I'm Sorry...developers please read

[dejaqwho]

Originally Posted by tcblcommish

Correct me if I am wrong but EHM was built from a very buggy free to play version and was developed into what it became? I am pretty sure that is how it was because I played the free to play game and in the beginning, it was awful and buggy as hell. Then by the time SI got its money into the game was very good and built on by SI. So enough with this EHM v FHM crap. Only difference between EHM start and FHM start is that FHM charges

Well I don't know anything about EHMs beta phase...I did buy both 05 and 07 games. But I will restates somethign important you already said about that, "free to play game", therefore the argument between the 2 games starting point is moot.

[puck]

I second that one. I'm sure it will be good some day, but if you don't follow the forums you aren't going to know about the issues until you buy it.

[tcblcommish]

Originally Posted by dejaqwho

Well I don't know anything about EHMs beta phase...I did buy both 05 and 07 games. But I will restates somethign important you already said about that, "free to play game", therefore the argument between the 2 games starting point is moot.

It isn't a moot point because if EHM had a backer at that time, it would have been sold. However, it is still the same point, the games starting point was far behind this game in a lot of ways and way ahead in a lot of others.

I'm not fully defending the product cause in a lot of ways, this game can get unplayable real fast but to compare EHM 2007 or even 2005 is very unfair to FHM at the state it is now.

Be constructive when talking about the game and respectful but people go so far over the top.

[pens66]

Originally Posted by tcblcommish

It isn't a moot point because if EHM had a backer at that time, it would have been sold. However, it is still the same point, the games starting point was far behind this game in a lot of ways and way ahead in a lot of others.

Please stop comparing the hobby project of a university student with the product of an experienced game developing studio. It's ridiculous.

[Smetana]

Originally Posted by tcblcommish

Correct me if I am wrong but EHM was built from a very buggy free to play version and was developed into what it became? I am pretty sure that is how it was because I played the free to play game and in the beginning, it was awful and buggy as hell. Then by the time SI got its money into the game was very good and built on by SI. So enough with this EHM v FHM crap. Only difference between EHM start and FHM start is that FHM charges

Just a point of information: SI's original EHM wasn't built off of Risto's freeware EHM:2g. The freeware was programmed in V-Basic, and Riz stated that he had reached the limitations of what that software could do.

The first commercial EHM was built off of old Championship Manager code, and was originally quite terrible, to be honest. It took two more versions for the game to become somewhat polished.

In actuality, the freeware EHM was not "awful and buggy." By version 1.16, that game was as slick as you could get for a freeware game. Riz worked his ass off on that labor of love.

[traveler99]

Originally Posted by Smetana

Just a point of information: SI's original EHM wasn't built off of Risto's freeware EHM:2g. The freeware was programmed in V-Basic, and Riz stated that he had reached the limitations of what that software could do.

The first commercial EHM was built off of old Championship Manager code, and was originally quite terrible, to be honest. It took two more versions for the game to become somewhat polished.

In actuality, the freeware EHM was not "awful and buggy." By version 1.16, that game was as slick as you could get for a freeware game. Riz worked his ass off on that labor of love.

Still atleast once a month i play the old freeware still :P never took me over to 2007 (i have it still) its simplicity and simply how it works if you mod it little it can do miracles if you only interest in NHL game and off course Smetanas classic rosters help a lot :P

[old fat bald guy]

Originally Posted by pens66

Please stop comparing the hobby project of a university student with the product of an experienced game developing studio. It's ridiculous.

I think this is why people are making that comparison: EHM in its final version ('07), was a good enough game to add knowledge to the field of sports management sims. It had serious flaws, but it was playable and immersive and did some parts of the management experience very well.

I also want to join Smetana in saluting Riz's work on that game.

That said, here's the main difference between EHM and FHM: EHM is gone and it's not coming back. FHM is here and it might get better if the consumers (that's us) support it so it doesn't die in its crib.

[BradC]

RE the "built from the ground up" comment: I guess it's how you use your metaphor that dictates how you view that phrase. To me, the UI and things like that are like the facade on a building - the actual simming of the games, the various hockey rules that are different from baseball, etc. are the pipes, the electrical wires, and all the other stuff that makes the building, or the game, actually function.

I'm sure there is code shared between OOTP and FHM that, for example, dictates how player pages are laid out, or how clicking a certain button takes you to a specific place (or how the back and forward buttons work), but none of that matters if you don't have the basics in place.

