play in OOTP are.

The options you provided are going to novelty at best with this audience. I've read enough of the forums to know that groups within this community are niche-heavy as far as how they play the game, and are comfortable with how they play, and not much interests them in the way of overhaul change.

I'm sure some will argue otherwise, but even this thread shows how accurate my analysis is.

Personally, I'm far more interested in changes in team management options, player development, and contract negotiations and options.

But, in playing an online league, I would very much enjoy building a more localized league to my geographic region, and meeting up with fellow players to play out games over the course of a season. And perhaps my idea of only a week's worth of activity is too slow. Maybe it should be a month's worth at a time, so you get through multiple seasons quicker and experience the fluctuations of growth, stability, and loss with each managing decision.

That's how I see it.

ReDGuNNeR · 10-03-2016, 08:41 PM

What a great thread, so many good responses!

#3 is the most lucrative but is also the biggest extension from the core of what OOTP currently offers. A mode like that would be very appealing to a lot of different players. There are apps that do this already but no other team manager/ultimate team benefits from the underlying OOTP engine. Even though you lose a bit of the thrill of playing the game yourself with an elite player like in an EA or 2K title, if the system is devised properly having a specific player would be a huge "get" irregardless. Would a player be classified by their overall stats or would there be yearly versions? (It'd be neat if it were something different than a simple ultimate team clone since there is so much stat-potential with baseball!)

From a development perspective it seems like it would be better to build out the underlying networking systems before offering a feature like this. Even with that said, its the most enticing feature on this list and I'd play something like that, especially if card packs were based on some neat-o XP/games played/performance system and not just achievements. They are fun but they scale in difficulty and you can only get them once (lol).

#1's "cheating" problem doesn't seem like a deal breaker since most users on here would probably play with other OOTP enthusiasts. With a wider Steam audience (or public lobby system) it could be solved with a veto option. If the engine notices a stat-line that's way above average on a player it should have a little indicator/check-mark you can click next to it, allowing the game to delay the matchup until the offending player(s) are moved off a team. This way if its two friends who are messing around with crazy players they could easily start the game. I'm assuming there is a lobby and chat system for this...

Live universe and play by play would be so amazing for leagues. Looking forward to more news about this whichever direction it goes!

bulldog55 · 10-03-2016, 09:44 PM

I would not play other people head to head. OOTP is a simulation engine for me so I rarely manage against the AI as it is. I don't find the in-game strategy immersive enough to really care about playing against someone.

As an online league commissioner, I might use online play for playoff games but I couldn't see using it for regular season games. Pretty much every league sims a week or two at a time several times a week so they move too fast to really make the most of that. I do think people would enjoy being able to play World Series games, when there are only two teams left and the stakes are high.

I doubt that pursuing this would be the most valuable use of development time.

injury log · 10-03-2016, 11:10 PM

I think head-to-head play in online leagues will sound better in theory than it will work in practice. I can imagine it would happen a lot that you schedule a game with an opponent, they show up 30 minutes late, then mid-game they take a break to put the kids to sleep, and you end up spending an hour or two just to manage a baseball game that often will be lopsided enough the AI might as well have done it for you. If I can save that time, knowing any AI deficiencies that might affect my team affect my opponent equally, I'd usually be happy to do that.

It seems to me the kind of feature most leagues would only end up using for decisive games in the playoffs, if at all. If there would be a serious development cost to introduce the feature, my guess is it won't be worth the effort. If it would be relatively simple to implement, then sure, why not.

Redeemed143 · 10-04-2016, 01:15 PM

no interest in any of these.

Dark Horse · 10-04-2016, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Challenge a friend for an head-to-head exhibition game with your team from your solo league.
Positive: Easy to set up, quick action
Negative: No real reward, cheating is easily possible by editing players

This is the only mode that i would use; just two friends passing some time playing a game. i wouldn't think their could be much cheating. In a sense you would treat it like an online league. Both GMs would have to be using teams from the same game file.

