Home | Webstore
Latest News: OOTP 25 Available - FHM 10 Available - OOTP Go! Available

Out of the Park Baseball 25 Buy Now!

  

Go Back   OOTP Developments Forums > Prior Versions of Our Games > Out of the Park Baseball 15 > OOTP 15 - General Discussions

OOTP 15 - General Discussions Discuss the new 2014 version of Out of the Park Baseball here!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-08-2014, 09:52 PM   #21
BradC
All Star Starter
 
BradC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: northern CA
Posts: 1,870
Blog Entries: 1
We will be giving a demo of 3D stadiums in OOTP 15 tonight when the GCL Finals conclude on Twitch. Twitch
BradC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2014, 10:09 PM   #22
dward1
All Star Reserve
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 929
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Hough View Post
One area is the fact that FM's AI involves far more actions and possible outcomes than OOTP processes. Whether it's transfer negotiations, contract negotiations, interacting with the media, disciplining players, interacting with the board, interacting with player agents, or any number of other features, FM is using AI to a much greater extent than OOTP, and it's doing it on a much larger scale, across many more nations, leagues, players and staff.

Also, the FM AI is vastly more competitive against the user. It is easy to outsmart the OOTP AI when it comes to player valuations, and many customers have had to come up with house rules or use difficulty levels to counter this. If you want to sign a free agent in OOTP, the only limit is budget. You can pretty much sign any free agent that you want. It's easy to beat the AI in negotiations. And it's also quite easy to crush the OOTP AI in trades unless you turn the difficulty up to hard or very hard. A really good AI would not require difficulty levels to compensate for consistently bad AI player valuation.


I agree the FM AI is much better than OOTP (contracts, strategy, lack of head-scratching benchings, etc) but I disagree it is more competitive. it's very easy to build up massive dynasties in FM, more so than it is in OOTP by buying young players who you know will develop well if you simply play them a decent amount. the "fog of war" in scouting and development in OOTP you can gain by turning accuracy down and using 2-8 scouting scale makes it more competitive and realistic. if you play 1-100 ratings with perfect scouting yes OOTP is much easier
dward1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2014, 10:39 PM   #23
Lukas Berger
OOTP Developments
 
Lukas Berger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Nice, Côte d'Azur, France
Posts: 19,755
Quote:
Originally Posted by dward1 View Post
I agree the FM AI is much better than OOTP (contracts, strategy, lack of head-scratching benchings, etc) but I disagree it is more competitive. it's very easy to build up massive dynasties in FM, more so than it is in OOTP by buying young players who you know will develop well if you simply play them a decent amount. the "fog of war" in scouting and development in OOTP you can gain by turning accuracy down and using 2-8 scouting scale makes it more competitive and realistic. if you play 1-100 ratings with perfect scouting yes OOTP is much easier
Yep. Agreed. When you can take Cambridge from non-League to the Premier League, or Cannes from the CFA2 to Ligue 1 or San Marino from Serie D to Serie A in 4-5 years in every single version of FM, it's hard to trumpet the ai as being fantastic or the game as being challenging.

Now FM's the best game in the world (OOTP's second) and I love it, don't get me wrong, but imo OOTP is actually more challenging than FM if you just turn off the ratings and play stats only. I think the OOTP ai is right up there with FM's.
Lukas Berger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2014, 06:11 AM   #24
Markus Heinsohn
Developer OOTP
 
Markus Heinsohn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Germany
Posts: 24,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Hough View Post
One area is the fact that FM's AI involves far more actions and possible outcomes than OOTP processes. Whether it's transfer negotiations, contract negotiations, interacting with the media, disciplining players, interacting with the board, interacting with player agents, or any number of other features, FM is using AI to a much greater extent than OOTP, and it's doing it on a much larger scale, across many more nations, leagues, players and staff.
Since I worked for SI, I know how this works. And the AI in FM is as limited (= no match for experienced players) as the one in OOTP, just take a peak at their forums and you'll get plenty of examples. Also, FM does not have customizable rules, so OOTP has to deal with unlimited rule permutations, which is very complex in it's own right. In the end, it is comparing apples to oranges.

Oh, and did I mention that the FM creators have a staff which is 20 times larger than ours?

