Feedback Needed / Play-by-Play Text - Page 3

tysok · 12-30-2006, 02:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Waninski

Someone made a passing reference to this, but it's ridiculous when someone is stealing a base and the batter puts a half swing on the pitch. Rather than throwing the ball immediately, the C somehow has the time to appeal to the umpire, get the call, and then fire to the bag.

Funniest one I saw was when it called, in this situation, the text object that had the pitcher walking in and yelling at the ump, then the catcher went out to calm him down, went back behind the plate... then threw to third to nail the would-be thief.

Twelvefield · 12-30-2006, 06:06 AM

A lot of description seems to be going towards what happens to the ball. It gets slammed, hammered, nailed, blooped, it sails, drifts, and lays a frozen rope. A lot of this stuff is the result of the action of the play, whereas the action itself tends to get very little decription. Sometimes, it's hard to tell who is doing the slicing, tagging, whipping, etc. because they don't even get named.

I would like to see more emphasis on descibing what the people are doing on the field, and less emphasis describing how the ball reacts to their actions.

i.e.

Here's Lafayette coming in from the on-deck circle...
Looks like the outfield is shifting to the left...
Barkely is getting the sign from the catcher Pieters...
Here's the wind-up and the pitch...
Lafayette checks his swing, it's ball one.
Barkely with the next pitch...
It's in the dirt and outside, Pieters has to stab at it with his glove.
The ump throws a new ball to the pitcher...
Lafayette digs in...
he's looking for a fastball...
Barkely delivers heat right down the middle...
Lafayette breaks his bat, the infield is charging in to get this one!
Barkely fields it himself,
the throw to first...
Lafayette is out by a step.
He's fuming!
He's got some cross words for the umpire.
From the press box, it looks like he was out, the ump made the right call.
The fans are not impressed.
Listen to them boo the ump!
Looks like the wind is picking up, and with it comes a light drizzle.
It's really staring to cool off out here.
Umbrellas are starting to come out in the stands as Ibanez comes to the plate.

Less ellipsis... , less emphasis on the variations of violence that can be done to a baseball, more "sounds", colour, and action from the players and the fans, and more opinions from the press box. The action itself can be terse, very terse, because most of it is reactive to the events that set it up: the way the pitcher sets up his pitches, the way the fielders align their defense, and what the batter is looking to hit. Those things need more description, that's what sets up the action, and creates the drama. Then, there should be denouement in the big plays, so that we have some idea of how we are supposed to feel about the play. The press gallery should come up with stats and opinions about the play. Maybe we agree with them, maybe we don't, but that's all part of baseball broadcasting.

Finally, the senses should be engaged. The reader should be allowed to discover sensual stimuli: the whiff of ozone in the air before a thunderstorm that might mean the game will be called on account of rain. The way the infield grass blazes emerald green when the lights are turned on, or how the ball travels through a zone of shadow on every pitch in a sunny summer afternoon game. The smell of cut grass, leather, and hotdogs that must waft through the dugout at the beginning of the season, and the stench of stale Gatorade, old sweat, and Absorbine jr. that permeates the end of a close pennant race. The roar and chatter of the fans as the game gets exciting, or their boos and jeers if it is a blowout. The lump in your throat you feel when your favorite ex-player has his jersey retired in a special ceremony before the first pitch.

You don't need a lot of that sensory stuff, as a little will go a very long way. But as these games unfold in the stats and in our imaginations, it sure helps to get a note from OOTPB that baseball, above all, is a great way to elevate and refine one's senses of sight, smell, taste, touch, and sound. Otherwise, why bother going out to the games at all?

EDIT: Heh. I guess this post puts me in the opposite camp from the super-terse PbP crowd. I'm not against having terse PbP - I think that should be an option, or a separate .xml mod that can be downloaded to replace the one that ships with the game. For me, it comes down to an argument many months ago that I was having with half of the rest of the community, which Gastric ReFlux, I think, put to bed by suggesting that the only way I would be satifisfied was if we re-animated Bernard Malamud and made him write the PbP. I've never forgotten that. It's a freaking good idea! W.P. Kinsella might also do in a pinch, although his baseball stories have more fluff than Elton John's wardrobe.

