A litte update!

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by SirMichaelJordan

Considering what the popular games are I feel bad for society if these games are targeted for kids....Cant say I've seen a barbie playhouse commercial for ps4...

The kid across the street from me has probably killed over a million people in all of his online shooters over the years. It makes me wonder about how that has changed his outlook on life and people.

[Leo_The_Lip]

Not to deflect from the gentlemanly discussion of 3D programming, but one of my pet peeves came up again last night and I would appreciate it changed.

The issue is on Manager Menu>Manager History. The column 'Playoffs' does not update at season end, it updates at year end. The 'Playoff' column is blank and the note will say, for example, '4 time(s) qualified, won 2' following a season, At December 31, the game places 'WON playoffs' in the column and the note updates to '5 time(s) qualified, won 3.'

The issue is I like to change teams (when I change) before free agency and the Rule 5 Draft. If I do this, my Manager History is never updated for the final championship.

Vanity, I know, but all is vanity.

Please make the update occur at season end, so I can revel in my awesomeness, at least until my wife tells me to take the recycling down to the curb.

[Fyrestorm3]

Originally Posted by SirMichaelJordan

Considering what the popular games are I feel bad for society if these games are targeted for kids....Cant say I've seen a barbie playhouse commercial for ps4...

Someone should get on that. I sense an untapped market!

[Bowtie]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

Just as a note, the money spent to hire the 3D programmer could have been spent on a first-class AI programmer.

Meh. I don't really know about a first class programmer but an AI programmer nonetheless.

Originally Posted by ShaneCarson

You act as though hiring one or the other is mutually exclusive. You, nor I, have no idea what OOTPD's financial situation is.

True. However, what would help their financial situation more? Hiring an AI programmer and making some much needed improvements to OOTP now as opposed to later or hiring Jorin (the 3D developer) now to add something to OOTP that really could have waited another version or two? I think hiring someone to improve the AI is more important in that if you read around these forums you will see numerous threads about how the AI does this, that or the other in an unrealistic way. While these AI issues may not necessarily be gamebreakers they can be disappointing/irritating/frustrating etc. Hence, making improvements to the AI first would be, imho, a good building block towards adding the 3D graphics.

Originally Posted by ShaneCarson

I find the rate at which forum members are so quick to make financial and personnel choices(or suggestions) for OOTPD in poor taste and completely bizarre.

Well the developers are after all human beings just like the rest of us that post in these forums. And they too are able to make a wrong choice here and there. Growing pains in the life of a software developer maybe? Anyway, I think its good that some of us are willing to share our thoughts about how the company might be better off spending its money or who in the way of personnel the company should hire.

Originally Posted by ShaneCarson

.....how about we keep our suggestions to features and bug fixes?

Why should we? I mean if Markus is going to offer us the chance the help him find another developer as he did recently, why should we limit ourselves to just suggestions to new features and bug fixes when we could be helping him in other areas of the company as well?

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Cryomaniac

Hear, hear.

Lackluster AI in games has been a complaint of mine for awhile now. Not that I expect AI to be as good as a human player in such games, but jeez, can't the developers at least get it to the point where it doesn't make egregiously dumb mistakes? Or resort to (usually blatant) cheating to make it tougher?

Originally Posted by The Wolf

You are completely wrong. They exist. They work mainly at universities, in business and for the government (DARPA et al).

If they're not working in the games industry then they may as well not exist for all practical purposes concerning the topic at hand.

Originally Posted by The Wolf

Console games are designed for kids - people who prefer eye candy to actually having a realistic simulation - so they don't bother to employ first-class artificial intelligence programmers.

It's no different for the PC versions of the same game titles. For whatever reason, the gamer community by and large seems to think fancy graphics are the most important thing. Innovative game play mechanics and competent AI seem to be relegated to the (far distant) back burner.

[Bowtie]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

The kid across the street from me has probably killed over a million people in all of his online shooters over the years. It makes me wonder about how that has changed his outlook on life and people.

