Does anyone here actually enjoy playing offline mode?

[itsmb8]

Basically what this all comes down to is this game doesnt simulate the role of a GM the way we want it to. This game does a great job of simulating baseball and producing stats and just how baseball works on a macro level, but it needs a lot more work on the micro level... How GMs interact with other GMs, how a front office operates, the relationships between GM and manager or between players, the logic of AI GMs, etc. etc.

This is where I wish OOTP would focus on upcoming iterations of the game.

[ALB123]

I would love to see changes implemented in the AI trading system. I've learned of a few ways people exploit trading with the AI and I could never, ever do such things. I want to win as much as anyone, but I want to win with some sort of honor. At the same time, I am a firm believer in, "It's your game. Play it the way you enjoy it the most!".

In addition to the trading system, something must be done about the Free Agency system in ootp. On the day new Free Agents are announced, the likelihood of getting anyone you desire in the Top 10 is probably 97% if you have the money to woo the player. And if you don't have the money, you can spend as much time as you'd like, IRL, proposing trades to free up some extra cash to grab the #1, #2 or whomever you desire as new Free Agents who will help your team a lot.

I did have a thought that when Free Agency begins and you select a new Free Agent you're interested in, perhaps we should not be told what the player is looking for in terms of $$ and duration. We could make an offer if we believe we know what they're looking for and possibly secure that F.A.'s services for the contract we proposed. Or, he'll tell us he will think about the offer and get back to us. Maybe, after 5 or 7 days, the terms and conditions each new F.A. is seeking will become public information. If the player was really happy with our offer, we should win the bidding unless he's high in Greed. Then he may decide to listen to other offers and we will have to make another bid for his services. With each F.A. in the top 25 or 35, we should only have 2 chances per month to win them over. So, maybe we don't want to make an offer in that first 5-7 days when his desires aren't revealed yet, because we'd only have 1 more chance to bid on him if he doesn't accept it right away. Waiting for his expected terms & conditions leaves us with two chances to win him over an AI team. And perhaps, when the player's terms & conditions are made public, the BNN should inform us of some type of range, not an exact dollar amount and # of years. If BNN says, "Derek Jeter is looking for a new deal for between 4-8 years with an average annual value between 2,000,000 - 5,000,000..." You might offer 7 years at $4,750,000/year and obtain his services and then it will be revealed what his exact terms were. Only then do you learn that he was willing to sign for $3,500,000/year over 5 years which means you way overpaid for him. Or maybe he didn't want anything over 4 years and that is why he's refusing that huge $4.75M/year for 7 years offer.

That might be the worst idea ever conceived...I don't know. I just know that if I'm a big market team and I have a generous owner, I can almost always get top quality free agents each season which just widens the gap between our team and the smaller market squads.

[jimmysthebestcop]

Originally Posted by itsmb8

Basically what this all comes down to is this game doesnt simulate the role of a GM the way we want it to. This game does a great job of simulating baseball and producing stats and just how baseball works on a macro level, but it needs a lot more work on the micro level... How GMs interact with other GMs, how a front office operates, the relationships between GM and manager or between players, the logic of AI GMs, etc. etc.

This is where I wish OOTP would focus on upcoming iterations of the game.

Agreed. Think I've been trying to say this for 3 years. Great job of what goes in on the diamond. But the board room not so much.

[itsmb8]

Originally Posted by jimmysthebestcop

Agreed. Think I've been trying to say this for 3 years. Great job of what goes in on the diamond. But the board room not so much.

I remember youve been saying this for the longest time and its time more people spoke up about where we really want OOTP to focus on.

We already have great sims like this, Mogul, Strat, etc. But where OOTP separates itself is its GM mode. This is what the majority of people buy the game for, to run a team.. Not JUST to sim seasons.

Its time OOTP started to HEAVILY focus development on this front office side of the game.

[jimmysthebestcop]

Originally Posted by itsmb8

I remember youve been saying this for the longest time and its time more people spoke up about where we really want OOTP to focus on.

We already have great sims like this, Mogul, Strat, etc. But where OOTP separates itself is its GM mode. This is what the majority of people buy the game for, to run a team.. Not JUST to sim seasons.

Its time OOTP started to HEAVILY focus development on this front office side of the game.