Eugene Church · 12-30-2006, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Twelvefield

A lot of description seems to be going towards what happens to the ball. It gets slammed, hammered, nailed, blooped, it sails, drifts, and lays a frozen rope. A lot of this stuff is the result of the action of the play, whereas the action itself tends to get very little decription. Sometimes, it's hard to tell who is doing the slicing, tagging, whipping, etc. because they don't even get named.

I would like to see more emphasis on descibing what the people are doing on the field, and less emphasis describing how the ball reacts to their actions.

i.e.

Here's Lafayette coming in from the on-deck circle...
Looks like the outfield is shifting to the left...
Barkely is getting the sign from the catcher Pieters...
Here's the wind-up and the pitch...
Lafayette checks his swing, it's ball one.
Barkely with the next pitch...
It's in the dirt and outside, Pieters has to stab at it with his glove.
The ump throws a new ball to the pitcher...
Lafayette digs in...
he's looking for a fastball...
Barkely delivers heat right down the middle...
Lafayette breaks his bat, the infield is charging in to get this one!
Barkely fields it himself,
the throw to first...
Lafayette is out by a step.
He's fuming!
He's got some cross words for the umpire.
From the press box, it looks like he was out, the ump made the right call.
The fans are not impressed.
Listen to them boo the ump!
Looks like the wind is picking up, and with it comes a light drizzle.
It's really staring to cool off out here.
Umbrellas are starting to come out in the stands as Ibanez comes to the plate.

Less ellipsis... , less emphasis on the variations of violence that can be done to a baseball, more "sounds", colour, and action from the players and the fans, and more opinions from the press box. The action itself can be terse, very terse, because most of it is reactive to the events that set it up: the way the pitcher sets up his pitches, the way the fielders align their defense, and what the batter is looking to hit. Those things need more description, that's what sets up the action, and creates the drama. Then, there should be denouement in the big plays, so that we have some idea of how we are supposed to feel about the play. The press gallery should come up with stats and opinions about the play. Maybe we agree with them, maybe we don't, but that's all part of baseball broadcasting.

Finally, the senses should be engaged. The reader should be allowed to discover sensual stimuli: the whiff of ozone in the air before a thunderstorm that might mean the game will be called on account of rain. The way the infield grass blazes emerald green when the lights are turned on, or how the ball travels through a zone of shadow on every pitch in a sunny summer afternoon game. The smell of cut grass, leather, and hotdogs that must waft through the dugout at the beginning of the season, and the stench of stale Gatorade, old sweat, and Absorbine jr. that permeates the end of a close pennant race. The roar and chatter of the fans as the game gets exciting, or their boos and jeers if it is a blowout. The lump in your throat you feel when your favorite ex-player has his jersey retired in a special ceremony before the first pitch.

You don't need a lot of that sensory stuff, as a little will go a very long way. But as these games unfold in the stats and in our imaginations, it sure helps to get a note from OOTPB that baseball, above all, is a great way to elevate and refine one's senses of sight, smell, taste, touch, and sound. Otherwise, why bother going out to the games at all?

EDIT: Heh. I guess this post puts me in the opposite camp from the super-terse PbP crowd. I'm not against having terse PbP - I think that should be an option, or a separate .xml mod that can be downloaded to replace the one that ships with the game. For me, it comes down to an argument many months ago that I was having with half of the rest of the community, which Gastric ReFlux, I think, put to bed by suggesting that the only way I would be satifisfied was if we re-animated Bernard Malamud and made him write the PbP. I've never forgotten that. It's a freaking good idea! W.P. Kinsella might also do in a pinch, although his baseball stories have more fluff than Elton John's wardrobe.

What you are describing is PBP paradise or PBP nirvana.

I wish it were that way, too.

That would be great, but first, the PBP has to be made to flow logically and make sense. The basics have to be there before it can be expanded and made interesting.

