Back from vacation, 1.0.3 coming up - Page 14

The Wolf · 08-20-2006, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andymac

That is extremely limited in comparison to OOTP.

You didn't post that. You posted the false statement that they were extremely limited period and you were totally wrong. Nice try at a save, though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by andymac

As for Affinity mode, it is definitely bordering on "replay".

Totally wrong one more time. It looks like you don't know anything about it except that it's for historical simmers and therefore you don't like it.

It's not for the likes of you. It's for people who want their historical baseball simulations to be a little more historical. Not robotic, not on rails, just a little more historical. And it works.

The Wolf · 08-20-2006, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sweed

This is the dumbest post I have ever read on this or any text sim board. I'm not even going to waste my time explaining why.

You ought to, given that people are posting totally ignorant statements about PureSim in this thread and that you seem to think that post was even dumber than that.

Explain yourself.

Sweed · 08-20-2006, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Wolf

You ought to, given that people are posting totally ignorant statements about PureSim in this thread and that you seem to think that post was even dumber than that.

Explain yourself.

No, if something as basic as that needs to be explained then I guess you just don't get it.

The Wolf · 08-20-2006, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sweed

No, if something as basic as that needs to be explained then I guess you just don't get it.

No, it just means that you spouted off and now can't or won't defend your statement.

Sweed · 08-20-2006, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Wolf

No, it just means that you spouted off and now can't or won't defend your statement.

No, it means you don't get it.

Charlie Hough · 08-20-2006, 03:06 PM

Here is a modest suggestion:

If you have not played the PureSim 2007 demo or the full game, please do not waste everyone's time by commenting on whether you think a particular feature of that game is good or not, and please do not waste everyone's time by questioning why it is that people want some of those features.

How would you respond if someone who had never played OOTP came onto these forums are started talking about how various features of OOTP would be horrible additions to another game -- all while openly admitting that he or she has never played OOTP?

I also want to reiterate that most of the features that people are asking for are OPTIONAL. They will NEVER affect you unless you use the options. So why would some of you argue against these features, especially when your reasoning is based on how YOU wouldn't like them? You might not like them, but other people will, and that's why they're added as optional features.

By the way, I can understand why Sweed was disgusted with the notion of simply getting features into the game and worrying about patching them later. What that means is that you will ignore quality controls and simply roll out a new feature without making sure that it works correctly. It means that you will waste the time of many users who will expect a functional feature and will become angry because they have ended up with a broken or useless feature. No one engaged in any kind of business would EVER entertain this kind of approach. It's absolutely suicidal in terms of quality, customer service, and product integrity.

Cornelius McGillicuddy · 08-20-2006, 03:41 PM

Here's one I posted on another thread and copied/pasted here:

What would be cool would be a customizible broadcast screen. Put whatever windows you want and size them the way you want. Shouldn't be hard to implement and each person could make it the way he wants.

rasnell · 08-20-2006, 03:44 PM

I believe Strat-O-Matic and Action PC give you those options, including resizing the play by play box and even allowing you to customize the font size.

I agree that these would be dramatic improvements to a very flawed in-game screen currently with OOTP 2006.

koohead · 08-20-2006, 03:55 PM

Okay, first time I think in 4 years I'm actually requesting features, but this game is 99.7% perfect...kinda like Ivory soap...and these last 3 features along with the aforementioned bug fixes would make Koo a very happy camper...

1. Save current game as a template.

Yeah, I know...I'm a dork for making changes and playing before saving as a Quickstart, but maybe Markus can make this game dummy proof.

2. experience limits for low minors. would be nice to restrict rookie leagues to players with less than 1 year of professional experience. The data is there, just need an option in the league. obviously this could be expanded upon for other leagues and countless fictional implementations.

3. Some way to limit the interleague movement. I want the ability for players from the INTL leagues to be able to sign on into the MLB, but based on 11 years of sim on the latest build, it happens too often (IMHO). Basically, all the stars from the other leagues end up in the MLB. I don't want to mess with fiancials to compensate for this since that would make the financials of the other leagues just unrealistic, but it should be the exception that the top players from Japan Korea, Taiwan, Mexico, and esp Cuba end up on the MLB, not the norm. Maybe a "loyalty" slider or something? Not to the team, but to the league.

Other than that, I'm happy. Thrilled is more like it. I didn't even notice the aging issue until I read the thread. The stats so far are great, and the MLB financials seem accurate (I know I can tweak this a bit more, but the flexibility is there so I'm not worried about that). If we can just get a couple more enhancements and a dumb-arse-prevention feature, along with a tweak to the aging issue (sounds like that is well on its way), this will be everything I expected from this game.

andymac · 08-20-2006, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Wolf

You didn't post that. You posted the false statement that they were extremely limited period and you were totally wrong. Nice try at a save, though.