Honestly don't think it's in the cards for OOTP. I just don't think it will ever be that game. OOTP isn't a game for gamers, its a game for baseball fans and the "non gamers". OOTPb is more of a "model building" experience then a true video game experience. Players design their worlds then sit back and watch it unfold. And there is absolutely nothing wrong that. And as world builder OOTP is great at what it does.

I went right from OOTPb 21 to Football Manager 20, which was my 1st FM ever, so I will share my experience. It's long but someone might like the comparison I guess lo.


OOTPb actually has way better FaceGen then FM. I would say the amount of stat reports OOTP has is far superior but the 2 sports diverge significantly in this manner. As FM is a lot more visual reporting since that is how the actual sport is played. The biggest difference in terms of the 3D engine is FM is 100% smooth. Both have glitches/hiccups and what have you but FM is completely smooth. As far as "game day managing" I would say FM and OOTP are about equal as they do top job with the game day experience.

FM does fall completely short in the 3D FaceGen department. Not sure why but they are absolutely trash awful. Other then that FM of course has the better UI and graphics. That's pretty much to be expected as its the bigger company/game/following etc. I will also give the nod to FM in the custom screen/view/searching department. OOTP is a little behind in this area not much just a little. Mostly OOTP fails in some of the player search screens. And they don't have as a robust export/import view mechanic. It is pretty close though.

The biggest difference in FM vs OOTP is absolutely the "management simulation" part. FM is outstanding in this area. Its not just the players but basically ever character in the game feels unique. Whether is ones of a dozens of assistants or one of your star players. You can't handle 2 relationships the same for the most part. All of the characters jump out of the screen and feel alive and not just numbers/ratings/stats like they do in OOTP.

FM and OOTP however take 2 completely different approaches to their individual sports. It's almost "inside out" of one another. While OOTP is hugely complex in creation/settings/customization FM is almost completely opposite. While everything to do with "man management" in FM is what is complex OOTP "man management" is basic and simple.

Just look at the individual attributes for coaches/players the 2 games show to human players and how scouting is handled. Scouting in FM is as complex as Universe creation in OOTP. This is part of the "inside out" philosophy I was talking about. Same thing with players in FM. There are over a dozen attributes, personality pro/cons, traits, hidden things, etc. It is very detailed. While in OOTP all the players have super simple ratings shown even though in the editor its a little more complex. A lot of that personality/mental stuff in FM really separates 1 player to the next.

I don't know the history of OOTP or of FM so I can't comment on that. But it appears the current offerings of FM are aimed towards gamers, or at least have a lot of gamer mechanics, while OOTP isn't really a game setup for gamers in its current offering. Which is why I referred to it like "model building".

You can really see the difference when observing FM mechanic called "tactics". There is this huge following of finding, posting, testing all of these tactics created by players. While some of them might emulate irl teams most are created with the sole purpose of beating and taking advantage the "game engine". That is a thing gamers do. I could never see most OOTP players doing anything like that. Cause OOTP players aren't really playing against the game, they are just playing out the world they created.

So FM and OOTP are both sports managements games but they 100% completely different. FM's world is simple while OOTP is complex. Then FM's inside part is complex while OOTP's is simple. 2 games in the same niche market but certainly with different scopes.


And I've never seen anything since OOTP 18 that leads me to believe OOTP wants to cater to "sports management" video gamers segment. But I see plenty of stuff that shows OOTP wants to cater towards "world building".

I don't think there is anything wrong with either game philosophy. As the consumer you just have to be aware of what style each game is in and pick the game that fits you the best.

The biggest thing wrong with OOTP is probably our personal expectations of the game. What OOTP does it does really well. Once we start to put our desires on OOTP is where the problem pops up.

[ExeR]

Originally Posted by jimmysthebestcop

There are over a dozen attributes, personality pro/cons, traits, hidden things, etc. It is very detailed. While in OOTP all the players have super simple ratings shown even though in the editor its a little more complex. A lot of that personality/mental stuff in FM really separates 1 player to the next.

