OOTP 17 Not realistic

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by TuckerDuckson

I feel like there is some i'll say, "home bias" on this site. While his claims are extreme hyperbole and a small sample size, there are some problems with the game.

While his samples may be extreme, I've had a fictional league with 3 25+ run games in a week, while again it is a small sample size, there have only been 27 games in the history of the MLB with more than 25 runs scored, (and that's not to mention the opposing teams score)

I felt that the runs scored is a bit (for lack of a better term) 'extreme'. I got the realistic hit modifier and that would tone it down. I feel without some adjustments through the workshop and other downloadables the game is sort of 'annoying' to play. While I have put some decent time into the game, it just drags on you.

So he has a half-baked point about it, although he needs have a better sample size and he needs to realize that there so many different scoring eras hes playing in, but he has a point, somewhat.

This is true, but as 'The Game' mentions, it all comes down to the modifiers and setup. When you're setting up an unusual league like the OP describes, you really need to do a bit of work on getting things adjusted so you see the results you're looking for.

That customization is one of OOTP's greatest strengths in that you can literally setup any sort of run environment you want in the game. You can create an area baseball league where teams score 30+ runs in most every game(which someone did and posted as a mod) and you can create a league where teams score less than a run a game on average (which I once saw happen as a bug because someone accidentally messed up their settings.

The problem with the out of the box setup is that OOTP's greatest strength becomes a bit of a weakness, where because there are so many options, we have to pick one that's kind of neutral by default for most players. Even that can be affected by users setting up creative leagues as the OP did, which can throw the settings off a bit and require manual adjustment.

We do a lot of work trying to setup and sim through thousands of seasons in the MLB quickstart and regular historical modes to make sure the stats come out as accurate as possible, very close to the era's being played, but we can't preemptively test and adjust every possible league setup to start perfectly, in part because there are too many possibilities for setups to test them all, and in part because what's perfect for each setup will vary in the eye of the beholder.

So generally speaking, there does need to be a bit of work done by the user to make the environment of their custom leagues come out how they want them to. It'd be nice if we can further automate the process in the future, and make it easier and more self explanatory, and I'm sure we'll look at ways of doing so.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by kowalskisan

I stand by my assertion that OOTP 17 is a very poor product. There is no way I could tolerate playing hundreds of games on this fiasco to get a better sample size, the PbP alone is enough to drive me nuts. In OOTP 17 there is rarely a routine play, almost every out has someone diving, crashing, lunging or leaping to make a sensational play - that is not as IRL. In OOTP 17 every popup in the infield is handled by the catcher - that is not realistic but maddening. I went though my PC and found I had bought OOTP 13 some time ago but never used it. I installed it and set up a league with the same 32 teams and after few games clearly OOTP 13 is realistic, as versions 6 and 8 were, but OOTP 17 is being written off as $10 wasted. I do like some of the new features in OOTP 17, but the gameplay reeks. I've been playing tabletop/computer baseball games since my first Strat-O-Matic I got for my birthday in 1967, so I don't need a huge sample size to tell if a product feels "right" or not. I also used the same 32 teams in OOTP 8 and did play hundreds of games with very realistic results, so the comment about the poor results being due to mixing teams from different eras is not really valid. Clearly OOTP rushed 17 out without much quality control.

There's been more quality control put into OOTP17 than there was in most past editions and we've run thousands and thousands of tests over the last couple years to make sure that statistical outputs are better than they were in the past, not worse. OOTP17 has by far the most accurate historical statistical output of any OOTP game yet. I don't just say that based on feeling, we have tools that actually measure just exactly how close the results in a given historical season are coming to matching the real life results, and in OOTP17 they're almost exactly on, better than we've even gotten them before, and certainly better than OOTP8 for example.

As I mention above, the issue can come with the sort of setup you're using, you may have to manually adjust the modifiers to get results more like what you're looking for. This can be easily done and if you're interested in learning how to do so, I'll be happy to help if you send me a PM.

If you just want to complain, you can always do that, but you'll need to provide some data we can analyse to back up your claims so we can actually see if there's something wrong or not. A saved game file would be useful for that.

