[endgame]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

That is part of OOTP's strength, I think, in that it can appeal to a variety of different types of players. Of course, that diversity also causes issues since everyone has their area of interest they want to see expanded and improved. I don't envy Markus trying to walk that tightrope.

Originally Posted by pstrickert

IMHO, Steve needs to be much more involved and available than last year. I hope his schedule will permit him to.

I'll reserve comment beyond adding that his involvement and availability in the forums themselves would add back a missing dimension. The vets who add their insights are always welcome, as are the newer more critical and provocative voices like OFG, The Wolf and others like him (these are productive, often divisive, but critical elements to growth. Go ahead, call me Obama ), but perhaps, with the exception of 1998 Yankees, no one has really stepped up to that MVP status or Rookie of the Year status, setting the bar with the impetus only his personality, at the time, could have provided.

As goes OOTP, competition, and focus, I'll respond to LGO's comment and yours quoting RonCo from a while back. While RonCo and I may have core philosophical differences about how the game achieves what it does, I've bolded parts of his statement I feel contain merit for serious consideration and dialogue, along with the entirety of his post.

Originally Posted by RonCo

My opinion only, of course: I think a small, independent developer like Markus needs to focus on quality and establishing a firm market. If you look around at the competitors--and there are a _lot_ more than you might think--you'll see that most of them can make a strong argument for having "the best historically accurate simulations" for real baseball universes. They are also bleeding into the area that differentiates OOTP: the ability to be a GM and interact with other GMs online. The phrase "head-to-head" also rises up on occasion.

At question, really, is "what does OOTP do that differentiates it from the rest of the pack?" I argue that fictional, career progression is the answer. Given this opinion, it's really no surprise to me that the recent poll showed that just over 60% of OOTP users preferred fictional players, and that the historical players were 3/5 on modern day vs. past history. Realize this means you have really three different groups--60% fictional, 25% historical, 15% modern.

The basic structure of OOTP was designed before sabermetric studies started showing folks how the game of baseball actually works, and while Markus has done a yoeman's job of mushing things to make the game fit some of those learnings I think there is very little question that any modern game engine developed with these philosophies from the ground up is going to be statistically more accurate in a strictly historical environment. Unless Markus decides to completely re-code his results engine OOTP will be unlikely to match some of the others.

When you run time forward 3-5 years, the question that comes up is: which of these markets will the competition be focusing on? Where will OOTP's bread-and-butter come from? How can OOTP be a market leader in a world where bigger corporate teams have begun to appear?

I quite honestly worry that the decision to continue to try to be everything to everyone is going to result in OOTP winding up being skin-deep everywhere in comparison to other products, leaving OOTP to be supported primarily by those (like folks with deep commitment to online leagues) who are already intricately intertwined in the game and unable to move on without deep impact.

Again, all this is just my .02.