I hate to be this type of guy, but it had to be done:
That's the only good point and part of FM that can be implemented out of all the things you mentioned. And not because FM got it right, but because there's whole lot more lacking in this department (intensity, consistency, killer instinct). Also, devs mentioned that they simplify ratings in FHM/OOTP to have ability to measure outcomes of actions from real games thus making simulation more realistic (slapshot from hockey was best example).
To avoid pointless arguments, we can use this simple fact: FM with all it's variety of attributes can't even recreate their best players performance. Not just best players, but maybe GOATs of all time. Strange, since variety implies quite the opposite. But that's what you get with hard overall talent CAP and hard attribute CAP. Messi's dribbling is same as ~10 other guys, Ronaldinho's flair is same as ~10 other guys etc. But not only that, all those attributes don't work or combine properly into anything. Livepool with 1 of 20 Acceleration & Speed finished... 6th in PL. Ronaldo and Messi struggle in english minors. So their simulation and attribute participation in sim is worse than awful. Even in FHM you can at least create Gretzky. Hell, you can even make better Gretzky with GOAT defense. Same with baseball, where you know what 250 speed gives you: 30 runs (~20 above regular human speed max of 200). So all the attributes in FM are there for presentation and for local "scouts" to show off. In simulation part it's not even close, even though there's depth that OOTP is lacking and have to look into. But I will take sim season in minutes over FM's sim season in hours atrocity. Biggest DB can't even be ran on Stadia PCs, come on now...
In GM part FM again only makes you feel that it's closer. But it's just another presentation. Try playing small leagues, try transfers that are filled with similar to the cent offers, try developing talent in weird pyramids (like US/Canada). And while more and more NA players shine in top leagues IRL, your FM will be full of MLS busts with whole slew of positions lacking any talent at all (variety of attribute combinations comes with a price). Again, I would gladly take "Can Cuban FA be less powerful?" problems with free editor over pay-to-edit with unclear definition of how new players are created or any control over process whatsoever. In OOTP you can turn off or regulate almost anything, and less ratings are easier to manually fix, even if it never should be user's headache.
So if anything, p.o.s. like FM should be treated as bad example of things to avoid. I know from american football project that devs are focused on online league stuff, but at least there's communication and improvements and some parts of game actually working like they should. All my suggestions about trading module improvements are not just for AI being smarter, so "focus group" would benefit too. Hopefully, it will be implemented or added on to-do list. No such hope exist for FM, I can guarantee it as someone who had 1st FM experience long time ago . Perspective is great thing, but not when it comes to this particular situation. Things as simple as Owner Goals and development budgets can be a breath of fresh air after playing "It's your tactics" manager.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by itsmb8

Basically what this all comes down to is this game doesnt simulate the role of a GM the way we want it to. This game does a great job of simulating baseball and producing stats and just how baseball works on a macro level, but it needs a lot more work on the micro level... How GMs interact with other GMs, how a front office operates, the relationships between GM and manager or between players, the logic of AI GMs, etc. etc.

This is where I wish OOTP would focus on upcoming iterations of the game.

It doesn't sim the role of GM the way you want it to. I'm not against them adding depth but for the way I play it sims GM (caveat bellow) just fine. If they added a lot of depth (hot dog prices, parking fees, or even bigger things like negotiating your own local tv contract) I'd pass that on to my assistant. And that assistant better have the AI to handle the job without bothering me

caveat: I'm not saying there is no room for improvement or that the current GM is perfect, the AI can always be improved upon. We don't need to go down the discussion road of "but this or that"... All I'm saying is the role as setup now is fine "as is" IMHO. I'd rather the GM was improved as how he looks at trades, contracts to offer etc. over trying to "teach" him to negotiate more in depth projects IE new stadium, hot dog prices etc. My 2 cents

Originally Posted by itsmb8

I remember youve been saying this for the longest time and its time more people spoke up about where we really want OOTP to focus on.

We already have great sims like this, Mogul, Strat, etc. But where OOTP separates itself is its GM mode. This is what the majority of people buy the game for, to run a team.. Not JUST to sim seasons.

Its time OOTP started to HEAVILY focus development on this front office side of the game.

That's a pretty big assumption if you mean that the majority want a game that makes them "go to work" every day. Running a team for some would be just what OOTP has them do now. IE Concentrate on getting players with a bare minimum of, as FM would call it, "backroom responsibilities".

Again not against them adding as much depth as they can as long as optional and can be delegated to the staff, that would need to created to handle these things for those that don't want that type of game.

Originally Posted by jimmysthebestcop

Honestly don't think it's in the cards for OOTP. I just don't think it will ever be that game. OOTP isn't a game for gamers, its a game for baseball fans and the "non gamers". OOTPb is more of a "model building" experience then a true video game experience. Players design their worlds then sit back and watch it unfold. And there is absolutely nothing wrong that. And as world builder OOTP is great at what it does.

