[endgame]

I think two or three of you actually get the point. A limited number of beta-testers (let's say an arbitrary active 30-40) are now at work on the game, to some degree what it contains, and whether what it contains works and works as intended. There is little doubt in my mind that Markus has applied, through his own creation or through someone in a leadership role, a detailed categorization of areas to explore for integrity. If one is to assume all areas will be treated with equal vigor and dissection, one should as well assume areas received both more and less attention than they deserved, breeding the cries of the aftermath. Some areas are in dire need of more attention than others, if but based solely on the voices of the community beyond those closest to its scrutiny. Unless we subscribe to the idea that most of the people really interested in the game and its essential aspects are involved in testing, so the need to contribute or be concerned becomes irrelevant. Your disenchantments, should they arise after the game's release, should then be justly treated with the same irrelevance and indifference.

In an earlier post, Sweed responded to someone that "we should wait to see what the next version looks like before writing off the game." I am a firm believer that we have historically been too complacent and we "wait and see," or rather "wait and then complain" rather than take an active and vocal role during the evaluation's process. To allow the focus of the game, potentially its emphasis and evaluation, to defer to the number of genuinely community-conscious, caring, and participating beta-testers (which I would argue is far less than the arbitrary 30-40) is harnessing an undue burden on the zealous few and magnifies, however inadvertantly, their Game-View to unintended influence.

In another thread someone said they would be willing to pay the usual top dollar for v2007 if it were nothing more than v2006 where everything worked as it should, or was intended to, and the basic, simple rules of baseball were applied with precision (or to that effect). I referenced my response in my original post. While plans, I know, are in place to resurrect many - if not all - of the features left behind in 6.5, my hope remains that the game - first and foremost - returns to the "business of baseball" and one governed by its rules with regard to transactions, finances, and statistical integrity. I think v2006 made great strides in its flexibility with the second, enhanced our field of collection drastically with the third, and still has a lot of work to do with the first. How the AI handles its evaluations, designations and assignments of roles, promotes and demotes, utilizes its roster in lineups, secondary rosters, farm systems, development plans, ad infinitum still remains a critical influence on the believability of the gaming experience: real, imagined, fictional, or historical. While still, IMHO, the pinnacle of baseball simulation, OOTP needs to stay trained on the idea that a baseball game must, primarily, provide an accurate reflection of how baseball works without undue tolerance or rationalization of its shortcomings. Further, and associated, are those same rules applied to the field of play and its adherence to rules and expectations. Beyond those things, the colorful world of decorating our digital heroes becomes not only an easier endeavour, but one with more promise and possibility.

Now that I've once again, to no doubt your usual dismay, editorialized, let me rephrase my original post: What is it you want to make sure these guys look at and look at hard before this game nears release? Don't get left wondering why something wasn't focused on when the answer may well be you never shouted loud enough, or enough times, that it mattered. It's not a suggestion thread, it's a Forget-Me-Not thread. Speak up about what's essential to you and don't get caught up in useless argumentative exchanges. I suppose I'm a fool, but I still like to think all of us still wear the same uniform. Let's try to play on the same field: making sure the front office is focused on the team.