Love the Game, But. . .

[Ruthian23]

Originally Posted by darkcloud4579

Meh. I'd prefer the game do stuff right than worryabout graphics. I never, ever play that way and it's unrealistic to expect a one-man company with a few developers helping to do something like that. The game for what it is is outstanding and there are so many other areas where the game what it is now could be better...

It's unrealistic to expect something like what?

And like I said a couple of posts above, there's just this widespread belief that you either want one or the other. It's not true. To me, when people say things like this, I feel like those who enjoy statistics beyond BA, HRs, and RBIs do when people imply they don't care about the actual sport, just the numbers.

[pastimesteve]

Ruthian23 has covered my perspective very well, however I wanted to jump in with a couple of points I've shared previously on here.

The only 3D animation I really care about is the accurate flight of the ball, or path of the ball if it's a grounder (along with some kind of corresponding sound effect). I want to get a feel for if it's a hot shot to the infield or a huge blast over the outfield wall. Maybe I'm weird, but sometimes I just like to sit back and watch my team and players in a game situation.

If old games like Earl Weaver Baseball, Hardball 1&2 and FPS Baseball '94 could accomplish these simple graphics, I'm not sure it's too much to ask for the OOTP team.

To me, and Ruthian23 pointed this out well, it's all about increasing the immersion factor for those of us who like to play out the games every once in a while. I've even suggested previously to have the option to replace the current player displays on the field with circles that have the uniform scheme/colors and jersey numbers. Those uniform representations on the field could be edited by the user (pinstripes or not, border colors, jersey number font/colors, etc.). Those circles would move along the basepaths in a realistic fashion, and infielder/outfielder circles would chase balls, "catch" balls, etc.

I guess if there was a desire for this, a sidebar animation could be shown of the pitcher/batter duel. Many games more than two decades ago were able to display this.

I don't want people to misunderstand my comments. I commend Markus for creating an impressive simulation of baseball. He has done amazing work. I just think these features would push the game over the top for me. Of course, I see all of these features as easily toggled on or off depending on user preference.

As it is now, I personally do not like "watching" games in OOTP, and that takes a lot of the fun out of the experience for ME, but I realize I'm just one guy. True, baseball has always been a game dominated by data and numbers, but it's also a game that has a unique atmospheric quality about it. It's not asking too much to have some of that reflected in a computer simulation, and certainly not a suggestion to have the atmosphere outweigh the numbers side of the simulation -- just seeking more balance.

Steve

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by Assos

Been here a long time, never thought I would see something as complex as what we have now. I want what is best for the under the hood engine. I do not care what kind of dress you put on her, it is what is underneath that I am after!

Exactly. Well put. The game's the thing.

[jabrown6940]

Originally Posted by pastimesteve

1) The only 3D animation I really care about is the accurate flight of the ball, or path of the ball if it's a grounder (along with some kind of corresponding sound effect).

2) I've even suggested previously to have the option to replace the current player displays on the field with circles that have the uniform scheme/colors and jersey numbers.


3) Those uniform representations on the field could be edited by the user (pinstripes or not, border colors, jersey number font/colors, etc.).


4) Those circles would move along the basepaths in a realistic fashion, and infielder/outfielder circles would chase balls, "catch" balls, etc.

5) I guess if there was a desire for this, a sidebar animation could be shown of the pitcher/batter duel.

6) Of course, I see all of these features as easily toggled on or off depending on user preference.

7) As it is now, I personally do not like "watching" games in OOTP, and that takes a lot of the fun out of the experience for ME, but I realize I'm just one guy.