If you can't provide us with anything evidence based, it makes it impossible for us to help you, or fix any issues that might actually be cropping up and makes it very difficult to see any validity in your claims, when they're so far at variance with what hundreds and thousands of hours of testing and the hard data we analyse to get the statistical outputs tuned in game indicate.

[jpeters1734]

Originally Posted by NoOne

"so I don't need a huge sample size to tell if a product feels "right" or not."

that pretty much explains it all. if you rely on feelings you will be fooled by randomness more often if you did not mix feelings and objective facts. that is the entire point of a larger sample size... you cannot tell with confidence in the absence of a suitable sample size. believing that you can is like believing in magic relative to the results you reported. i.e. they are not extreme outliers consistently occurring one after another. a little common sense of course, but that's a very small portion of situations when it's actually obvious.

Probably one of the best words of wisdom written on here in a while. In baseball especially, you have to be patient and not be so reactionary

[David Watts]

This thread should link to the "Field of Dreams" dynasty thread.

[Rizon]

Tower or laptop?

[Germaniac]

I have witnessed something that perfectly fits this thread:

I recently started a new season in my fictional league - after Day 2 for the fun of it I checked the Projected Batting and Pitching leaders.

Severals starters projected for 80 wins, closers for 162 saves, batters projected for 810 hits, 162 HR's and 648 RBI's ...

Not even close to being realistic ... but hey, that's what small samples will do

And on another note:

What always fascinated me about baseball is the fact, that you could play the same two teams with identical line-up's and starting pitchers at the same ballpark on different days, and you'll get an entirely different outcome.

No two baseball games are ever the same - and OOTP is providing just that.

Simply turn off injuries, transactions, etc. and sim a season 10 times and take a look at the outcome.

[BaseballMan]

Originally Posted by RchW

No one here says the game has no problems. Our posts are available to any interested party. To dismiss a game based on less than 10 scores on probably the most difficult mode of in game play for OOTP suggests an agenda to me.

I asked the OP politely, I believe, to tell us what other games he tried. I think he (or she) is obligated to back up the critique with some detail on how other games in the genre handle that specific game mode.

Agreed. Plus we all know how much time the ootp team and the beta testers put into testing the game. Sure theres always things that can be improved but to imply that there is no quality testing for this game is hogwash.

[Honorable_Pawn]

If you don't like the output then change the modifiers.

I don't see the problem here.

[TheMaus2]

Originally Posted by RchW

I asked the OP politely, I believe, to tell us what other games he tried. I think he (or she) is obligated to back up the critique with some detail on how other games in the genre handle that specific game mode.

OP better deliver...

[NoOne]

Originally Posted by TuckerDuckson

I feel like there is some i'll say, "home bias" on this site. While his claims are extreme hyperbole and a small sample size, there are some problems with the game.

While his samples may be extreme, I've had a fictional league with 3 25+ run games in a week, while again it is a small sample size, there have only been 27 games in the history of the MLB with more than 25 runs scored, (and that's not to mention the opposing teams score)

I felt that the runs scored is a bit (for lack of a better term) 'extreme'. I got the realistic hit modifier and that would tone it down. I feel without some adjustments through the workshop and other downloadables the game is sort of 'annoying' to play. While I have put some decent time into the game, it just drags on you.

So he has a half-baked point about it, although he needs have a better sample size and he needs to realize that there so many different scoring eras hes playing in, but he has a point, somewhat.

there are defintiely things wrong with this game.

however, most of the time it's self-inflicted and perceived as a problem with the game....

go a little deeper and you could argue that because it's so complex, it truely is the game's fault even though the user used settings that were not complimentary, for a lack of a better way to describe it. I prefer it stay sophisticated because of all the possible configurations you can do with it. this isn't an action game, so that's got to be one of the bigger draws. (for more nerdy of us)

there was a bug once where runs scored could escalate... i can't recall if it was this year or last -- and not an issue if you are up-to-date. other than that, it's most likely your LT/LTM that will cause a larger proportion of high scoring games compared to normal.