Last edited by Markus Heinsohn; 04-10-2014 at 06:13 AM.
Markus Heinsohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2014, 09:54 AM   #25
Cryomaniac
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Hucknall, Notts, UK
Posts: 4,902
Quote:
Originally Posted by lukasberger View Post
Yep. Agreed. When you can take Cambridge from non-League to the Premier League, or Cannes from the CFA2 to Ligue 1 or San Marino from Serie D to Serie A in 4-5 years in every single version of FM, it's hard to trumpet the ai as being fantastic or the game as being challenging.
This reminded me of a different game (namely Premier Manager '98), where I managed to win the FA cup with Darlington, admittedly a small amount of save-scumming was involved, but IIRC only in the semi-final.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn View Post
Also, FM does not have customizable rules, so OOTP has to deal with unlimited rule permutations, which is very complex in it's own right.
This is something about OOTP which I think people overlook. Now, it might seem as if I overlook it too with my constant harping on about additional customisation options, but I do at least usually not that AI is hard to code. The problem (you know this, but others might not get it) is that for each option that you add, you have to at least consider how it will effect every other option. Now for some things that stuff is slightly obvious (eg if you have a larger roster and a lower salary cap, the AI should really pay people less) but some stuff isn't that obvious at first glance.

Knowing this doesn't stop me asking for more customisation, but it does temper my expectations of getting everything I ask for lol.
__________________

Cryomaniac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2014, 10:16 AM   #26
SirMichaelJordan
Hall Of Famer
 
SirMichaelJordan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,609
3D Screen SHots

Quote:
Originally Posted by dward1 View Post
I agree the FM AI is much better than OOTP (contracts, strategy, lack of head-scratching benchings, etc) but I disagree it is more competitive. it's very easy to build up massive dynasties in FM, more so than it is in OOTP by buying young players who you know will develop well if you simply play them a decent amount. the "fog of war" in scouting and development in OOTP you can gain by turning accuracy down and using 2-8 scouting scale makes it more competitive and realistic. if you play 1-100 ratings with perfect scouting yes OOTP is much easier

You can do the same in FM. Most people just choose not to. I noticed a high amount of players who enjoy stealing regens and wonder kids from other teams for example.

I modded the ratings into color coded bars (I wish they didn't remove graphical ratings)

I delegate tasks to my staff while I manage.

Scouts are finding my players so that stop me from finding and stealing those hidden gems and new-gen wonder kids. I also let my Director of Football/GM bring in new players while I oversee things. I love the new feature of having staff matter and letting them actually do their job if you want to play that way.


As for OOTP Baseball,

I can dominate in this game also if I chose to. But the way I have my game setup makes it hard to do so.

At the end of the day its all about how you choose to play the game.

Last edited by SirMichaelJordan; 04-10-2014 at 10:27 AM.
SirMichaelJordan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2014, 11:03 AM   #27
garion333
Minors (Double A)
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 133
I'm hoping we make it three pages in before we get a screenshot of the 3D parks and whatnot.
garion333 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2014, 11:33 AM   #28
Donevyn
Major Leagues
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: UP, WA
Posts: 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by garion333 View Post
I'm hoping we make it three pages in before we get a screenshot of the 3D parks and whatnot.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Alx_ta9Raqg




(hello garion...donan here

Last edited by Donevyn; 04-10-2014 at 11:35 AM.
Donevyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2014, 12:21 PM   #29
rpriske
Hall Of Famer
 
rpriske's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Spencerville, ON, Canada
Posts: 23,898
Blog Entries: 1
Sticking with photos.