It is very difficult to write specifics for a computer baseball game, it almost has to be generic and bland by necessity, so it will fit in all cases...at least in the early editions of a game, it has to be this way.

In my opinion, Markus has never concentrated on PBP until V2006. That is why it is poor (in my opinion).

Keep in mind that the text for the most part is written by "unpaid volunteers". To do it right, you need professionals to write it.

Even the best of the writing can get stale, when you see it over and over again, which you will in a computer game.

But the game needs two styles of PBP...just the terse and basic play outcome...and the expanded play result for the ones who love language and atmosphere.

I am not a computer programmer, but it seems like Markus could do this...just have two files shipped with the game...and give the option to choose which one you want to use.

There is no way Markus can please us all...half of us play out games and want good PBP...half of us sim and could care less about PBP, we want Markus to spend time on the other "more important elements that we like", rather than waste it on PBP...half of us like clean and uncluttered game screens...half of us like the faded logos...etc.

Markus can't win for losing.

Curtis · 12-30-2006, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eugene Church

There is no way Markus can please us all...half of us play out games and want good PBP...half of us sim and could care less about PBP, we want Markus to spend time on the other "more important elements that we like", rather than waste it on PBP...half of us like clean and uncluttered game screens...half of us like the faded logos...etc.

Markus can't win for losing.

Can I have an 'Amen!' from the congregation?

rbaezam79 · 12-31-2006, 07:46 PM

Is there any way we can see in the pbp the text that is saved in the log files? Maybe some kind of option or something like that. I find the log files more clear and short, and less distracting.

Thanks.

The Professor · 01-01-2007, 11:08 AM

The problem with PBP in OOTP2006 is that it was the work of too many blind men poking around without directions. I know. I was one of the blind men.

I do, of course, think all of the criticisms of the text are completely valid.

That said, I think discussing what is and isn't wrong with the text is a complete waste of time if the fundamental problem underlying all of this is not addressed. There has to be a comfortable and complete meeting of the text editing team and the game's code. Too often in v.2006 the uneditable code mucked up efforts to create comprehensive PBP. The text writers got too ambitious trying to make up for the inability to edit key code tokens and phrases by creating verbose descriptions...

...only to discover that the code doubled up pronouns, doubled up home run calls, misread runners on base or called grand slam descriptions with no runners on. Exclamations were overused but almost impossible to control. When you consider that there were far too many people writing the text, with far too little understanding of how it all fit (and that after months of writing the team had to slash, burn & tweak 3/4 of the work in a weeks time prior to release) as bad as it turned out - and it was exceptionally bad - it could have been imcomprehensibly worse.

Ultimately, and I've said this before, the future of PBP in OOTP will benefit from just a few qualified text writers focusing specifically on that aspect of the game. More importantly, however, Markus has to make it possible for the entire range of PBP code to be edited so that what was "untouchable" in v.2006 doesn't continue to muddle up efforts to improve the editable PBP in future versions.

Establishing a uniform voice dedicated to simple, diverse, text with an emphasis on clean description that falls somewhere between vanilla and slightly colorful would be perfect IMO. As someone who ran the gauntlet of the 2006 process, the lessons seem painful and clear ---- but valuable. I think if they are keenly remembered the text in the next version of OOTP will be a remarkable step forward. The kind of step that could only come after reckoning with the tribulations of the v.2006 process.

That, however, will all be moot if uneditable phrases and code remain and are slowly addressed and/or ignored (because, honestly, they just aren't as important as most other aspects of the game) during the creating/testing process.

PSUColonel · 01-01-2007, 11:50 AM

I know these conversations can be fun, but until the AI in this game is up to snuff, this is all window dressing as far as I'm concerned.

Eugene Church · 01-01-2007, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Professor

The problem with PBP in OOTP2006 is that it was the work of too many blind men poking around without directions. I know. I was one of the blind men.

I do, of course, think all of the criticisms of the text are completely valid.

