First Impressions

[StanfordBerkely]

So I ran a season for the first time, and I have to say WOW this game is way faster than 16!

I LOVE the wood theme for the classic skin. I used classic all the time in 16 (light was to bright and boring for me, and dark just doesn't work with the logos)

I have to say the fan interest numbers and market sizes seem to be much more realistic. And by realistic I mean lower. Let's be honest baseball isn't exactly booming in certain major league cities.

There is one thing I noticed that's remain unchanged. It's very minor, but I am curious as to why -- I immediately changed the Los Angeles Angels to the Anaheim Angels, however, if I shop a player around, and the Angels offer players, they will still show up in alphabetical order as if they were still named Los Angeles. Is there anything I can do to change that?

Anyway, here's the result from this test season. I winded up getting Trout vs. Harper in the World Series. Also..

>The absolute state of the Atlanta Braves!

[bigsmooth]

Perhaps a dumb question - but where do you get the classic skin from?

[DustinthePOWERHOUSE]

Wow poor Atlanta fans.

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by bigsmooth

Perhaps a dumb question - but where do you get the classic skin from?

Game menu -> settings -> select skin.

[DJP53916]

My first impressions:

--This game sims FAST! I thought 16 moved quick, but this is WOW!
--I admit my expectations were lowered for the 3D graphics view (because this game is about more the game play itself as opposed to the graphics), but it was better than expected. Not great, but quite good.
--I started off with running a simulated 1994 season, using historical transactions, and was pretty impressed with how accurate it was. All 4 teams from the National League to make the postseason in the simulation were the same four teams that would have made it for real had a postseason occurred that season. Montreal even ended up with the exact same record that they did in real life. Houston ended up with the best record in baseball, and Cincinnati the Wild Card (as opposed to Cincinnati leading the division, and Houston the Wild Card leader, but that's still a great hit rate). The American League wasn't quite as accurate, but still not bad. Seattle had a bad 1994 season, but Montreal beat Seattle in the World Series. Hard to remember that far back, but maybe real life Seattle had a team full of injuries to key players, or a season full of players playing beneath their career norms and expectations? That kind of baseball randomness is pretty cool, and I like it.
--I only found one bug so far, and it seemed to be pretty minor, really. More like finding an innocent typo than anything really. OOTP really put together a fantastic game in this edition.

Now, for the areas I'm not sure about, or feel need improvement (or at least an explanation to help me understand)...

I decided to simulate 2016, and when I looked at the Top 100 Prospect List going into the pre-season, some prospect placements just jumped WAY out at me. For example, Orlando Arcia in the Milwaukee organization has been consistently ranked as anywhere from #6 - #12 prospect, but doesn't even make the Top 100 in the game. The Milwaukee system ranked #10 overall isn't too out of line from what I've seen this offseason, but that has got to be about the most glaring prospect omission I can see. Texas having Joey Gallo at #52 when I've seen him comfortably inside the Top 20 all offseason from numerous sources seems odd as well. No Brinson, or Mazara ranked at all? Two more guys I've seen consistently within the Top 20.

Is this something that just generates randomly in the game, and might I end up with a completely different Top 100 if I started a new game? Or is this the consistent Top 100 within the game, and if so, what's the methodology used to put this together? I guess if this is random, that explains it all. If there's a consistent metric built into the game to generate this, and it could be explained, I'd probably understand it better, and can adjust accordingly.

All in all, I am VERY HAPPY with what I have seen so far! OOTP, you guys exceeded my expectations overall, and I expected a lot!

[StanfordBerkely]

I just noticed the Assistant GM also gives his input in trades. Nice!

[StanfordBerkely]

Originally Posted by DJP53916

My first impressions:

--This game sims FAST! I thought 16 moved quick, but this is WOW!
--I admit my expectations were lowered for the 3D graphics view (because this game is about more the game play itself as opposed to the graphics), but it was better than expected. Not great, but quite good.
--I started off with running a simulated 1994 season, using historical transactions, and was pretty impressed with how accurate it was. All 4 teams from the National League to make the postseason in the simulation were the same four teams that would have made it for real had a postseason occurred that season. Montreal even ended up with the exact same record that they did in real life. Houston ended up with the best record in baseball, and Cincinnati the Wild Card (as opposed to Cincinnati leading the division, and Houston the Wild Card leader, but that's still a great hit rate). The American League wasn't quite as accurate, but still not bad. Seattle had a bad 1994 season, but Montreal beat Seattle in the World Series. Hard to remember that far back, but maybe real life Seattle had a team full of injuries to key players, or a season full of players playing beneath their career norms and expectations? That kind of baseball randomness is pretty cool, and I like it.
--I only found one bug so far, and it seemed to be pretty minor, really. More like finding an innocent typo than anything really. OOTP really put together a fantastic game in this edition.

Now, for the areas I'm not sure about, or feel need improvement (or at least an explanation to help me understand)...

I decided to simulate 2016, and when I looked at the Top 100 Prospect List going into the pre-season, some prospect placements just jumped WAY out at me. For example, Orlando Arcia in the Milwaukee organization has been consistently ranked as anywhere from #6 - #12 prospect, but doesn't even make the Top 100 in the game. The Milwaukee system ranked #10 overall isn't too out of line from what I've seen this offseason, but that has got to be about the most glaring prospect omission I can see. Texas having Joey Gallo at #52 when I've seen him comfortably inside the Top 20 all offseason from numerous sources seems odd as well. No Brinson, or Mazara ranked at all? Two more guys I've seen consistently within the Top 20.