----

i read too many replies, not sure where this came from at this point but too lazy to go back through it... lol...

there is definitely a "circle-the-wagons" culture in the forums when the game is attacked. some stay rational, while others do not on some occasions. there's defintiely some group-think, too. If there is too strong of an emotional attachment, those are the ones that typically lash out in an emotional way. i.e. more likely to be rude - which even if the op was or wasn't isn't an excuse to be that way.

alot of times the attack is irrational, too. anger and frustration is a common reaction to things a person does not understand. in general most don't wnat ot help an adult throwing a hissy fit. (heck, i won't even help a child until they stop behaving that way)

so, it just comes down to the fact that many people are entitled little cry-baby egomaniacs... and they occur in roughly the same frequency on all sides to any situation. LoL

i try to work around it as best i can... i hav a bit of a@@hole in me too, though. i think i stayed measured in my initial reply, but i'm sure if you went through my history i have a stereotyipcal internet comment or two in my forum history.

[NoOne]

Originally Posted by lukasberger

It'd be nice if we can further automate the process in the future, and make it easier and more self explanatory, and I'm sure we'll look at ways of doing so.

based on PCM, # of new players created per year it should be possible.

you can figure out a known for 1000years (or whatver's necessary) of player creation and therefor average league talent level and average distribution, which can be translated to expected stats based on LT/LTM as normal. so based on those relevant settings influenced by the user, it calculates a based "average" league talent and distribution to calculate the adjustment.

the missing piece to make it easy is just knowing average talent over long-term, right? that's the biggest moving piece due to human input. the other info should be already known / in the game.

so like auto-calc, but first it's cacluating an average level of talent bsed on league settings, then running years to allow for adjustment.

[jpeters1734]

It just occurred to me that the OP is complaining of unrealism in his league of historical teams from different eras and the unrealistic part are the stats!

[GoBucsGo]

If you don't think this game is realistic, then I'm sorry, but you are insane.

Whenever I do historical sims, I frequently check out Baseball-Reference.com - MLB Stats, Standings, Scores, History and compare stats, standings, award winners, etc. and it is absolutely freaky and uncanny how accurate OOTP comes to the real life seasons.

I'm always blown away with how close and accurate everything is. W-L records, team stats, player stats, it's crazy. For you to say this game isn't a realistic representation of the sport is just ludicrous.

[P*Funk]

Originally Posted by jpeters1734

It just occurred to me that the OP is complaining of unrealism in his league of historical teams from different eras and the unrealistic part are the stats!

That's a pretty important point. Realism with respect to a simulator is based on comparing the deviation the simulated output has next to the real baseline.

There is no realistic baseline for the best teams of all eras of baseball playing together outside of their respective eras. In this case the simulator is not being asked to represent reality. Its being asked to represent an alternate reality and even if you're satisfied with the results there's no basis to claim the results are realistic.

Maybe OP should have stuck to something a bit more sensible like the best teams from a 30 year span or something. Then again Op is clearly not reasonable as apparently he's been tabletop gaming since the late 60s and hasn't cottoned on to the nature of variance in any randomized game. OP is basically complaining to Full Tilt Poker that after playing their service for 2 days that everytime he goes all in with the best hands he always loses.

[madjac74]

I played super baseball on atari 2600 so it pains me when kids complain about realism these days. Especially when they are complaining about the stats of a game between teams of different eras which no one would ever know! Or they are complaining about the 3d model of their favorite player...or maybe lebron james doesnt crossover like he does on nba 2k like he does in real life!

Atari baseball...everyone was yellow and had no ratings and you had to hit the ball dead center over 2nd base to get a home run! Try getting realistic stats with that

We (mostly kids) are spoiled these days...enjoy this amazing product even if like anything in life...it isn't perfect!

[NoOne]

Originally Posted by Germaniac

I have witnessed something that perfectly fits this thread:

I recently started a new season in my fictional league - after Day 2 for the fun of it I checked the Projected Batting and Pitching leaders.

Severals starters projected for 80 wins, closers for 162 saves, batters projected for 810 hits, 162 HR's and 648 RBI's ...

Not even close to being realistic ... but hey, that's what small samples will do

So?!?

I don't know about everyone else, but I've been waiting on pins and needles for an update on these players' seasons. Did they get 162 home runs? That would be a record, i bet. golly-gee.