That said, I think discussing what is and isn't wrong with the text is a complete waste of time if the fundamental problem underlying all of this is not addressed. There has to be a comfortable and complete meeting of the text editing team and the game's code. Too often in v.2006 the uneditable code mucked up efforts to create comprehensive PBP. The text writers got too ambitious trying to make up for the inability to edit key code tokens and phrases by creating verbose descriptions...

...only to discover that the code doubled up pronouns, doubled up home run calls, misread runners on base or called grand slam descriptions with no runners on. Exclamations were overused but almost impossible to control. When you consider that there were far too many people writing the text, with far too little understanding of how it all fit (and that after months of writing the team had to slash, burn & tweak 3/4 of the work in a weeks time prior to release) as bad as it turned out - and it was exceptionally bad - it could have been imcomprehensibly worse.

Ultimately, and I've said this before, the future of PBP in OOTP will benefit from just a few qualified text writers focusing specifically on that aspect of the game. More importantly, however, Markus has to make it possible for the entire range of PBP code to be edited so that what was "untouchable" in v.2006 doesn't continue to muddle up efforts to improve the editable PBP in future versions.

Establishing a uniform voice dedicated to simple, diverse, text with an emphasis on clean description that falls somewhere between vanilla and slightly colorful would be perfect IMO. As someone who ran the gauntlet of the 2006 process, the lessons seem painful and clear ---- but valuable. I think if they are keenly remembered the text in the next version of OOTP will be a remarkable step forward. The kind of step that could only come after reckoning with the tribulations of the v.2006 process.

That, however, will all be moot if uneditable phrases and code remain and are slowly addressed and/or ignored (because, honestly, they just aren't as important as most other aspects of the game) during the creating/testing process.

Another BIG AMEN!

The Professor knows of what he speaks.

Well said, Prof.

Happy New Year.

Sorry about the exclamation point.

Mattymo · 01-02-2007, 09:23 AM

I keep seeing 2 things which are incredibly annoying.

1: "There's a fly ball to left
Peterson over ran the ball
Now he turns, Looking, looking
He's caught it! What a play"

The guy catches it every time, and I see it once per every 3 games (keep in mind, I sim through the 6th inning, then play out the last 3 as manager)

2: "There's a hard shot in the hole to between 1st and 2nd
Johnson barehands it, and throws to first for the out"

Umm...no infielder is barehanding a "hard shot" on the ground.

Other than that, while there are a few things missing, I think it's fine. I agreed with some of the sentiments that EVERY ball is close to being caught, when in fact, some should be obvious singles, doubles, etc.

Mattymo · 01-02-2007, 09:27 AM

Oh, and another play I can't stand is the "incredible stop" by the catcher.

"Martinez hits a dribbler in front of the plate
A great stop by Gomez, he gets to his feet
First to first...Out!"

jm47048 · 01-02-2007, 09:32 AM

My biggest complaint about the PbP was that everything was such a close play. Case in point:

"Routine ground ball to SS... this should be a routine play... difficult play for the SS... He has it... throw to first... IN TIME!!!! WOW I really want to see the highlight reel on that one..."

Anyway, this is not exact text but you get the idea. This was true of OOTP6 too.

What I think would be a cool idea is to have some text used on average, and some less often text. Perhaps a flag in the XML might be good no?

jm47048 · 01-02-2007, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattymo

Oh, and another play I can't stand is the "incredible stop" by the catcher.

"Martinez hits a dribbler in front of the plate
A great stop by Gomez, he gets to his feet
First to first...Out!"

Ha ha, this bothers me too actually It happens every game!

RBLwebguy · 01-02-2007, 09:38 AM

hehe, it happened in the games I looked at

albatross11 · 01-02-2007, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattymo

Oh, and another play I can't stand is the "incredible stop" by the catcher.

"Martinez hits a dribbler in front of the plate
A great stop by Gomez, he gets to his feet
First to first...Out!"

I rarely see the catcher field anything! Usually the pitcher fields anything "around home plate", and the corner infielders field "high flys" and "pop ups" behind the plate!