I went right from OOTPb 21 to Football Manager 20, which was my 1st FM ever, so I will share my experience. It's long but someone might like the comparison I guess lo.


OOTPb actually has way better FaceGen then FM. I would say the amount of stat reports OOTP has is far superior but the 2 sports diverge significantly in this manner. As FM is a lot more visual reporting since that is how the actual sport is played. The biggest difference in terms of the 3D engine is FM is 100% smooth. Both have glitches/hiccups and what have you but FM is completely smooth. As far as "game day managing" I would say FM and OOTP are about equal as they do top job with the game day experience.

FM does fall completely short in the 3D FaceGen department. Not sure why but they are absolutely trash awful. Other then that FM of course has the better UI and graphics. That's pretty much to be expected as its the bigger company/game/following etc. I will also give the nod to FM in the custom screen/view/searching department. OOTP is a little behind in this area not much just a little. Mostly OOTP fails in some of the player search screens. And they don't have as a robust export/import view mechanic. It is pretty close though.

The biggest difference in FM vs OOTP is absolutely the "management simulation" part. FM is outstanding in this area. Its not just the players but basically ever character in the game feels unique. Whether is ones of a dozens of assistants or one of your star players. You can't handle 2 relationships the same for the most part. All of the characters jump out of the screen and feel alive and not just numbers/ratings/stats like they do in OOTP.

FM and OOTP however take 2 completely different approaches to their individual sports. It's almost "inside out" of one another. While OOTP is hugely complex in creation/settings/customization FM is almost completely opposite. While everything to do with "man management" in FM is what is complex OOTP "man management" is basic and simple.

Just look at the individual attributes for coaches/players the 2 games show to human players and how scouting is handled. Scouting in FM is as complex as Universe creation in OOTP. This is part of the "inside out" philosophy I was talking about. Same thing with players in FM. There are over a dozen attributes, personality pro/cons, traits, hidden things, etc. It is very detailed. While in OOTP all the players have super simple ratings shown even though in the editor its a little more complex. A lot of that personality/mental stuff in FM really separates 1 player to the next.

I don't know the history of OOTP or of FM so I can't comment on that. But it appears the current offerings of FM are aimed towards gamers, or at least have a lot of gamer mechanics, while OOTP isn't really a game setup for gamers in its current offering. Which is why I referred to it like "model building".

You can really see the difference when observing FM mechanic called "tactics". There is this huge following of finding, posting, testing all of these tactics created by players. While some of them might emulate irl teams most are created with the sole purpose of beating and taking advantage the "game engine". That is a thing gamers do. I could never see most OOTP players doing anything like that. Cause OOTP players aren't really playing against the game, they are just playing out the world they created.

So FM and OOTP are both sports managements games but they 100% completely different. FM's world is simple while OOTP is complex. Then FM's inside part is complex while OOTP's is simple. 2 games in the same niche market but certainly with different scopes.


And I've never seen anything since OOTP 18 that leads me to believe OOTP wants to cater to "sports management" video gamers segment. But I see plenty of stuff that shows OOTP wants to cater towards "world building".

I don't think there is anything wrong with either game philosophy. As the consumer you just have to be aware of what style each game is in and pick the game that fits you the best.

The biggest thing wrong with OOTP is probably our personal expectations of the game. What OOTP does it does really well. Once we start to put our desires on OOTP is where the problem pops up.

If your definition of a "gamer" vs "nongamer" means a gamer tries to break the engine while a nongamer tries to play the actual game trying to be simulated, in this case baseball, then I guess you're right. But why isn't someone trying to play baseball a gamer?

I play games therefore I am a gamer. The fact I don't try to game the system, find every little chink in the armor and exploit it, spend hundreds of hours testing to see what the exact pct influence a legendary coach has compared to a average coach doesn't mean I'm not a gamer. I'd argue that the fact I don't do this makes me a gamer, and IMHO a better gamer than one who tries to break the game. And that's fine that we differ as long as your game can't have an effect on mine

The whole point of games like this is to simulate, as best it can, a real world game. Why would someone try to break it, as you note FM players do with tactics, rather than enjoy it? It's why, IMHO, online OOTP or any sports sim for that matter is simply no fun. Someone in the league is running test after test trying to figure out the underlying code to use to their advantage. Their argument? I'm not playing baseball, I'm playing OOTP "the game". Their goal is to beat the game, baseball or football has nothing to do with it. I see no joy in playing this way, just my opinion. If someone likes to play this way more power to them, I won't be there Playing baseball in OOTP's instance or football in FM's instance does not make someone a non-gamer. They are after all playing the game the way it was designed to be played, they're just not playing it your way. Unless of course Markus and the Collier (I think that's the correct name?) brothers designed OOTP and FM as a puzzle for "gamers" to solve. I know, from 20 years of reading his posts, if the question were put to Markus he would say he wanted to make a baseball game for those, like himself, that loved baseball.