Uh oh. Yeah, makes me wonder too.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

Except for the fact that my sister does graphic design work for console games and every company has specifically told her that their target audience is kids.

Then I'd say such companies haven't been paying attention to the market research, which clearly shows that the average age of a gamer has been steadily increasing over the years. Last I recall, it was around the 35-year-old mark.

It's also worth remembering that the gaming industry is actually bigger than Hollywood movie industry in terms of revenue. The production budget for the major console titles and/or cross-platform major titles rival those of the bigger Hollywood movies.

[Honorable_Pawn]

Originally Posted by Bowtie

Uh oh. Yeah, makes me wonder too.

I'd say not too much different than an anvil dropping on top of the Roadrunner's head. Or Tom getting electrocuted by sticking a fork inside a toaster trying to brutally stab Jerry to death.

Probably not too different than some of the twisted crap in Brother's Grimm. Lastly, not too much different than horrific stories small children hear in Sunday school.

Just sayin'

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by Honorable_Pawn

I'd say not too much different than an anvil dropping on top of the Roadrunner's head. Or Tom getting electrocuted by sticking a fork inside a toaster trying to brutally stab Jerry to death.

Probably not too different than some of the twisted crap in Brother's Grimm. Lastly, not too much different than horrific stories small children hear in Sunday school.

Just sayin'

Nope.

Watching vs. doing.

Watching a cartoon animal smash another one with no long-term damage vs. choosing, planning, and deciding to pull the trigger on another human, who dies bloodily in front of them. Times one million.

Not the same thing at all.

[Honorable_Pawn]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

Nope.

Watching vs. doing.

Watching a cartoon animal smash another one with no long-term damage vs. choosing, planning, and deciding to pull the trigger on another human, who dies bloodily in front of them. Times one million.

Not the same thing at all.

ok.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

Watching a cartoon animal smash another one with no long-term damage vs. choosing, planning, and deciding to pull the trigger on another human, who dies bloodily in front of them. Times one million.

Except, of course, it's not a human being. It's a virtual recreation (in lower fidelity) of a human being. It's a virtual recreation of firing a weapon, with no physical recoil, no ear-splitting sound, no physical reloading of the weapon, severely restricted view, etc. Other than increasing one's hand-eye co-ordination, firing a weapon in Call of Duty is not going to make one more proficient at firing the real thing.

Then, of course, there are all the games where the enemy isn't a human being. The Flood in Halo, the Locust and Lambent in Gears of War, and so forth.

There are those who like to tout the relationship between 'violent' video games and real-life violence, but studies indicating such are inconclusive at best, and plenty show no causative link. Then there's the interesting correlation that there has been a sharp decrease in real violence in the U.S. and the rise of the so-called 'violent' video game, which have been around for quite awhile now (Doom came out 21 years ago.)

The stereotype of the teenage video game player is still alive and well, and there are plenty of same, but there are plenty of older games as well (i.e. 20s and 30s or older). But for whatever reason—not unlike with cartoons—video games are still frequently seen as a "kid's" thing. There doesn't seem to be much appreciation of the fact that games, like cartoons, can be aimed at a more mature audience.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Except, of course, it's not a human being. It's a virtual recreation (in lower fidelity) of a human being. It's a virtual recreation of firing a weapon, with no physical recoil, no ear-splitting sound, no physical reloading of the weapon, severely restricted view, etc. Other than increasing one's hand-eye co-ordination, firing a weapon in Call of Duty is not going to make one more proficient at firing the real thing.

Then, of course, there are all the games where the enemy isn't a human being. The Flood in Halo, the Locust and Lambent in Gears of War, and so forth.

There are those who like to tout the relationship between 'violent' video games and real-life violence, but studies indicating such are inconclusive at best, and plenty show no causative link. Then there's the interesting correlation that there has been a sharp decrease in real violence in the U.S. and the rise of the so-called 'violent' video game, which have been around for quite awhile now (Doom came out 21 years ago.)