I've yet to see a catcher drop a foul tip either...he always hangs on to it.
And.....the first bunt attempt is always foul!

t-bone shuffle · 01-02-2007, 01:37 PM

I'm sure I'll probably regret this, but most of the discussion above leads me to the honest question of, what was/are the complaints/problems with the PbP in 6.5? I've always thought it did a good job and certainly if you play out games there's some repetitiveness, but nothing even close to being as bad as some of the examples listed here.

I'm sure there's probably a thread or two and if anyone could provide a link, I'd be grateful. This just seems to me to be one of the items that would fall under the heading of "If it's not broken", but I'm seriouly interested in hearing from those who thought 6.5 PbP was.

Thanks in advance.

White Sox · 01-02-2007, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t-bone shuffle

I'm sure I'll probably regret this, but most of the discussion above leads me to the honest question of, what was/are the complaints/problems with the PbP in 6.5? I've always thought it did a good job and certainly if you play out games there's some repetitiveness, but nothing even close to being as bad as some of the examples listed here.

I'm sure there's probably a thread or two and if anyone could provide a link, I'd be grateful. This just seems to me to be one of the items that would fall under the heading of "If it's not broken", but I'm seriouly interested in hearing from those who thought 6.5 PbP was.

Thanks in advance.

I agree. But never having played 6.5, I have to say the PbP from OOTP5 was incredible. I'm not sure why that would get completely scrapped. They should have just kept making improvements.

On getting back to some things, namely strange terminology, enough with the line shots being described as "blue darters".

Also getting back to my previous complaint in this post that when you sim out an entire AB, there will be zero foul balls, there should also be more foul pop flies caught for an out. It seems occasionally there will be a foul pop straight up the chute that is caught by the C, but other than that, I have only seen the 3B catch a foul ball...which is rare, and is always described as (not verbatim, of course): "Popped up behind the plate...the 3B makes the catch," which makes no sense...well some, if you consider the rare play that a fly ball is hit so high and at a bad angle for the C that either the 1B or the 3B must rush in to help out. But also, if you guys will be good enough to make foul fly outs while simming ABs, there should also be the possibility that some of these foul flies simply make the seats, because otherwise it will be too predictable. Every foul fly will obviously be caught, taking away from the drama that comes with a foul pop fly near the seats.

EDIT: Just thinking of more things as I go along, having the majority of ground balls hit to the 2B described as a "ground ball between 1st and 2nd" gets annoying. There seems to be way too many homeruns hit "down the right/left field lines" and not enough homers into the gaps...and not nearly enough home runs hit to straight away CF.

zekester91 · 01-02-2007, 02:59 PM

OOTP has always had trouble with Foul balls, I don't think 6.5 or before has ever seen an outfeider catch a foul ball. And unless your playing pitch by pitch, unless there is an "play" made on a foul ball you don't see it, as only the action is shown in simming the at bat. My guess is that the first foul ball on bunt attempts is so that you can set up your defense, which kinda defetes the purpose of bunting, since the batter is trying to suprise the defence.

With OOTP 6, Markus made a redution in the foul balls that make the seats being shown becuse many complained that you'd end up getting a bunch of foul balls incressing the number of clicks and incressing game times. People didn't want drama, they wanted speed.

Charley575 · 01-02-2007, 03:01 PM

I'll echo the "blue darter" (huh?) comment and add "lasers". At times, it feels like a Star Trek movie or a laser tag game. I keep expecting the PbP to inform me that the 3B just deactivated the enemy base. "That's 100 points, Bob." "And 50 free prize tickets, Joe." "Ha! That's a lot of free pencil erasers, Bob! And now, a word from our sponsors."

*Note that I added the color guy. Nice touch, I think.

White Sox · 01-02-2007, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charley575

I'll echo the "blue darter" (huh?) comment and add "lasers".

For the record, hearing line shots described as "lasers" and "laser beams" isn't too strange if you've ever heard a game called by the God-awful Chip Caray. But, yes, the laser call should forever be done away with.