You're last sentence is dead on. So we to leave it to Markus to continue to build on his vision of the game as we suggest things we'd like to see. We can agree with his decisions and continue to buy the game or, if unhappy, move on.

In any case I guess I'll be playing baseball while you'll be playing a "game"

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by ExeR

I hate to be this type of guy, but it had to be done:
That's the only good point and part of FM that can be implemented out of all the things you mentioned. And not because FM got it right, but because there's whole lot more lacking in this department (intensity, consistency, killer instinct). Also, devs mentioned that they simplify ratings in FHM/OOTP to have ability to measure outcomes of actions from real games thus making simulation more realistic (slapshot from hockey was best example).
To avoid pointless arguments, we can use this simple fact: FM with all it's variety of attributes can't even recreate their best players performance. Not just best players, but maybe GOATs of all time. Strange, since variety implies quite the opposite. But that's what you get with hard overall talent CAP and hard attribute CAP. Messi's dribbling is same as ~10 other guys, Ronaldinho's flair is same as ~10 other guys etc. But not only that, all those attributes don't work or combine properly into anything. Livepool with 1 of 20 Acceleration & Speed finished... 6th in PL. Ronaldo and Messi struggle in english minors. So their simulation and attribute participation in sim is worse than awful. Even in FHM you can at least create Gretzky. Hell, you can even make better Gretzky with GOAT defense. Same with baseball, where you know what 250 speed gives you: 30 runs (~20 above regular human speed max of 200). So all the attributes in FM are there for presentation and for local "scouts" to show off. In simulation part it's not even close, even though there's depth that OOTP is lacking and have to look into. But I will take sim season in minutes over FM's sim season in hours atrocity. Biggest DB can't even be ran on Stadia PCs, come on now...
In GM part FM again only makes you feel that it's closer. But it's just another presentation. Try playing small leagues, try transfers that are filled with similar to the cent offers, try developing talent in weird pyramids (like US/Canada). And while more and more NA players shine in top leagues IRL, your FM will be full of MLS busts with whole slew of positions lacking any talent at all (variety of attribute combinations comes with a price). Again, I would gladly take "Can Cuban FA be less powerful?" problems with free editor over pay-to-edit with unclear definition of how new players are created or any control over process whatsoever. In OOTP you can turn off or regulate almost anything, and less ratings are easier to manually fix, even if it never should be user's headache.
So if anything, p.o.s. like FM should be treated as bad example of things to avoid. I know from american football project that devs are focused on online league stuff, but at least there's communication and improvements and some parts of game actually working like they should. All my suggestions about trading module improvements are not just for AI being smarter, so "focus group" would benefit too. Hopefully, it will be implemented or added on to-do list. No such hope exist for FM, I can guarantee it as someone who had 1st FM experience long time ago . Perspective is great thing, but not when it comes to this particular situation. Things as simple as Owner Goals and development budgets can be a breath of fresh air after playing "It's your tactics" manager.

I do like FM though I haven't played in years due to not having enough time. Even with the faults you mention I hope to return to the game when I retire and have lots of hours to fill.

I did want to say though that I agree with most of this and there was a lot I had not even thought of The biggest take away? FM is not all "gravy" either.

Personally I wouldn't call it a p.o.s but yes, it does have it's own problems, thank you very much

[Mat]

I would just like to add that I have tried FM numerous times and tried to like it (I love soccer) but it is too bloated.

It is fine if you want these things in OOTP (as long as I can turn them off), but wrong to assume the majority of users do.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by Mat

I would just like to add that I have tried FM numerous times and tried to like it (I love soccer) but it is too bloated.

It is fine if you want these things in OOTP (as long as I can turn them off), but wrong to assume the majority of users do.

I've tried FM over 5 versions and found it similar to you.

[jimmysthebestcop]

Yes I play games. I'm a gamer. Sure I like baseball but not as much as gaming. That's the obvious difference in ootp.