In fact this would be good for online leagues. If you just wanted to watch a game in the 3D environment and let the AI run the teams as usual.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Play head-to-head games in an online league
Positive: Good immersion, games mean something
Negative: Only the first game for a sim period (i.e. 7 days) would be playable, so commishes would have to sim & post league files day-by-day if users want to play out every game. Timing issue (in real life I even have problems meeting friends for a coffee, how likely is it that users in online leagues find the right time to meet and play?)

I can't see myself using this in an online league. I would want all my games decided the same way. Not i win when i manage the team, but we lose when the AI runs the team. And lke the logistics would be hard. But it is even more difficult than you presented. The smallest league i played in was a 16 team league. That is eight games where people from different time zones and sometimes in different countries/hemispheres. How do you decide that? Home team pick the time? i'm not playing in that league. Really, i don't see this option that a league can take advantage of unless you have a league full of high school or college students or retired people who live in the same city.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Something like FIFA's Ultimate Team or MLB The Show's Diamond Dynasty mode
Positive: Great immersion, a new play mode (collect player cards and set up your team with them, card packs can be purchased or unlocked via achievements), no cheating easily possible, can challenge & play against strangers or friends via matchmaking, user teams can take part in automated league play
Negative: Lots of development work, success depends on number of users playing this mode

Ugh no. i want players to have their natural progressions, not "power ups" that was purchased. i want players that are drafted, signed or traded, not purchased.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Do you have a different idea for an online / head-to-head / e-sports mode in OOTP?

Cheers,
Markus

My number one want for online leagues is to allow GMs to submit trades in-game. Take that out of commissioners' hands; make their job a little easier.

strzepeksc · 10-04-2016, 09:38 PM

I would definitely use head to head play in on line leagues

GM's that miss the deadline games would be played out within the game.

Padreman · 10-05-2016, 03:20 PM

I will personally not use it but I know a lot of the people do enjoy head to head online So I have no issue with it

Tyler87898 · 10-05-2016, 05:19 PM

It may be because I'm younger, but I love these ideas. I'd really prefer option 2, though. I understand though it may take a couple versions to get it right. Option 1 seems nice, but I don't know how much I would use it. I'm not really a fan of option 3 because I hate the idea of the card pack systems used in many games (usually on mobile).

TheMaus2 · 10-05-2016, 06:28 PM

Okay, maybe a FUT draft mode would work.

10-01-2016, 04:47 PM	#44
Habsfan18 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Canada Posts: 2,239	Not sure a Diamond Dynasty style mode would really work in a text sim. Plus, adding DLC style microtransactions to OOTP scares the hell out of me. In-game purchases are killing the gaming industry in some ways, although I suppose it makes sense from a business standpoint. I'm just really really hoping OOTP steers clear of things like that. Just my feelings, not sure if others agree. I suppose I can handle it for JUST this mode (which I probably wouldn't even play) but like I've said before..the day the game introduces the option of a $.50 bonus to improve hitting for a few games or $1.00 to refill player stamina is the day I stop playing OOTP. Obviously I know nobody is forced to do this, but many games these days use the "pay to win" formula and I just don't want OOTP going down that road. As for the other options, I suppose having a friend or a buddy on the forums here controlling one of the teams in my fictional league for an exhibition game would be pretty cool. That is if I'm understanding the concept. Last edited by Habsfan18; 10-01-2016 at 05:05 PM.

10-01-2016, 09:17 PM	#47
endgame Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 16,842	While many may enjoy the social aspects of 'gaming', there's a reason I have a solo league. It's solo. No interest in any of these. __________________ "Try again. Fail again. Fail better." -- Samuel Beckett _____________________________________________

10-02-2016, 06:14 PM	#48
daves Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 3,716	Challenge a friend in exhibition mode to start. Like to create teams to go against historical teams or other player created teams. Is there a league challenge mode? For instance, someone makes a league for single player only, (Ex. 1977 Seattle expansion or a fictional league setup). All functions are locked besides simming and being a GM. Highest GM scores in 5 seasons? __________________

10-02-2016, 06:25 PM	#49
plannine All Star Reserve Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Michigan Posts: 561	No interest in any of the three.... __________________ Good pitching will always stop good hitting and vice-versa - Casey Stengel Last edited by plannine; 10-02-2016 at 06:27 PM.

