Wait for 2015?

[slimjim111]

I'm 33 AEWHistory.

I have been playing mostly in the present day and merely glanced at playing in historical mode. I'll admit, it's not my thing to play in historical mode, but I'm not judging and can see the appeal it has to some and the reputation OOTP has with regards to it from their Baseball management series.

As for the unrealistic score bit... 12-2 is just an example of the season I played. Some games I won 6-1, 7,2 and then I can go on and have results like 9-7, 7-2, 9-3, 8-7... these are all loses with Carey Price in nets, reasonable tactics (nothing forced) and the current Montreal defence (albeit, they are not the best, but still not the bush league D that would allow a ridiculous amount of goals).

Furthermore, looking back at history, any Montreal management would've canned me with such results. Jacques Martin, Alain Vigneault and Mario Tremblay were nowhere near those results and their fates were sealed, granted it took a couple seasons.

Being born in Montreal and growing up with the Canadiens, I certainly can't see how such scores would be considered 'normal' with the team at hand and not get fired.

Those results could be more acceptable in other leagues.

It just would be nice to see a league that plays more or less the same way as it does in real life... Toronto finished with 107 points, Nashville with 110 while teams like Chicago and SJ had 89 and 86 points.

I highly doubt you would see a football management sim where when managing Man Utd or Barcelona and getting similar results would not result in a sacking OR see Sunderland and Almeria at the top of the Premier league or La Liga.

Originally Posted by AEWHistory

If you don't mind my asking how old are you? I'm not asking to be a jerk, I think it is a salient point. Also, what was the era you were simulating?

I see a lot of people talking about what is and is not "realistic" and I have to say that fir the mist part I do not agree. If anything, the game is too balanced. I was playing as the KC Scouts in the past few days and managed to win about 2 game for every 3 I lost. In reality the Scouts lost 3 games or so for every 1 they won. As for scores, the famous Gretzky "Mickey mouse" quote about the Devils was after the Oilers had given the Devils a 13-4 drubbing!!! The first game I ever watched of the Rockies they lost something like 10-2. So if those are the REAL scores I don't see why a 12-2 score isn't realistic. Even in the modern NHL it isn't unheard of for some games each year to get to 10 points or more total (for both teams) during a game. Now that's less than what you're reporting but hardly a world away. Now if this is what was the norm then I'd see your point but I just don't have those experiences myself.

[AEWHistory]

If you're sim-ing "current" hockey then I can agree that those results aren't realistic. It was also why I asked your age. I'm 40 and became a hockey fan in '80, so I watched a lot of blowouts in my day when the league was high scoring and terribly unbalanced (although quite a bit of that is getting hard to remember for this increasingly elderly mind). Anyway, it's why it really doesn't faze me seeing scores like that when I sim history mode as they are what I grew up with and are appropriate for the era, at least how I recall it. However, I'm on the younger end on the fans from that period and I'd imagine most peeps even a little younger are really more used to the so-called "dead puck era". More importantly, when scores really did drop precipitously about 20 years ago it was because the game itself started to change. I think maybe the engine is having problems coping with (or simulating) the changes.

For example, one of the theories as to why scoring dropped was the trap and another is butterfly goaltending. But are either of those phenomena really able to be simulated in the game? If not then the this might explain why the scores remain high when they dropped in reality: in FHM hockey is staying the same and thus remains traditionally high scoring.

BTW, I can see what you're saying about the Canadiens. I guess growing up watching the Deviks in their losing "prime" it was easy to view being blown out as a common occurrence. Oh glory days... This is making me want to do some research and see what the average scores
were and what the outliers were.

As an aside, I LOVE history mode. It is wonderful taking over the Devils (or even the Rockies or... gag.... Scouts) and turning into a competitive team. When I was a wee kid it felt like a million years of losing before we got anywhere. It was only when I got to be older, maybe about 30, that I thought back and realized that the Devils made the Wales finals after "merely" half a decade of abject misery and failure. Not as bad as I remembered.... it just felt longer going thru it.