White Sox · 01-02-2007, 03:22 PM

I know this is what you guys are NOT looking for, but I thought I would go ahead and say it anyway. (Perhaps you should start a thread for complaints on the actual action, because that is also far from perfect). There are way, way, way, too many runners that don't score from second base on base hits to the outfield with two outs.

View Poll Results: How do you feel about the play-by-play text in OOTPB 2006? (multiple selections OK!)
The overall phrasing/"baseball feel" of the play-by-play is good	7	10.29%
The overall phrasing/"baseball feel" of the play-by-play is OK	34	50.00%
The overall phrasing/"baseball feel" of the play-by-play is poor	19	27.94%
The overall phrasing of the play-by-play is too verbose	17	25.00%
The overall verbosity of the play-by-play is just about right	9	13.24%
The play-by-play is not verbose enough	15	22.06%
The play-by-play should be broken into more lines/pauses	6	8.82%
The play-by-play is nicely broken out into multiple lines/pauses	10	14.71%
The play-by-play is broken into too many lines/pauses	27	39.71%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 68. You may not vote on this poll

12-30-2006, 06:06 AM	#42
Twelvefield All Star Starter Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 1,188	A lot of description seems to be going towards what happens to the ball. It gets slammed, hammered, nailed, blooped, it sails, drifts, and lays a frozen rope. A lot of this stuff is the result of the action of the play, whereas the action itself tends to get very little decription. Sometimes, it's hard to tell who is doing the slicing, tagging, whipping, etc. because they don't even get named. I would like to see more emphasis on descibing what the people are doing on the field, and less emphasis describing how the ball reacts to their actions. i.e. Here's Lafayette coming in from the on-deck circle... Looks like the outfield is shifting to the left... Barkely is getting the sign from the catcher Pieters... Here's the wind-up and the pitch... Lafayette checks his swing, it's ball one. Barkely with the next pitch... It's in the dirt and outside, Pieters has to stab at it with his glove. The ump throws a new ball to the pitcher... Lafayette digs in... he's looking for a fastball... Barkely delivers heat right down the middle... Lafayette breaks his bat, the infield is charging in to get this one! Barkely fields it himself, the throw to first... Lafayette is out by a step. He's fuming! He's got some cross words for the umpire. From the press box, it looks like he was out, the ump made the right call. The fans are not impressed. Listen to them boo the ump! Looks like the wind is picking up, and with it comes a light drizzle. It's really staring to cool off out here. Umbrellas are starting to come out in the stands as Ibanez comes to the plate. Less ellipsis... , less emphasis on the variations of violence that can be done to a baseball, more "sounds", colour, and action from the players and the fans, and more opinions from the press box. The action itself can be terse, very terse, because most of it is reactive to the events that set it up: the way the pitcher sets up his pitches, the way the fielders align their defense, and what the batter is looking to hit. Those things need more description, that's what sets up the action, and creates the drama. Then, there should be denouement in the big plays, so that we have some idea of how we are supposed to feel about the play. The press gallery should come up with stats and opinions about the play. Maybe we agree with them, maybe we don't, but that's all part of baseball broadcasting. Finally, the senses should be engaged. The reader should be allowed to discover sensual stimuli: the whiff of ozone in the air before a thunderstorm that might mean the game will be called on account of rain. The way the infield grass blazes emerald green when the lights are turned on, or how the ball travels through a zone of shadow on every pitch in a sunny summer afternoon game. The smell of cut grass, leather, and hotdogs that must waft through the dugout at the beginning of the season, and the stench of stale Gatorade, old sweat, and Absorbine jr. that permeates the end of a close pennant race. The roar and chatter of the fans as the game gets exciting, or their boos and jeers if it is a blowout. The lump in your throat you feel when your favorite ex-player has his jersey retired in a special ceremony before the first pitch. You don't need a lot of that sensory stuff, as a little will go a very long way. But as these games unfold in the stats and in our imaginations, it sure helps to get a note from OOTPB that baseball, above all, is a great way to elevate and refine one's senses of sight, smell, taste, touch, and sound. Otherwise, why bother going out to the games at all? EDIT: Heh. I guess this post puts me in the opposite camp from the super-terse PbP crowd. I'm not against having terse PbP - I think that should be an option, or a separate .xml mod that can be downloaded to replace the one that ships with the game. For me, it comes down to an argument many months ago that I was having with half of the rest of the community, which Gastric ReFlux, I think, put to bed by suggesting that the only way I would be satifisfied was if we re-animated Bernard Malamud and made him write the PbP. I've never forgotten that. It's a freaking good idea! W.P. Kinsella might also do in a pinch, although his baseball stories have more fluff than Elton John's wardrobe. Last edited by Twelvefield; 12-30-2006 at 06:23 AM.