Yes, it was a very rough launch, and we're all just as frustrated by that as everyone else is. We're working hard to smooth things out and make people happy. We value constructive feedback, whether it's a critique of how the game plays or it's a bug report. We're dedicated to improving the game, and the nice thing about being such a small company with very low overhead is that we can survive a rough launch without needing to think about cancelling the game.

We're very happy with the sales so far, and the % of refunds is actually comparable to the % of OOTP 14 refunds, so I think a lot of people are willing to stick with us. Again, if you want your money back, or if you're holding off on making a purchase, we respect that completely. We just hope you'll keep following the game's progress and will give it another shot at some point.

Thanks. Have a great weekend, everyone.

[GMO123]

Originally Posted by old fat bald guy

I think this is why people are making that comparison: EHM in its final version ('07), was a good enough game to add knowledge to the field of sports management sims. It had serious flaws, but it was playable and immersive and did some parts of the management experience very well.

I also want to join Smetana in saluting Riz's work on that game.

That said, here's the main difference between EHM and FHM: EHM is gone and it's not coming back. FHM is here and it might get better if the consumers (that's us) support it so it doesn't die in its crib.

I agree.

Yes, the initial version of FHM could have been better but the past can't be changed.

If the developers weren't going to improve FHM then we should continually complain.

But the developers have and are improving the game with every patch.

This shows their support for the game and, if we want a hockey sim, we should support their efforts.

They are responsive to constructive critiques.

How does the developers of FHM responsiveness and continual improvements compare to other companies, such as EA NHL 14?

[traveler99]

Originally Posted by BradC

RE the "built from the ground up" comment: I guess it's how you use your metaphor that dictates how you view that phrase. To me, the UI and things like that are like the facade on a building - the actual simming of the games, the various hockey rules that are different from baseball, etc. are the pipes, the electrical wires, and all the other stuff that makes the building, or the game, actually function.

I'm sure there is code shared between OOTP and FHM that, for example, dictates how player pages are laid out, or how clicking a certain button takes you to a specific place (or how the back and forward buttons work), but none of that matters if you don't have the basics in place.

I guess it confirms that pretty much then that OOTP used Baseball code to make the game and mostly just alter what was needed :P so hardly built from "the ground up" and that explains some of the bugs also as people reported same bugs on FHM that was known in OOTP also. Thanks for responding and have a good weekend!

[seankaye]

I think FHM, for an initial release was very ambitious and therein lies the problem.

There are a ton of features and functionality and the game breaks the Pareto Principle (the 80/20) rule.

Basically 80% of the people who buy the game will use 20% of the features, so as a developer it utterly behooves you to make sure that 80% of your time is spent on building that feature set.

But things like flexible league structures and vast numbers of playable leagues are complicated and require a ton of effort to create and maintain. So instead of having multiple levels of leagues in England, that time should have been spent perfecting something else in the game that the vast majority of people want to be as good as possible like the AI.

The other problem that arises with this broad approach is now, a small team has to support that broad feature set.

I applaud the ambition for sure, but sometimes less is more.

[Bluenoser]

Originally Posted by traveler99

I guess it confirms that pretty much then that OOTP used Baseball code to make the game and mostly just alter what was needed :P so hardly built from "the ground up" and that explains some of the bugs also as people reported same bugs on FHM that was known in OOTP also. Thanks for responding and have a good weekend!

It confirms nothing of the sort. All it says is page layouts and clickable links are likely the same. I can't think of too many software programs that don't use page layouts and clickable links.

That's "Hardly" using baseball code to build a hockey game.

[Bluenoser]

Originally Posted by seankaye

I think FHM, for an initial release was very ambitious and therein lies the problem.

There are a ton of features and functionality and the game breaks the Pareto Principle (the 80/20) rule.

Basically 80% of the people who buy the game will use 20% of the features, so as a developer it utterly behooves you to make sure that 80% of your time is spent on building that feature set.

But things like flexible league structures and vast numbers of playable leagues are complicated and require a ton of effort to create and maintain. So instead of having multiple levels of leagues in England, that time should have been spent perfecting something else in the game that the vast majority of people want to be as good as possible like the AI.

The other problem that arises with this broad approach is now, a small team has to support that broad feature set.

I applaud the ambition for sure, but sometimes less is more.

OOTP Baseball has been using a small team to support a broad feature set for 16 versions now - it hasn't hindered the growth/development/support of that game. Why would it be different with this one?

[traveler99]

Originally Posted by Bluenoser

It confirms nothing of the sort. All it says is page layouts and clickable links are likely the same. I can't think of too many software programs that don't use page layouts and clickable links.