Now, if you could make a 3-D model that was photo-realistic, I'd be down... but that is an awful lot to ask.
__________________
Rusty Priske
Poet, Canadian, Baseball Fan

````````````````````````````````````````

rpriske is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2014, 09:11 PM   #30
Charlie Hough
Hall Of Famer
 
Charlie Hough's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by dward1 View Post
I agree the FM AI is much better than OOTP (contracts, strategy, lack of head-scratching benchings, etc) but I disagree it is more competitive. it's very easy to build up massive dynasties in FM, more so than it is in OOTP by buying young players who you know will develop well if you simply play them a decent amount. the "fog of war" in scouting and development in OOTP you can gain by turning accuracy down and using 2-8 scouting scale makes it more competitive and realistic. if you play 1-100 ratings with perfect scouting yes OOTP is much easier
Usually people who claim this are abusing FM's search function and other tools in a way that is completely unrealistic. If you use the fog of war in FM, start with a realistic manager reputation and background, start at the bottom, and rely heavily on your scouts like real managers do, you will not find it that easy to build up a small club from nothing and into global conquerors. Yes, it can be done, and we've all done it, but it's nowhere near as easy as when you use the game's data in ways that are not realistic.

And, by the way, is it just me, or is there an inferiority complex around here? It seems that every time a different product comes up and people talk about aspects of it that they enjoy and that they like better than OOTP, we get reminded that these other companies have a much larger number of programmers.

Well, I've got news for you: FM started as CM with two brothers as an amateur product in 1992. It's been around for 22 years. OOTP has been around for 15 years.

One company has had explosively larger growth, was vastly further along after 15 years than the other is, and now has a sizable staff level. That number of personnel was growing rapidly within a few years after release. It's the most successful sports sim in history and arguably one of the best selling and most successful gaming titles in the history of computing of any kind.

So let's cut the crap and stop with the phony comparisons. Sports Interactive didn't start with the staff that it has now. It got there on its own merits and has earned every bit of the accolades that it receives. So let's not try to downplay what they do by pointing to their advantage in staffing level. They got to that staffing level from nothing. It's the job of everyone else to step up to the same level and produce results so they can enjoy the advantages of having all those programmers too.
Charlie Hough is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2014, 09:39 PM   #31
tomwolf2008
Major Leagues
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 359
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Hough View Post
Usually people who claim this are abusing FM's search function and other tools in a way that is completely unrealistic. If you use the fog of war in FM, start with a realistic manager reputation and background, start at the bottom, and rely heavily on your scouts like real managers do, you will not find it that easy to build up a small club from nothing and into global conquerors. Yes, it can be done, and we've all done it, but it's nowhere near as easy as when you use the game's data in ways that are not realistic.

And, by the way, is it just me, or is there an inferiority complex around here? It seems that every time a different product comes up and people talk about aspects of it that they enjoy and that they like better than OOTP, we get reminded that these other companies have a much larger number of programmers.

Well, I've got news for you: FM started as CM with two brothers as an amateur product in 1992. It's been around for 22 years. OOTP has been around for 15 years.

One company has had explosively larger growth, was vastly further along after 15 years than the other is, and now has a sizable staff level. That number of personnel was growing rapidly within a few years after release. It's the most successful sports sim in history and arguably one of the best selling and most successful gaming titles in the history of computing of any kind.

So let's cut the crap and stop with the phony comparisons. Sports Interactive didn't start with the staff that it has now. It got there on its own merits and has earned every bit of the accolades that it receives. So let's not try to downplay what they do by pointing to their advantage in staffing level. They got to that staffing level from nothing. It's the job of everyone else to step up to the same level and produce results so they can enjoy the advantages of having all those programmers too.

I hope you'll agree with me that a game that simulates football(soccer) will probably sold much better (thus making a company easier to grow, more profitable, and easier to expand its staff) than a game that simulates baseball
tomwolf2008 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2014, 09:57 PM   #32
Honorable_Pawn
Hall Of Famer
 
Honorable_Pawn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Tampa Bay
Posts: 6,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sweed View Post
Well, FM has a large team of programmers dedicated to different modules of the game while OOTP has Markus, Andreas, and Daniela. I would guess if OOTP had stayed under the SI umbrella animation would have been in the game long ago.
and Brad, dammit, and Brad

Honorable_Pawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2014, 10:02 PM   #33
Honorable_Pawn
Hall Of Famer
 
Honorable_Pawn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Tampa Bay
Posts: 6,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by rpriske View Post
Sticking with photos.

Now, if you could make a 3-D model that was photo-realistic, I'd be down... but that is an awful lot to ask.
Same here
Honorable_Pawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2014, 10:03 PM   #34
Honorable_Pawn
Hall Of Famer
 
Honorable_Pawn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Tampa Bay
Posts: 6,407
All I got to say is: Soccer Sucks.


'Nuff said.
Honorable_Pawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2014, 11:07 PM   #35
SirMichaelJordan
Hall Of Famer
 
SirMichaelJordan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,609
Quote:
Originally Posted by Honorable_Pawn View Post
All I got to say is: Soccer Sucks.





'Nuff said.

Agreed. I always preferred Football 😉
SirMichaelJordan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2014, 12:15 AM   #36
RchW
Hall Of Famer
 
RchW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The big smoke
Posts: 15,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Hough View Post
Usually people who claim this are abusing FM's search function and other tools in a way that is completely unrealistic. If you use the fog of war in FM, start with a realistic manager reputation and background, start at the bottom, and rely heavily on your scouts like real managers do, you will not find it that easy to build up a small club from nothing and into global conquerors. Yes, it can be done, and we've all done it, but it's nowhere near as easy as when you use the game's data in ways that are not realistic.