I wasn't saving anything. I made that comment in the same post where I was discussing why it would likely take much longer to implement expansion into OOTP than this "couple weeks" or whatever it took to get it into PureSim. I would think it would be pretty obvious that I was still comparing the two when making that comment, especially to you and your supposed "industry standard" approach.

Quote:

Totally wrong one more time. It looks like you don't know anything about it except that it's for historical simmers and therefore you don't like it.

It's not for the likes of you. It's for people who want their historical baseball simulations to be a little more historical. Not robotic, not on rails, just a little more historical. And it works.

I sim historically, so I'm not sure why the fact it is for historical simmers would matter. I would much rather set my game up to imitate the real life team financial situations (which I try to do) than artificially alter the decisions of the teams & players within the game. I also never said that it shouldn't be put it, I simply offered why I wouldn't use it just like you offered why it should be (apparently because it is in PureSim).

koohead · 08-20-2006, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andymac

I wasn't saving anything. I made that comment in the same post where I was discussing why it would likely take much longer to implement expansion into OOTP than this "couple weeks" or whatever it took to get it into PureSim. I would think it would be pretty obvious that I was still comparing the two when making that comment, especially to you and your supposed "industry standard" approach.

I sim historically, so I'm not sure why the fact it is for historical simmers would matter. I would much rather set my game up to imitate the real life team financial situations (which I try to do) than artificially alter the decisions of the teams & players within the game. I also never said that it shouldn't be put it, I simply offered why I wouldn't use it just like you offered why it should be (apparently because it is in PureSim).

Although this is a very valid discussion and appropriate for the forum, this really isn't the thread for it. can you guys start a separate thread and continue this discussion? Don't get me wrong..its very appropriate and I'm sure many of us have opinions on the issues you are discussing...but it has gone beyond the scope of this thread. thanks.

canadiancreed · 08-20-2006, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by koohead

Although this is a very valid discussion and appropriate for the forum, this really isn't the thread for it. can you guys start a separate thread and continue this discussion? Don't get me wrong..its very appropriate and I'm sure many of us have opinions on the issues you are discussing...but it has gone beyond the scope of this thread. thanks.

"!

The Wolf · 08-20-2006, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sweed

No, it means you don't get it.

I get it. You don't. Defend it.

The Wolf · 08-20-2006, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charlie Hough

By the way, I can understand why Sweed was disgusted with the notion of simply getting features into the game and worrying about patching them later. What that means is that you will ignore quality controls and simply roll out a new feature without making sure that it works correctly. It means that you will waste the time of many users who will expect a functional feature and will become angry because they have ended up with a broken or useless feature. No one engaged in any kind of business would EVER entertain this kind of approach. It's absolutely suicidal in terms of quality, customer service, and product integrity.

You did try to play the original release of OOTP 2006, right?

The Wolf · 08-20-2006, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by koohead

Although this is a very valid discussion and appropriate for the forum, this really isn't the thread for it. can you guys start a separate thread and continue this discussion? Don't get me wrong..its very appropriate and I'm sure many of us have opinions on the issues you are discussing...but it has gone beyond the scope of this thread. thanks.

Fair enough.

battists · 08-20-2006, 06:13 PM

Koohead is dead on here.

I've asked a few participants in the thread to cool it personally as well.

Please back off, as this has gone on plenty long enough for now. I let this thing go on, since it was Markus' thread, but I'm closing it if this persists.

Thanks very much, all.

The Wolf, is there any possibility you could post a new thread describing what affinity mode is, and why you like it for historical sim purposes? I don't play any of the other sims, so I frankly don't understand how it works. Thanks.

Steve

Charlie Hough · 08-20-2006, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Wolf

You did try to play the original release of OOTP 2006, right?

No. But that is the point. I did not buy OOTP 2006 until patch 1.0.2. I saw the initial problems with the game, which included the failure to properly implement features before releasing them, so I stayed away until there was a playable demo and until there was a patch that addressed many of these issues. The release of OOTP 2006 is an example of why you shouldn't rush your product development and shouldn't release game features until they function properly. The end result is a disaster in public relations and customer satisfaction.

Now, getting back to the original point of this thread, let's continue to post requests for relatively simple changes that could realistically be implemented over the next couple of weeks. If you want a wider debate, let's take it to my Open Letter topic.

http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...=129530&page=8

Faroo6 · 08-20-2006, 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rwd59

Actually there are quite a few who post ideas over there, and yes many come from OOTP. I think of it like this: The OOTP series has been like a Lexus and the Puresim series has been like a Toyota, not as flashy but very reliable. This year Puresim moved closer to the Lexus line but it still hasn't made it yet. This years OOTP has had to make massive recalls that have angered many but not all owners, but it has proven itself to be top of the line in the past. Are you going to give up on the Lexus because of one bad year? No. You're gonna let them know you are ticked off and why, so they can fix the problem and fix it soon if it is possible to fix. Now if I buy another Lexus for my next purchase and it has problems again I'm not gonna buy another one, ever. Like the old adage says, fool me once shame on you...fool me twice shame on me. I'll take the less flashy but more reliable version from then on. And of course there is something to be said for that older reliable Lexus I already have paid off and sitting in the garage with a 6.5 litre engine.......Bottom line is I want to play OOTP as I have for years and I want to see it get better. I just do not enjoy this version.