01-01-2007, 11:08 AM	#46
The Professor Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: East of East Posts: 3,020	The problem with PBP in OOTP2006 is that it was the work of too many blind men poking around without directions. I know. I was one of the blind men. I do, of course, think all of the criticisms of the text are completely valid. That said, I think discussing what is and isn't wrong with the text is a complete waste of time if the fundamental problem underlying all of this is not addressed. There has to be a comfortable and complete meeting of the text editing team and the game's code. Too often in v.2006 the uneditable code mucked up efforts to create comprehensive PBP. The text writers got too ambitious trying to make up for the inability to edit key code tokens and phrases by creating verbose descriptions... ...only to discover that the code doubled up pronouns, doubled up home run calls, misread runners on base or called grand slam descriptions with no runners on. Exclamations were overused but almost impossible to control. When you consider that there were far too many people writing the text, with far too little understanding of how it all fit (and that after months of writing the team had to slash, burn & tweak 3/4 of the work in a weeks time prior to release) as bad as it turned out - and it was exceptionally bad - it could have been imcomprehensibly worse. Ultimately, and I've said this before, the future of PBP in OOTP will benefit from just a few qualified text writers focusing specifically on that aspect of the game. More importantly, however, Markus has to make it possible for the entire range of PBP code to be edited so that what was "untouchable" in v.2006 doesn't continue to muddle up efforts to improve the editable PBP in future versions. Establishing a uniform voice dedicated to simple, diverse, text with an emphasis on clean description that falls somewhere between vanilla and slightly colorful would be perfect IMO. As someone who ran the gauntlet of the 2006 process, the lessons seem painful and clear ---- but valuable. I think if they are keenly remembered the text in the next version of OOTP will be a remarkable step forward. The kind of step that could only come after reckoning with the tribulations of the v.2006 process. That, however, will all be moot if uneditable phrases and code remain and are slowly addressed and/or ignored (because, honestly, they just aren't as important as most other aspects of the game) during the creating/testing process. __________________ History isn't really about the past - settling old scores. It's about defining the present and who we are." Last edited by The Professor; 01-01-2007 at 11:09 AM.

01-02-2007, 09:32 AM	#51
jm47048 All Star Starter Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 1,247	My biggest complaint about the PbP was that everything was such a close play. Case in point: "Routine ground ball to SS... this should be a routine play... difficult play for the SS... He has it... throw to first... IN TIME!!!! WOW I really want to see the highlight reel on that one..." Anyway, this is not exact text but you get the idea. This was true of OOTP6 too. What I think would be a cool idea is to have some text used on average, and some less often text. Perhaps a flag in the XML might be good no? __________________ The New York Yankees World Series Champions 1923, 1927, 1928, 1932, 1936, 1937, 1938, 1939, 1941, 1943, 1947, 1949, 1950, 1951, 1952, 1953, 1956, 1958, 1961, 1962, 1977, 1978, 1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2009 American League Champions 1921, 1922, 1923, 1926, 1927, 1928, 1932, 1936, 1937, 1938, 1939, 1941, 1942, 1943, 1947, 1949, 1950, 1951, 1952, 1953, 1955, 1956, 1957, 1958, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1981, 1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2003, 2009, 2024 Last edited by jm47048; 01-02-2007 at 09:34 AM.