10-02-2016, 09:39 PM	#51
PutIntoPlay Bat Boy Join Date: Apr 2016 Location: Seattle Metro Posts: 19 Blog Entries: 6	I like the idea of playing live, in the context of having an online league where all members get together once a week in real life, play a week's worth of games over the day and then part ways, and the commissioner takes in all the game files, updates the game through a server, so that everyone goes home, updates their rosters, lineups, etc, and comes together again to repeat the process. What I just suggested is complicated, and I know that. But to me, that's about the only practical use for such an option, in terms of what the expectations of game play in OOTP are. The options you provided are going to novelty at best with this audience. I've read enough of the forums to know that groups within this community are niche-heavy as far as how they play the game, and are comfortable with how they play, and not much interests them in the way of overhaul change. I'm sure some will argue otherwise, but even this thread shows how accurate my analysis is. Personally, I'm far more interested in changes in team management options, player development, and contract negotiations and options. But, in playing an online league, I would very much enjoy building a more localized league to my geographic region, and meeting up with fellow players to play out games over the course of a season. And perhaps my idea of only a week's worth of activity is too slow. Maybe it should be a month's worth at a time, so you get through multiple seasons quicker and experience the fluctuations of growth, stability, and loss with each managing decision. That's how I see it. __________________ One day you'll look back and wonder where it all went. And why you did what you did. You had better know the Lord by then. - From the book A Very Interesting Year Is this the hill you want to die on? - Too Many It's a beautiful day for a ballgame, let's play two! - Ernie Banks Football is a mistake. It combines the two worst elements of American life. Violence and committee meetings. - George Will

10-01-2016, 04:32 PM	#43
dewelar Major Leagues Join Date: May 2013 Posts: 311	#2 would be very handy for the fictional league I play with my wife. My current DMB league has chosen not to migrate to OOTP due to the lack of head-to-head play, but it sounds like the type of play we do now wouldn't work, so that's unfortunate. #1 would be cool to have but I don't know how often I'd use it, and I'd have no use for #3.

10-01-2016, 07:02 PM	#45
zappa1 All Star Starter Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 1,989	I'm not a big fan for playing any game online. I've been down that road before with other games. I've had games that require you to have internet in order to even play it. No more. If I'm forced to have internet access to play a game, I'm out. I'm not stopping anybody else if that's what they like. Have at it. It's only an option for next release. If it ever became mandatory that you need the internet to play, I'll be gone in a New York second. So, I won't use any of it. But if others want it, great.

10-01-2016, 07:43 PM	#46
BKL All Star Reserve Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 927	Head to head in online leagues.

10-02-2016, 07:49 PM	#50
MorseMoose Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 6,023 Blog Entries: 4 Infractions: 1/1 (1)	#2 would be interesting, but #1 would be a start. No interest in #3.