Do you have a fav team? Is it the Canadiens? I can see how some teams may not appeal to a history mode like, say, the Sharks or other teams that haven't been around quite as long. (as I write this I am realizing I still think of the Sharks as a "new" team.... ). OTOH, the Canadiens would be an amazing team to sim in HM.

Originally Posted by slimjim111

I'm 33 AEWHistory.

I have been playing mostly in the present day and merely glanced at playing in historical mode. I'll admit, it's not my thing to play in historical mode, but I'm not judging and can see the appeal it has to some and the reputation OOTP has with regards to it from their Baseball management series.

As for the unrealistic score bit... 12-2 is just an example of the season I played. Some games I won 6-1, 7,2 and then I can go on and have results like 9-7, 7-2, 9-3, 8-7... these are all loses with Carey Price in nets, reasonable tactics (nothing forced) and the current Montreal defence (albeit, they are not the best, but still not the bush league D that would allow a ridiculous amount of goals).

Furthermore, looking back at history, any Montreal management would've canned me with such results. Jacques Martin, Alain Vigneault and Mario Tremblay were nowhere near those results and their fates were sealed, granted it took a couple seasons.

Being born in Montreal and growing up with the Canadiens, I certainly can't see how such scores would be considered 'normal' with the team at hand and not get fired.

Those results could be more acceptable in other leagues.

It just would be nice to see a league that plays more or less the same way as it does in real life... Toronto finished with 107 points, Nashville with 110 while teams like Chicago and SJ had 89 and 86 points.

I highly doubt you would see a football management sim where when managing Man Utd or Barcelona and getting similar results would not result in a sacking OR see Sunderland and Almeria at the top of the Premier league or La Liga.

[Duranium]

yeah....historical mode is the thing to go

Building up my Pens from the scratch -again- now (1967) and will start a Scouts/Rockies/Devils game next weekend

[Ciccarelli]

Originally Posted by Duranium

yeah....historical mode is the thing to go

Building up my Pens from the scratch -again- now (1967) and will start a Scouts/Rockies/Devils game next weekend

I don't know if many other people feel the same way, but I'd be far more interested in historical mode once the "develop and retire in real life" parameters are removed and I can actually get a different experience every time I play the mode.

For one thing, regarding the Pens, I've always wondered how well Michel Briere would've become if his life wasn't tragically cut short. The current form of historical mode doesn't allow me to do that. What about guys like Pelle Lindbergh, George Pelawa, the Swift Current Four (could they have become NHL-caliber players?), even guys who suffered career ending injuries like Brett Lindros and Gord Kluzak. What about a history where a guy like Todd Bertuzzi becomes a massive bust while Dave Chyzowski becomes a premier power forward in the NHL (remember they were both "boom or bust" prospects)?

That's what excites me about a historical mode, not in its limited state right now. Just saying.

[Duranium]

Originally Posted by Ciccarelli

I don't know if many other people feel the same way, but I'd be far more interested in historical mode once the "develop and retire in real life" parameters are removed and I can actually get a different experience every time I play the mode.

For one thing, regarding the Pens, I've always wondered how well Michel Briere would've become if his life wasn't tragically cut short. The current form of historical mode doesn't allow me to do that. What about guys like Pelle Lindbergh, George Pelawa, the Swift Current Four (could they have become NHL-caliber players?), even guys who suffered career ending injuries like Brett Lindros and Gord Kluzak. What about a history where a guy like Todd Bertuzzi becomes a massive bust while Dave Chyzowski becomes a premier power forward in the NHL (remember they were both "boom or bust" prospects)?

That's what excites me about a historical mode, not in its limited state right now. Just saying.

Absolutely right, waiting for the possibility to turn off the "retire in actual year" option to go with Briere as 1st coming of Super Mario