01-02-2007, 03:22 PM	#60
White Sox All Star Reserve Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 583	I know this is what you guys are NOT looking for, but I thought I would go ahead and say it anyway. (Perhaps you should start a thread for complaints on the actual action, because that is also far from perfect). There are way, way, way, too many runners that don't score from second base on base hits to the outfield with two outs. __________________ "Pitching, Defense, and the Three-Run Homer."

12-31-2006, 07:46 PM	#45
rbaezam79 Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 58	Is there any way we can see in the pbp the text that is saved in the log files? Maybe some kind of option or something like that. I find the log files more clear and short, and less distracting. Thanks.

01-01-2007, 11:50 AM	#47
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,148	I know these conversations can be fun, but until the AI in this game is up to snuff, this is all window dressing as far as I'm concerned.

01-02-2007, 09:23 AM	#49
Mattymo All Star Starter Join Date: May 2002 Location: Colchester, CT Posts: 1,448	I keep seeing 2 things which are incredibly annoying. 1: "There's a fly ball to left Peterson over ran the ball Now he turns, Looking, looking He's caught it! What a play" The guy catches it every time, and I see it once per every 3 games (keep in mind, I sim through the 6th inning, then play out the last 3 as manager) 2: "There's a hard shot in the hole to between 1st and 2nd Johnson barehands it, and throws to first for the out" Umm...no infielder is barehanding a "hard shot" on the ground. Other than that, while there are a few things missing, I think it's fine. I agreed with some of the sentiments that EVERY ball is close to being caught, when in fact, some should be obvious singles, doubles, etc.

01-02-2007, 09:27 AM	#50
Mattymo All Star Starter Join Date: May 2002 Location: Colchester, CT Posts: 1,448	Oh, and another play I can't stand is the "incredible stop" by the catcher. "Martinez hits a dribbler in front of the plate A great stop by Gomez, he gets to his feet First to first...Out!"

01-02-2007, 09:38 AM	#53
RBLwebguy Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Canuckistan Posts: 5,162	hehe, it happened in the games I looked at

01-02-2007, 01:37 PM	#55
t-bone shuffle All Star Reserve Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: The dull edge of the blade Posts: 867	I'm sure I'll probably regret this, but most of the discussion above leads me to the honest question of, what was/are the complaints/problems with the PbP in 6.5? I've always thought it did a good job and certainly if you play out games there's some repetitiveness, but nothing even close to being as bad as some of the examples listed here. I'm sure there's probably a thread or two and if anyone could provide a link, I'd be grateful. This just seems to me to be one of the items that would fall under the heading of "If it's not broken", but I'm seriouly interested in hearing from those who thought 6.5 PbP was. Thanks in advance.

01-02-2007, 02:59 PM	#57
zekester91 All Star Starter Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 1,122	OOTP has always had trouble with Foul balls, I don't think 6.5 or before has ever seen an outfeider catch a foul ball. And unless your playing pitch by pitch, unless there is an "play" made on a foul ball you don't see it, as only the action is shown in simming the at bat. My guess is that the first foul ball on bunt attempts is so that you can set up your defense, which kinda defetes the purpose of bunting, since the batter is trying to suprise the defence. With OOTP 6, Markus made a redution in the foul balls that make the seats being shown becuse many complained that you'd end up getting a bunch of foul balls incressing the number of clicks and incressing game times. People didn't want drama, they wanted speed.

01-02-2007, 03:01 PM	#58
Charley575 All Star Reserve Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Ocala, FL Posts: 544	I'll echo the "blue darter" (huh?) comment and add "lasers". At times, it feels like a Star Trek movie or a laser tag game. I keep expecting the PbP to inform me that the 3B just deactivated the enemy base. "That's 100 points, Bob." "And 50 free prize tickets, Joe." "Ha! That's a lot of free pencil erasers, Bob! And now, a word from our sponsors." *Note that I added the color guy. Nice touch, I think.