1) This!
2) Black circle with white jersey number for home team and white circle with black jersey number or visa versa. Teams with similar team colors get confused along the bath paths. This would make the field look less cluttered. The information displayed now could be displayed in the rollover information.
3) Don't need huge circles with pinstripes and such. I'd rather have a simple black or white circle more representative of size of a player on the field. It would be large as is with the jersey number in it.
4) This! The ball should never leave the field. Whether it be a pitch, throw to second, a passed ball, wild pitch, hit, 6-4-3 DP, throw from outfield, etc. the ball depicts every move it makes. Player circles, both offensive and defensive, move accordingly. Defensive player shifts displayed and so much more.
5) This goes too far. Don't need it.
6) Agree.
7) While I would enjoy watching the games more with the graphic representations I mention above, I do enjoy playing the game as is.


Graphics shouldn't be feared (even though it scares the hell out of me that it will go too far). Do I think other aspects of this great game be ignored? Of course not. That would be ridiculous.

[Markus Heinsohn]

Players (or something resembling players) moving around in 3D running the bases, catching the ball etc does sound easy to do, but if you want to do it right (which we do), it is a very complicated system with a very complex AI. Heck, even the modern console baseball games have plenty of flaws in this area (I am not talking about the look, but rather the AI and where players move in relation to the ball/situation).

We will work on this for OOTP 17, though

[jasonn29tn14]

I've been playing OOTP since 2003. I've bought about every 3rd version. One thing I've noticed is this game consistently gets better with every release. It seems like those who are saying they don't want graphics are making a false argument. They've been working on graphics for the last two versions and yet the sim keeps getting better. That just sounds like a win-win to me.

I play FM in 3D mode. The immersion of watching your team on the field is a really big deal to me. I always keep going back even if I haven't played it for a while. In two or three versions when OOTP starts getting closer to this graphically it will take over as the game I play the most. I think the future of OOTP is very bright in every way. I think eventually we can have our cake and eat it too.

[Bunktown Ballers]

Originally Posted by Ruthian23

I think there seems to be a common misconception that those who would like a more graphical in game presentation don't care about the simulation or something. If we wanted video game action, we'd get a video game system as you suggest, but the thing is that we don't want that kind of action (or at least we don't want that kind of action from our OOTP.)

I assume anyone who has been playing OOTP for a long time (or at all, really) hasn't been playing it because of the graphics. We play it because we love the depth and the simulation engine. That being said, though, some of us feel we'd be even further immersed by the actual games if there was really strong simple animation. Not to speak for everyone who wants more animation, and there certainly might be some folks out there who would compromise gameplay for graphics, but I get kind of tired of the posts that seem to indicate a belief that those of us who would like a little more on the in game graphics side don't care about the simulation or would be happier with a PS4 game.

Well Said.....With all you just said people seem to forget since version 1 this game has been text based simulation. And every year all of us buy it because of that. Don't You? Yet every year there are so many threads about .."How I wish this game had animation" And Markus has time and time again replied to those threads..But I'd be doggone...In 3-4 more days a new thread will surface with the same "How I wish this game had animation" For 16 versions it hasn't....How many versions has to be released before people understand this is a text based simulation game? I LOVE IT FOR JUST THAT! If it ever turned into an animated based game...I won't buy...But that's my option....Just worry bout bugs that you find....I'm out...

[Ruthian23]

Originally Posted by Bunktown Ballers

Well Said.....With all you just said people seem to forget since version 1 this game has been text based simulation. And every year all of us buy it because of that. Don't You? Yet every year there are so many threads about .."How I wish this game had animation" And Markus has time and time again replied to those threads..But I'd be doggone...In 3-4 more days a new thread will surface with the same "How I wish this game had animation" For 16 versions it hasn't....How many versions has to be released before people understand this is a text based simulation game? I LOVE IT FOR JUST THAT! If it ever turned into an animated based game...I won't buy...But that's my option....Just worry bout bugs that you find....I'm out...

Well, I'm actually a supporter of more animation, but like I said in the posts, certainly the animation should never ever come at the expense of the simulation. Again, I just feel like sometimes people act like folks who are pro-more animation don't care about the simulation, and this couldn't be further from the truth.