That's "Hardly" using baseball code to build a hockey game.

There is exact same bugs in OOTP Baseball and FHM how is that not using same code...

[traveler99]

Originally Posted by Bluenoser

OOTP Baseball has been using a small team to support a broad feature set for 16 versions now - it hasn't hindered the growth/development/support of that game. Why would it be different with this one?

Problem usually lies there that is a small team, how many games they can concentrate fully same time? time is off from something when they work on other always

[Konstantinov]

Originally Posted by traveler99

There is exact same bugs in OOTP Baseball and FHM how is that not using same code...

Seems that everyone is a programmer these days...

They didn't use the same coding. Not even for links and structuring. Links were similar, no doubt. But that's it. That's pretty much where the coding stops the similarities.

If they used the same coding, we'd be playing a baseball game.

I laugh when people say it's almost the same coding, and that there's no excuse for FHM1 to look like OOTP1... apparently people do a lot of programming in their spare time.

All in all, someone summed it up best by saying something along the lines of "EHM was good, yeah. But EHM isn't coming back. Ever. If we continue to support FHM, sooner or later we'll get a product of the same caliber."

The last OOTP I played was 12, I believe. It's really fun. That's why I continue to support FHM. Because I know a good product is on the horizon.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by traveler99

Problem usually lies there that is a small team, how many games they can concentrate fully same time? time is off from something when they work on other always

The team for OOTP is different from that for FHM. OOTP is mostly Markus and Andreas.

FHM is Jeff, Sebastien and Malte.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by traveler99

I guess it confirms that pretty much then that OOTP used Baseball code to make the game and mostly just alter what was needed :P so hardly built from "the ground up" and that explains some of the bugs also as people reported same bugs on FHM that was known in OOTP also. Thanks for responding and have a good weekend!

Have you played both games? I get the feeling you know nothing at all about OOTP. They're very different and have different features.

And what "bugs" are you talking about in OOTP? OOTP is nearly entirely bug free. Of course it has a few small bugs, as any game does, but very few, none of which are the same as the major bugs in FHM.

[dejaqwho]

Originally Posted by Konstantinov

Seems that everyone is a programmer these days...

They didn't use the same coding. Not even for links and structuring. Links were similar, no doubt. But that's it. That's pretty much where the coding stops the similarities.

If they used the same coding, we'd be playing a baseball game.

I laugh when people say it's almost the same coding, and that there's no excuse for FHM1 to look like OOTP1... apparently people do a lot of programming in their spare time.

All in all, someone summed it up best by saying something along the lines of "EHM was good, yeah. But EHM isn't coming back. Ever. If we continue to support FHM, sooner or later we'll get a product of the same caliber."

The last OOTP I played was 12, I believe. It's really fun. That's why I continue to support FHM. Because I know a good product is on the horizon.

It worked decently for EHM copying code from Football manager. Some guy in another forum, Archibalduk(I think he is active here as well), but anyways, he said they did the code 100% form scratch (if he is correct), it is dumb.

Signing the players in MLB and NHL is relativly the same, negotiations, AIs assesment of trade value, trades in general, all this could have been copied from OOTPB. The logic is the same, they are obviously going to have to adjust values to reflect NHL rules.

Just like EHM copied FM code, AI judging values in soccer and hockey is the same logic, they are going to look at potential and current ability, then team needs...and other factors. You change the values and add some extra lines of code as needed, and you have something that you know works. Instead of building something new with massive bugs.

[traveler99]

Originally Posted by Konstantinov

Seems that everyone is a programmer these days...

They didn't use the same coding. Not even for links and structuring. Links were similar, no doubt. But that's it. That's pretty much where the coding stops the similarities.

If they used the same coding, we'd be playing a baseball game.

I laugh when people say it's almost the same coding, and that there's no excuse for FHM1 to look like OOTP1... apparently people do a lot of programming in their spare time.

All in all, someone summed it up best by saying something along the lines of "EHM was good, yeah. But EHM isn't coming back. Ever. If we continue to support FHM, sooner or later we'll get a product of the same caliber."

The last OOTP I played was 12, I believe. It's really fun. That's why I continue to support FHM. Because I know a good product is on the horizon.

you truly are a fanboy with blinds on...If you read these forums there is people who say the player bugs (i could not find link now tried to search but its there, is exact same bug in both games...if is new code how is possible same exact bug appears in both games...)News module is exact same from OOTP just altered txt little, menus and options is exact same, how ignorant you need to be that you still believe its all new...and you are an expert coder that you preach this as 100% fact that it did not use any code? please...