Is this something that just generates randomly in the game, and might I end up with a completely different Top 100 if I started a new game? Or is this the consistent Top 100 within the game, and if so, what's the methodology used to put this together? I guess if this is random, that explains it all. If there's a consistent metric built into the game to generate this, and it could be explained, I'd probably understand it better, and can adjust accordingly.

All in all, I am VERY HAPPY with what I have seen so far! OOTP, you guys exceeded my expectations overall, and I expected a lot!

Every time I start a game the prospect rankings are the same, although I dont pay too much attention to them.

[Elf Marine]

I play games rather than simming seasons. However, I set up different ways with no starting job with managing and managing + GM then just GM starting with Houston. I run into one thing odd. In 16 Houston was listed as a small city when in real life it is about to become the 3rd largest city in the U.S. and has over 4 million people. In 17 it is a little better as it is "below average". How can I change the city size to make it more realistic? I assume it makes it easier to get free agents and fill the ballpark if you have a larger city. Players might even take less money for all I know as they do in real life since they make more in endorsements etc. by being in the large cities.

[tward13]

I like the Hall of Fame plaques

[Vinnyvagus]

I agree the speed is so much better. I'm also love playing the games in 3D View - WIDE.

Amazing!

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by DJP53916

I decided to simulate 2016, and when I looked at the Top 100 Prospect List going into the pre-season, some prospect placements just jumped WAY out at me. For example, Orlando Arcia in the Milwaukee organization has been consistently ranked as anywhere from #6 - #12 prospect, but doesn't even make the Top 100 in the game. The Milwaukee system ranked #10 overall isn't too out of line from what I've seen this offseason, but that has got to be about the most glaring prospect omission I can see. Texas having Joey Gallo at #52 when I've seen him comfortably inside the Top 20 all offseason from numerous sources seems odd as well. No Brinson, or Mazara ranked at all? Two more guys I've seen consistently within the Top 20.

Is this something that just generates randomly in the game, and might I end up with a completely different Top 100 if I started a new game? Or is this the consistent Top 100 within the game, and if so, what's the methodology used to put this together? I guess if this is random, that explains it all. If there's a consistent metric built into the game to generate this, and it could be explained, I'd probably understand it better, and can adjust accordingly.

All in all, I am VERY HAPPY with what I have seen so far! OOTP, you guys exceeded my expectations overall, and I expected a lot!

We're still working on prospect rankings, they're not in perfect shape by any means.

That being said, the three guys you mention should be able to make the top 100 at least! Do you have scouting turned on? That may be the problem.

[vegaspomeranians]

Originally Posted by DJP53916

My first impressions:

--This game sims FAST! I thought 16 moved quick, but this is WOW!
--I admit my expectations were lowered for the 3D graphics view (because this game is about more the game play itself as opposed to the graphics), but it was better than expected. Not great, but quite good.
--I started off with running a simulated 1994 season, using historical transactions, and was pretty impressed with how accurate it was. All 4 teams from the National League to make the postseason in the simulation were the same four teams that would have made it for real had a postseason occurred that season. Montreal even ended up with the exact same record that they did in real life. Houston ended up with the best record in baseball, and Cincinnati the Wild Card (as opposed to Cincinnati leading the division, and Houston the Wild Card leader, but that's still a great hit rate). The American League wasn't quite as accurate, but still not bad. Seattle had a bad 1994 season, but Montreal beat Seattle in the World Series. Hard to remember that far back, but maybe real life Seattle had a team full of injuries to key players, or a season full of players playing beneath their career norms and expectations? That kind of baseball randomness is pretty cool, and I like it.
--I only found one bug so far, and it seemed to be pretty minor, really. More like finding an innocent typo than anything really. OOTP really put together a fantastic game in this edition.

Now, for the areas I'm not sure about, or feel need improvement (or at least an explanation to help me understand)...

I decided to simulate 2016, and when I looked at the Top 100 Prospect List going into the pre-season, some prospect placements just jumped WAY out at me. For example, Orlando Arcia in the Milwaukee organization has been consistently ranked as anywhere from #6 - #12 prospect, but doesn't even make the Top 100 in the game. The Milwaukee system ranked #10 overall isn't too out of line from what I've seen this offseason, but that has got to be about the most glaring prospect omission I can see. Texas having Joey Gallo at #52 when I've seen him comfortably inside the Top 20 all offseason from numerous sources seems odd as well. No Brinson, or Mazara ranked at all? Two more guys I've seen consistently within the Top 20.

Is this something that just generates randomly in the game, and might I end up with a completely different Top 100 if I started a new game? Or is this the consistent Top 100 within the game, and if so, what's the methodology used to put this together? I guess if this is random, that explains it all. If there's a consistent metric built into the game to generate this, and it could be explained, I'd probably understand it better, and can adjust accordingly.

All in all, I am VERY HAPPY with what I have seen so far! OOTP, you guys exceeded my expectations overall, and I expected a lot!

This is like Lucas Giolito in the Sept 1 update for ootp16 which had him rated in the 40s. The elite prospects should be rated similarly in game.

[DJP53916]

Originally Posted by lukasberger

We're still working on prospect rankings, they're not in perfect shape by any means.

That being said, the three guys you mention should be able to make the top 100 at least! Do you have scouting turned on? That may be the problem.

I actually hadn't looked at that, but now that you mentioned it, I will take a look at it first thing once I log on tonight.

That all said, I do not want to give the impression that I expect/demand the game's prospect list to be carbon copies of John Sickles, Keith Law, KATOH, mlb.com, Baseball America, etc. After all, each of these sources have different lists, criteria, etc. as well.

But it sure caught my attention how different it was.

Thank you for the reply and the tip.