Also, I think those of us who support more animation envision some sort of cool 2D graphics (with a 3D ball), not AAA level graphics. I don't want to ever play OOTP FOR the graphics, and I really don't think there are people who do, but I would enjoy if the simulation engine I love had a more graphical output. It would make an already incredibly immersive game even more immersive for me. They're two entirely different things.

[Ruthian23]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Players (or something resembling players) moving around in 3D running the bases, catching the ball etc does sound easy to do, but if you want to do it right (which we do), it is a very complicated system with a very complex AI. Heck, even the modern console baseball games have plenty of flaws in this area (I am not talking about the look, but rather the AI and where players move in relation to the ball/situation).

We will work on this for OOTP 17, though

By the way, I don't mean to suggest (and I'm not sure anyone else does) that this is an easy thing, because you're absolutely right that it needs to be done right. That's kind of why I think 2D players on the field and a 3D ball might be the solution. I think FM has a pretty much perfect 2D/3D ball system right now, but their 3D is still a little awkward for me. I think the 2D circle players and 3D ball might be a more realistic goal.

Like I said, I don't think people are suggesting it's easy, just that it's doable, even for a smaller team. You guys seem to agree, since you're working toward it, and I'm very happy to see it.

[Garrett67]

I've mentioned it before and I think what Big Win Baseball (iOS game) does is perfect in terms of representing what happens on the field.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUe2IW2BsEE

[Syd Thrift]

I've got to be honest, I used to play the crap out of Microleague Baseball and I remember that after a few games I kind of wanted to just turn the graphics off because you could tell after like 4 or 5 frames what the outcome of the play was going to be and everything else was just you watching the same animation unfold over and over again. I'm not sure how OOTP can get away from this at least in its current model.

For something in the future, probably far into the future, it would be awesome for the game to be purely physics-based. It would be, to put it mildly, very, very hard for Markus to keep everything working at the same level that it's working now if you do that (I can only imagine, for instance, trying to translate classic stats into pitchFX-based ratings, and would imagine that for anything before 1960 or so somebody would need to spend a crap-ton of time tweaking everything so it came out right *and* looking like actual baseball). In short, it's a neat idea but I don't think we're ready for it just yet.

[Ruthian23]

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

I've got to be honest, I used to play the crap out of Microleague Baseball and I remember that after a few games I kind of wanted to just turn the graphics off because you could tell after like 4 or 5 frames what the outcome of the play was going to be and everything else was just you watching the same animation unfold over and over again. I'm not sure how OOTP can get away from this at least in its current model.

I think this is what Markus means by "doing it right," though. For instance, the 2D in FM everything runs very fluidly and you can't pick up on what's going to happen based on the same animations occurring over and over. I agree it wouldn't be worth it if it was just the same 10 animations playing over and over again.

[swoboda]

Originally Posted by Ruthian23

I think this is what Markus means by "doing it right," though. For instance, the 2D in FM everything runs very fluidly and you can't pick up on what's going to happen based on the same animations occurring over and over. I agree it wouldn't be worth it if it was just the same 10 animations playing over and over again.

I have never looked at FM, but the 2d graphics in the old Tony LaRussa game would be just fine. an option to disable them would be just fine too. The 2D/3D hybrid described above would be fantastic.
but having said that I would also say that I plan to continue to buy this game each year even if the graphics do not improve. it's great being just what it is.

[Ruthian23]

Originally Posted by swoboda

I have never looked at FM, but the 2d graphics in the old Tony LaRussa game would be just fine. an option to disable them would be just fine too. The 2D/3D hybrid described above would be fantastic.
but having said that I would also say that I plan to continue to buy this game each year even if the graphics do not improve. it's great being just what it is.

That goes without saying for me as well. I've bought 11 (12 maybe? 12-13 if you include ITP) versions now with virtually no graphics, and I'd imagine I'd buy 11 more. Also, I of course agree that those who don't want them should be able to disable them.