The stereotype of the teenage video game player is still alive and well, and there are plenty of same, but there are plenty of older games as well (i.e. 20s and 30s or older). But for whatever reason—not unlike with cartoons—video games are still frequently seen as a "kid's" thing. There doesn't seem to be much appreciation of the fact that games, like cartoons, can be aimed at a more mature audience.

I'm not "touting" such a relationship. I just wonder what the effects will turn out to be.

Originally Posted by The Wolf

The kid across the street from me has probably killed over a million people in all of his online shooters over the years. It makes me wonder about how that has changed his outlook on life and people.

I wish I was certain that there aren't going to be any negative effects as some people seem to be.

[ghostrobot]

I haven't even used the 3D yet. I personally don't really care about how the games look when I play them out, and I do play out most of my games. I like the simplistic and pure simulation feel that I have when I play OOTP. I don't expect it to be anything like Ken Griffey Jr Presents Major League Baseball, MVP 2005, The Show, etc. I've played and loved all of those games, but for very different reasons than why I've played and loved APBA and OOTP.

That said, if some people are excited for 3D, then why not try to find a cool way to include it in the game. I just hope that, like almost everything else in the game, things like 3D fields and players will always come with a box that makes them optional.

I love the way the game plays and looks right now, and I don't think I'll ever switch over to a 3D OOTP experience. When I want to play a video game, I fire up MVP 2005. When I want to play a baseball game, I sit down with OOTP.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by ghostrobot

I haven't even used the 3D yet. I personally don't really care about how the games look when I play them out, and I do play out most of my games. I like the simplistic and pure simulation feel that I have when I play OOTP. I don't expect it to be anything like Ken Griffey Jr Presents Major League Baseball, MVP 2005, The Show, etc. I've played and loved all of those games, but for very different reasons than why I've played and loved APBA and OOTP.

That said, if some people are excited for 3D, then why not try to find a cool way to include it in the game. I just hope that, like almost everything else in the game, things like 3D fields and players will always come with a box that makes them optional.

I love the way the game plays and looks right now, and I don't think I'll ever switch over to a 3D OOTP experience. When I want to play a video game, I fire up MVP 2005. When I want to play a baseball game, I sit down with OOTP.

Yep, my feelings exactly.

fwiw, I sit down with OOTP 10,000 times for each time I fire up MLB2005.

[Lukas Berger]

Never mind

[ghostrobot]

Originally Posted by lukasberger

Yep, my feelings exactly.

fwiw, I sit down with OOTP 10,000 times for each time I fire up MLB2005.

I moved to Korea 2 years ago and I didn't bring my PS2 along with me. I've exclusively played OOTP since the move and even when I return to the states, I'm not sure I'll need another baseball game in my life.

That's the thing about this game...since I've been in Asia I've done some traveling and OOTP is always with me, on my laptop...killing time for me when I'm stuck in airports or train stations; doing things for me that no other game has ever done for me before.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by ghostrobot

doing things for me that no other game has ever done for me before.

Yeah, exactly. What an amazing game!

FM does the same sort of things for me, but those are the only two games in the "best of" class for me. There are some other great games, but those two are in a league of their own.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by lukasberger

Yeah, exactly. What an amazing game!

FM does the same sort of things for me, but those are the only two games in the "best of" class for me. There are some other great games, but those two are in a league of their own.

Exactly. OOTP and FM are the two best games in the world.

[The Wolf]

Although I am getting a heck of a lot of enjoyment out of Kerbal Space Program ( https://kerbalspaceprogram.com ). Mün or bust!

[Honorable_Pawn]

I understand that my side-conversation in relation to video game violence is off the OP topic therefore I will quietly bow out.

On a much closer point to the topic at hand I must whole-heartedly agree with Wolfey. As an accountant I would have to agree with the engineer that the opportunity cost lost spending time on sizzle instead of steak chafes my hide.

There is no way that some dirtbag should be stealing 3rd base in a 45-2 game. Get it right, first, then work on the graphical representation of what the game engine is producing.

I'm cool with improved graphics but there are waaaaaay too many holes that Mark Johnson is ignoring. Graphics be damned. Fix the bad AI.