10-03-2016, 08:41 PM	#52
ReDGuNNeR Bat Boy Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: Miami, FL Posts: 4	What a great thread, so many good responses! #3 is the most lucrative but is also the biggest extension from the core of what OOTP currently offers. A mode like that would be very appealing to a lot of different players. There are apps that do this already but no other team manager/ultimate team benefits from the underlying OOTP engine. Even though you lose a bit of the thrill of playing the game yourself with an elite player like in an EA or 2K title, if the system is devised properly having a specific player would be a huge "get" irregardless. Would a player be classified by their overall stats or would there be yearly versions? (It'd be neat if it were something different than a simple ultimate team clone since there is so much stat-potential with baseball!) From a development perspective it seems like it would be better to build out the underlying networking systems before offering a feature like this. Even with that said, its the most enticing feature on this list and I'd play something like that, especially if card packs were based on some neat-o XP/games played/performance system and not just achievements. They are fun but they scale in difficulty and you can only get them once (lol). #1's "cheating" problem doesn't seem like a deal breaker since most users on here would probably play with other OOTP enthusiasts. With a wider Steam audience (or public lobby system) it could be solved with a veto option. If the engine notices a stat-line that's way above average on a player it should have a little indicator/check-mark you can click next to it, allowing the game to delay the matchup until the offending player(s) are moved off a team. This way if its two friends who are messing around with crazy players they could easily start the game. I'm assuming there is a lobby and chat system for this... Live universe and play by play would be so amazing for leagues. Looking forward to more news about this whichever direction it goes! Last edited by ReDGuNNeR; 10-03-2016 at 09:05 PM.

10-03-2016, 09:44 PM	#53
bulldog55 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: California's Canada Warnings: 17 Posts: 2,477	I would not play other people head to head. OOTP is a simulation engine for me so I rarely manage against the AI as it is. I don't find the in-game strategy immersive enough to really care about playing against someone. As an online league commissioner, I might use online play for playoff games but I couldn't see using it for regular season games. Pretty much every league sims a week or two at a time several times a week so they move too fast to really make the most of that. I do think people would enjoy being able to play World Series games, when there are only two teams left and the stakes are high. I doubt that pursuing this would be the most valuable use of development time. __________________ Commissioner, Trans-Continental Base Ball Association Owner/GM, Los Angeles Electrics (TCBA), Beaverton Rangers (OTBL), Portland Mavericks (Union League), and Los Angeles Superbas (Century League) Being smart, don't always make you popular. Last edited by bulldog55; 10-03-2016 at 09:45 PM.

10-03-2016, 11:10 PM	#54
injury log Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Toronto Posts: 9,162	I think head-to-head play in online leagues will sound better in theory than it will work in practice. I can imagine it would happen a lot that you schedule a game with an opponent, they show up 30 minutes late, then mid-game they take a break to put the kids to sleep, and you end up spending an hour or two just to manage a baseball game that often will be lopsided enough the AI might as well have done it for you. If I can save that time, knowing any AI deficiencies that might affect my team affect my opponent equally, I'd usually be happy to do that. It seems to me the kind of feature most leagues would only end up using for decisive games in the playoffs, if at all. If there would be a serious development cost to introduce the feature, my guess is it won't be worth the effort. If it would be relatively simple to implement, then sure, why not.

10-04-2016, 01:15 PM	#55
Redeemed143 Minors (Single A) Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 64	no interest in any of these.

10-04-2016, 09:38 PM	#57
strzepeksc All Star Reserve Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 632	Yes Asked for this for many years I would definitely use head to head play in on line leagues GM's that miss the deadline games would be played out within the game.

10-05-2016, 03:20 PM	#58
Padreman Hall Of Famer Join Date: May 2013 Location: Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico (formally San Diego, CA.) Posts: 4,138 Blog Entries: 1	I will personally not use it but I know a lot of the people do enjoy head to head online So I have no issue with it __________________ Chargers= Despicable Traitors

10-05-2016, 05:19 PM	#59
Tyler87898 All Star Reserve Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 793	It may be because I'm younger, but I love these ideas. I'd really prefer option 2, though. I understand though it may take a couple versions to get it right. Option 1 seems nice, but I don't know how much I would use it. I'm not really a fan of option 3 because I hate the idea of the card pack systems used in many games (usually on mobile).

10-05-2016, 06:28 PM	#60
TheMaus2 All Star Starter Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: The OOTP Forums. Always. Posts: 1,952 Blog Entries: 16	Okay, maybe a FUT draft mode would work. __________________ I write a monthly newsletter on the Food Baseball Association. I also listen to music no one's ever heard of in hopes of looking cool and alternative.