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by swoboda

I have never looked at FM, but the 2d graphics in the old Tony LaRussa game would be just fine. an option to disable them would be just fine too.

That game was more or less physics and not stat based. If you or the computer or whatever made contact with the ball, the ball would be randomly pushed out onto the field with a general idea of the direction, I think, based on the numbers. From there, hits/outs/errors occurred as the fielders were able to or not able to get to the balls, etc. I'm also fairly sure that FM is physics-based, much like Frontpage Sports: Football Pro. At some level there's a physics engine that churns out the results.

The two and a half-ish options you're looking at for OOTP are:

1. Animate the existing plays, which would require the dev team to write out animations for each and every possible outcome, preferably several so they don't get boring. OOTP also has a *lot* more possible outcomes than MicroLeague ever had; for instance, instead of "fly out to left" there are dozens of locations the balls get hit, each of which would require a different animation (and probably, too, separate ones for great defensive plays and bad ones).

2. Don't go to all that trouble and instead make the entire engine physics-based like FM or Tony LaRussa. You'd still need to animate stuff like throws and catches and so on but then you'd use in-game AI to tell fielders how to run to the ball, where to throw when they catch it, and so on. This is the kind of thing that AAA titles like MLB: The Show does, and it's also the kind of thing that an indie dev can never really hope to make work that well. And no, retro graphics don't really help much. The cheapest and easiest way to do this would be to build it out using something like the Unity engine.

3. Build something like the physics engine in 2 but then use it only to record a discrete amount of plays so that Markus doesn't have to completely rebuild and retest the whole engine just to implement physics. This would probably take as many resources as #2 because graphics take a hell of a long time to do, and has the added "benefit" of perhaps not having enough variety in plays, causing people to turn it off as they would in #1.

All of these options would cost the team a great load of time. I do think that the way the stats are headed Markus is going to have to do this anyway, but let's not be too overly optimistic here: at best, this kind of effort would require a splitting up of the dev team to where for a season or two the "new version" of the game would be not a lot more than bug fixes, updated rosters, and very, very minor additions while behind the scenes everything got completely rebuilt. At worst, we don't get OOTP for a year or two while everything is recoded a la OOTP6/OOTP2007.

[swoboda]

no OOTP for a year or two..... No way... No way!

[swoboda]

are you sure you are correct about the Tony LaRussa game? was there at least an option to have it run by the numbers and watch the animation without it being physics-based. I certainly never played it in a thumb twitching mode.

[Syd Thrift]

FM has that option as well, but it still runs the physics in the background. Tony LaRussa may have had a stats-based sim engine that it used when you *weren't* playing out games (in fact, that seems probable, as my recollection of that game was that if you played on astroturf in particular you got some weird results sometimes) but if you were playing with graphics on at all - and that's kind of the point of this thread, isn't it? - it used a physics engine to produce the results.

[jabrown6940]

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

At worst, we don't get OOTP for a year or two while everything is recoded a la OOTP6/OOTP2007.

OOTP can't go a year without a release. They have assembled a good team and it would not be financially wise to skip a release. Any major undertaking would need to be done in the background over the course of a couple of releases.

[jasonn29tn14]

Originally Posted by Ruthian23

By the way, I don't mean to suggest (and I'm not sure anyone else does) that this is an easy thing, because you're absolutely right that it needs to be done right. That's kind of why I think 2D players on the field and a 3D ball might be the solution. I think FM has a pretty much perfect 2D/3D ball system right now, but their 3D is still a little awkward for me. I think the 2D circle players and 3D ball might be a more realistic goal.

Like I said, I don't think people are suggesting it's easy, just that it's doable, even for a smaller team. You guys seem to agree, since you're working toward it, and I'm very happy to see it.

Not to stray too far off-topic, but I'm just curious as to why you don't like the 3D in FM. I don't think I would enjoy it so much without it. I watch a pretty good bit of soccer, and to me the animations are pretty solid.