Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaneCarson
Oh how I wanted to say yes to three of those new feature requests!
Revamped and Extended Financial System
League Associations and Custom Tournaments
More "Role-Play" Style Immersion and Interaction (i.e. Interactive Storylines, Media Interaction, etc.)
All three of those would be fantastic. Unfortunately they only wanted me to choose two.  |
I selected a better 2d/3d representation and more role playing. I play out every inning of every game, so a 2d or 3d system similar to Football Manager would really add to the immersion. Even if the players were only "dots" a la the 2D system of FM, I'd be very happy with that. It is just more fun when you see the dots moving around the park, IMO. Even though FM2010 has 3d, I still play with dots.
As for the online questions, I think it might be a good business decision to try to set up something similar to FM Live with OOTP. They could still release the normal product and provide the ability to have private leagues online, while they could also provide a more worldwide network for people to join to play in an online league. I think that could be a huge market for them, so I'm all for it, even though I generally only play solo fictional leagues and have only once taken part in an historical league online with other users.
I'm also very much for a revamped play by play style interactive game, whether it is in 3D or 2D. Even if it is only 2D to start, it would be very fun I think to watch the games play out with fielders moving around and the ball being tossed around since I play out every inning of every game. The immersion factor is so much more apparent when the players come to life, even if as only numbered dots on a fairly unsophisticated field. I'd love to read the description of a fantastic play (like a CF flying into the gap, a 3B charging a chopper, a SS flying into the hole to snag what should have been a single, etc.) and see it played out with my 2D dots with only numbers designating who they are. I don't think 3D is necessary unless it isn't that much of a difference, in terms of work and implementation, between 2D and 3D. I honestly have several fist pumping moments for the 2D version of FM, as pathetic as that may sound. It is so much more rewarding to see the dot actually make the play than it is to read the commentary about what happened. Offensively, I think it would be very rewarding to see how the defensive dots play against a certain struck ball, especially when you are talking about gappers, short homers, or line drives or sharp grounders into the hole. It would so much more fun to watch, even in a very basic 2D environment I think, compared to the static 2D version we have now.
The two things I'd like to see improved by a very large amount are the immersion factor in terms of role playing within the game and the immersion factor involved with seeing the game play out on the field in 2d or 3d. It is so much cooler to see a great sliding catch, for instance, if you actually see your dot flying forward to make the catch. It's just easier to picture in your mind any play, routine or not, if there is both text and the 2d representation on the field. If the play plays out as a liner to RF that a 2B has a chance at, it is so much cooler to see the 2B dot try to go for the ball and perhaps even make a diving motion (whatever that may be in 2D) than it is to just see the ball hit into a RF with no movement from any fielder. The same is true of any inflield play that might be close or any outfield play that might be close in terms of holding a double to a single or a perhaps a triple to a double. Seeing a 2D dot charge in from 3B or 1B or perhaps even SS or 2B would be so much cooler to see actually happen in front of you in 2d than it would otherwise. Even a play that is a chopper between SS and 3B that goes to LF with the LF trying to throw out a guy trying to score from 2B would be so much more intense to actually see it play out on the field. All of these plays are very basic baseball plays.
This is all coming from a person that plays a lot of FM (over 200 hours on FM2010 and 300 hours on FM2009) playing out every game in 2D) despite 3d being available.
In short, I am very much for the idea of an OOTP Online game where you could have thousands of users interacting within the same game world, while still offering the option for smaller private leagues to form as they do now. Still, in terms of business, I think you may want to first introduce a 2D or 3D representation of live games out of pure marketing sense. The game would be much more marketable to a mass audience, if the 2D or 3D game-world would come to life and play out each play. If you could do both within the same game cycle I think that would be perfect, but I'm not sure releasing an "OOTP Live" version of the game without an immersible, playable world on the field would be a good idea. I do definitely think an immersible on the field playing experience would attract a very large market in terms of the online OOTP Live concept of the game. I personally know a huge number of general baseball fans (probably around 30-40 people both as online baseball chatting buddies and people I know IRL) that I haven't been able to turn on to OOTP due to the fact that it is not a full online experience with thousands of gamers and the fact that the games don't really come to life while watching them inning by inning (Out of those 30-40, I've only been able to sell the game to one person, FWIW, and the 30-40 I'm talking about are baseball fanatics. The one I convinced loved the concept of the historical game and was a big 60's Cubs fan).
The inning by inning gameplay is the major selling point for the game, IMO, with the "Live" version coming out once the viewable 2d or 3d representation has reached a level that it becomes the thing that sends it off in terms of massive appeal as an online subscription game. I really think you'd need a more immersive play by play game to sell the Gamespot and IGN crowd on your game, but even a fairly solid 2D version (with 3D being a future consideration) would do the trick, IMO.I am all for simply updating the 2d or 3d aspect of the game in this cycle because I think there is a huge untapped market for you to get into. Get a solid 2D on the field view of the game and release an online subscription version of the game and I really think you could take a huge jump forward in this type of gaming. Fantasy baseball players will probably be very attracted to this new online experience, and I know the people that I know would be very attracted to the concept provided the fees weren't outrageous (say, less than $10 per month). Out of the 30-40 baseball fanatics I know, only one has bitten so far, but if you presented an online game with an immersive 2d or 3d version, I could very realistically sell the game (I'm a good marketer 
) to at least 20 of them, if not more.
Go for it, Markus, but make sure the 2d or 3d is quality before you make the decision. Just my humble opinion. I think the on the field experience of seeing the players actually play out each game is the next step for you from going to kind of an indie game to becoming
the PC baseball game on the market. You already have the best system in terms of historical play, fictional play, or current season play with the work of the people on the real life rosters. Making the game play out on the field would open up a gigantic market for you, my very nice German friend (since about 2005
) Get the immersive on the field play right (2d or 3d), and you put yourself on a rocket launcher in terms of future marketability and sales. Baseball is such a popular sport in the US, you could easily become the FM of the sport. With an interactive on the field experience, word of mouth and reviews would blast your sales through the sky, IMO, since their really aren't many baseball games on the market in the states that can fairly realistically handle the sport over multiple years of play (or decades even, with your game). Though I haven't played many of them, from what I stand, the franchise gameplay is basically broken if you want to play more than maybe 3-4 seasons. MLB:2010 the show is basically "the baseball experience" right now, but having viewed that game, I think you could blow it out of the water with a solid 2d/3d representation on the field.
Regardless of what you decide, I support you 100%. I try to sell your product to as many friends as I can, and I am fairly active on sports forums. Still, even with my recommendation (on sites that I'm considered to be a highly respected member), people are hesitant to buy your game. Any type of upgraded on the field representation would add a huge amount of sell-ability for someone like me that is just a fan and is not affiliated with your company. If you got the on the field immersion factor down, I could honestly sell probably 30-40 copies myself, and I bet that applies to a huge number of the member on here. The on the field representation is huge, for some reason (and actually, I hope you prioritize it, even though I enjoy blasting through historical seasons).
The on the field representation is the future, my friends.