You said it yourself, it's for people who love baseball not video games. I 100% agree!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Which is why ootp will continue to get better more realistic baseball results and customizations but won't see any improvement to management simulation video game mechanics. Just look from 18 to 21 it's exactly the same GM experience with nothing changed at all.

It's not a good or bad thing. Just different philosophies of gaming. It just means ootp isn't a yearly purchase for me personally any longer.

I don't bash the game or the devs. I only say what the game does and doesn't do.

[ALB123]

I really wish the OOTP Devs would focus more on the Baseball Operations side of things. Coaches, Free Agency, Trading...that type of stuff.

Still, I love OOTPb 21.

[zdubbya13]

Originally Posted by The Yurpman

So you're upset that one of the youngest, most talented teams IRL are...becoming talented and winning games in your sim? I'm confused.Most of your players are on the Braves in real life and are very highly touted. Start a game with the Orioles and show me these same records and then we can talk about the game needing improvement.

Agree. Start with the 2020 Baltimore Orioles and then show a screenshot of all your 100+ win seasons shortly thereafter.

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by zdubbya13

Agree. Start with the 2020 Baltimore Orioles and then show a screenshot of all your 100+ win seasons shortly thereafter.

He's right though

I'm coming off consecutive world series victories and instead of being excited to try for a third I'm trying to figure out how to sabotage myself at the All Star break when I'm tied for 1st.

[jimmysthebestcop]

Originally Posted by zdubbya13

Agree. Start with the 2020 Baltimore Orioles and then show a screenshot of all your 100+ win seasons shortly thereafter.

It's not hard. Once you do 1 small market play through all the ones after are exactly the same.

I've done the athletics, pirates, tigers, forget who I did in ootp 18 Marlin's or Ray's I think.

It actually becomes really dull and monotonous. Because it plays out exactly the same over and over, from season to season. Just the names and numbers change. Typically it's 3 to 5 years into the universe and you're an annual world series contender.

My 2nd run in 21 I did the Phillies because I needed change. Having all that money didn't really change anything. Only difference is yearly turnover. You can actually keep players longer.

[Syd Thrift]

For the truest challenge, accept any trade the AI offers you, no matter how bad. I call it Bavasi Mode.

[SirMichaelJordan]

High Injury rate
TCR 200
Very Hard trading
Very low scouting accuracy
AI evaluation settings that put the AI where I want it to be...

Those provide a good challenge for me. There are things that can approve in “GM mode” but i have yet to win any back to backs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[polydamas]

I have played since 10, but I have never played online/mp. Never played Perfect Team either.

[SirMichaelJordan]

One thing that the AI does that a human wouldn’t do, that definitely needs to get fix and doesn’t make the game any harder is the AI’s willingness to start a poor defensive player at a premium defensive position.

I see the AI play a aging vet without a 2B rating at 2B far too often when they could have moved him to a less defensive position if they wanted to keep the bag in the lineup. These players usually put up -20 UZR which doesn’t help the AI win games.

[BirdWatcher]

In my experience, one of the challenges in conversations like this on the Forum (and they are numerous) is that OOTP is so customizable and game play comes in so many different flavors that it is very difficult to generalize. (I mean, it's always easy to generalize, but the validity of the generalizations is another thing altogether. )

Do I believe that it is easy for a somewhat savvy player to build a perpetually winning team, even without doing too much of what most of us would consider gaming the system? Yes, I do.

But just because that is my experience, using the settings and approach I do, doesn't mean it is a universal experience.
And while I get the argument that one shouldn't have to use individual "house rules" to experience more of a challenge, it does seem to me that there are many ways to play the game that are already built-in that can lead to greater challenges. (Less scouting accuracy, more random talent change, stats only, etc.)

I suppose I'm not really even responding just to this thread but to something I have seen so much of in the time I've been playing OOTP and spending time in this community. It is common for someone to come here to vent about an aspect of the game they think is flawed or even broken, make bold generalized statements that I'm sure seem self-evident to them but often have little to do with how many others experience the game. And I'm not saying that they are wrong, just that a more nuanced approach would likely lead to more productive conversations.

It is both a strength and arguably a weakness that OOTP provides such a broad array of gaming experiences and approaches. I personally love the breadth of options but it also does make it hard to reach any universal truths about the game. My wish would just be that people posting here would try to step outside of their own perspective first and acknowledge that their experience isn't everyone's experience. (But, hey, do what you will. This is just my idealistic view of how things should be, not how they are.)