The fact that Lexus is a division of Toyota, makes this a pretty funny post.

I apologize for the threadjack, but I work at a Toyota dealership and this made me laugh.

Cras · 08-20-2006, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Faroo6

The fact that Lexus is a division of Toyota, makes this a pretty funny post.

I apologize for the threadjack, but I work at a Toyota dealership and this made me laugh.

Because you said that I can no longer take anything you say as serious.

Friends don't let friends drive "yotas"

Faroo6 · 08-20-2006, 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cras

Because you said that I can no longer take anything you say as serious.

Friends don't let friends drive "yotas"

If it makes you feel better we sell Hondas and Mazdas too. Wait til the new Tundra drops. Its a freaking monster of a Toyota.

08-20-2006, 03:55 PM	#269
koohead Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 3,233	My feature request list :) Okay, first time I think in 4 years I'm actually requesting features, but this game is 99.7% perfect...kinda like Ivory soap...and these last 3 features along with the aforementioned bug fixes would make Koo a very happy camper... 1. Save current game as a template. Yeah, I know...I'm a dork for making changes and playing before saving as a Quickstart, but maybe Markus can make this game dummy proof. 2. experience limits for low minors. would be nice to restrict rookie leagues to players with less than 1 year of professional experience. The data is there, just need an option in the league. obviously this could be expanded upon for other leagues and countless fictional implementations. 3. Some way to limit the interleague movement. I want the ability for players from the INTL leagues to be able to sign on into the MLB, but based on 11 years of sim on the latest build, it happens too often (IMHO). Basically, all the stars from the other leagues end up in the MLB. I don't want to mess with fiancials to compensate for this since that would make the financials of the other leagues just unrealistic, but it should be the exception that the top players from Japan Korea, Taiwan, Mexico, and esp Cuba end up on the MLB, not the norm. Maybe a "loyalty" slider or something? Not to the team, but to the league. Other than that, I'm happy. Thrilled is more like it. I didn't even notice the aging issue until I read the thread. The stats so far are great, and the MLB financials seem accurate (I know I can tweak this a bit more, but the flexibility is there so I'm not worried about that). If we can just get a couple more enhancements and a dumb-arse-prevention feature, along with a tweak to the aging issue (sounds like that is well on its way), this will be everything I expected from this game. __________________ GM - New Jersey Bears of the NPBL;

08-20-2006, 03:06 PM	#266
Charlie Hough Hall Of Famer Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 3,646	Here is a modest suggestion: If you have not played the PureSim 2007 demo or the full game, please do not waste everyone's time by commenting on whether you think a particular feature of that game is good or not, and please do not waste everyone's time by questioning why it is that people want some of those features. How would you respond if someone who had never played OOTP came onto these forums are started talking about how various features of OOTP would be horrible additions to another game -- all while openly admitting that he or she has never played OOTP? I also want to reiterate that most of the features that people are asking for are OPTIONAL. They will NEVER affect you unless you use the options. So why would some of you argue against these features, especially when your reasoning is based on how YOU wouldn't like them? You might not like them, but other people will, and that's why they're added as optional features. By the way, I can understand why Sweed was disgusted with the notion of simply getting features into the game and worrying about patching them later. What that means is that you will ignore quality controls and simply roll out a new feature without making sure that it works correctly. It means that you will waste the time of many users who will expect a functional feature and will become angry because they have ended up with a broken or useless feature. No one engaged in any kind of business would EVER entertain this kind of approach. It's absolutely suicidal in terms of quality, customer service, and product integrity.

08-20-2006, 03:41 PM	#267
Cornelius McGillicuddy Banned Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Playing the inside game Posts: 763 Infractions: 0/1 (4)	Here's one I posted on another thread and copied/pasted here: What would be cool would be a customizible broadcast screen. Put whatever windows you want and size them the way you want. Shouldn't be hard to implement and each person could make it the way he wants.

08-20-2006, 03:44 PM	#268
rasnell Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Frankfort, Kentucky Posts: 3,746	I believe Strat-O-Matic and Action PC give you those options, including resizing the play by play box and even allowing you to customize the font size. I agree that these would be dramatic improvements to a very flawed in-game screen currently with OOTP 2006.

08-20-2006, 06:13 PM	#276
battists Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 18,506	Koohead is dead on here. I've asked a few participants in the thread to cool it personally as well. Please back off, as this has gone on plenty long enough for now. I let this thing go on, since it was Markus' thread, but I'm closing it if this persists. Thanks very much, all. The Wolf, is there any possibility you could post a new thread describing what affinity mode is, and why you like it for historical sim purposes? I don't play any of the other sims, so I frankly don't understand how it works. Thanks. Steve