And, by the way, is it just me, or is there an inferiority complex around here? It seems that every time a different product comes up and people talk about aspects of it that they enjoy and that they like better than OOTP, we get reminded that these other companies have a much larger number of programmers.

Well, I've got news for you: FM started as CM with two brothers as an amateur product in 1992. It's been around for 22 years. OOTP has been around for 15 years.

One company has had explosively larger growth, was vastly further along after 15 years than the other is, and now has a sizable staff level. That number of personnel was growing rapidly within a few years after release. It's the most successful sports sim in history and arguably one of the best selling and most successful gaming titles in the history of computing of any kind.

So let's cut the crap and stop with the phony comparisons. Sports Interactive didn't start with the staff that it has now. It got there on its own merits and has earned every bit of the accolades that it receives. So let's not try to downplay what they do by pointing to their advantage in staffing level. They got to that staffing level from nothing. It's the job of everyone else to step up to the same level and produce results so they can enjoy the advantages of having all those programmers too.
So why don't you cut the crap and stop with the everything FM does is superior to OOTP meme? That's no less phony. Pointing out the fact that SI has more programmers is not a critique of their success. Show me one post that even comes close to what you claim. Continuing the phony argument you use this non-existent criticism of SI to justify criticism of OOTPD for not growing like SI. I'm trying but failing to see what purpose you have here.
__________________
Cheers

RichW

#stopthestupid

“Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition …There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.” Frank Wilhoit
RchW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2014, 02:18 AM   #37
silvam14
Hall Of Famer
 
silvam14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Dedham, MA
Posts: 9,742
It helps SI that soccer is the most popular sport in the world. probably 20x or more popular than baseball. So lets cut the crap that OOTPD and SI were even on the same playing field to begin with
__________________
Senior "Nancy Boy" of the OOTP Boards
_______________________________________________
silvam14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2014, 04:12 AM   #38
HolyCow98
Hall Of Famer
 
HolyCow98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Douglasville, GA
Posts: 2,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by silvam14 View Post
It helps SI that soccer is the most popular sport in the world. probably 20x or more popular than baseball. So lets cut the crap that OOTPD and SI were even on the same playing field to begin with
Totally agree.

The entire time I've been reading this thread...I kept thinking over and over that on the global market, no matter what, a good baseball game is going to get out sold by a good football (soccer) game due to the wide gap in popularity of the two sports globally speaking. This would not change if OOTP was perfect in each and every way and had every feature we could think of done to every ones idea of perfection. If SI and OOTPD had the exact same number of staff and resources it still would not matter (in terms of who sells more copies globally). If you compare the rate of growth you also have to compare the size of the customer pools. OOTP is never going to get a large percentage of its sells out side of the US/North America pool of customers. FM I'm sure does just fine if they had zero US/North America sold copies (which I know they have a lot more than zero). To me that makes it a bit unfair to compare the growth patterns of OOTPD and SI...but that just IMO.

Now in the US...I think OOTP is arguably the most successful of the text sims of the big 4 US/North American sports (baseball, american football, basketball, hockey). I think their path to growing OOTPD is going to be to continue developing in those 4 sports. If successful they'll have more resources and the ability to increase staff size.

As far as OOTP specifically....I tip my cap to OOTPD for how far OOTP has expanded. I was going through my old backups CDs from old computers and came across one that had OOTP 3 written on it. It had all my files from my first leagues covering the OOTP 3, 4 and 5 versions. Its insane how primitive those versions are now and in comparison how deep the current version is. How far the game has expanded makes it more complicated (I would imagine) to get everything just right...especially when that is part of the development is still just one man. I'm sure FM 15 years in had a larger staff and more resources and a larger fan base.

I will agree the FM series is the most successful sports text sim game ever developed. I can't help but think that the sports popularity had something to do with that on multiple levels (initial success which enabled the ability to reinvest which expanded the staff and scope of the series). I also agree, and I'm sure OOTPD would agree, that if they had more resources and man power they could put out a even better product. Again just IMO...
HolyCow98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2014, 05:27 AM   #39
Charlie Hough
Hall Of Famer
 
Charlie Hough's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by RchW View Post
So why don't you cut the crap and stop with the everything FM does is superior to OOTP meme? That's no less phony. Pointing out the fact that SI has more programmers is not a critique of their success. Show me one post that even comes close to what you claim. Continuing the phony argument you use this non-existent criticism of SI to justify criticism of OOTPD for not growing like SI. I'm trying but failing to see what purpose you have here.
Wow, you might want to review the claims you just made and compare them to the content of my posts. You have made some massive, fallacious leaps in logic. To get to my real point, though, you way want to do a search for posts that Markus and others have made and analyze how many times that they have referred to the number of programmers that SI, MLB The Show, and other companies have.

It's almost always in the context of explaining why OOTP can't do something or when someone merely points out they they like something better in another game. You will find hundreds of posts like this over the years.

It's a tired, old refrain, and I didn't say that this constitutes criticism of SI. I said that it downplays what they do because there are consistent responses that point to the disparity in resources rather than the quality of the output and the fact that considerable successes and major breakthroughs were achieved long before those resources were at that level.

It's a classic deflective and defensive tactic, so it makes sense psychologically. But, conveniently, it doesn't mention or acknowledge the fact that SI started with nothing and produced more with limited resources than all the rest. And it misses an opportunity for self-reflection and and to learn more from what these other companies do to succeed. Repeatedly pointing out the disparity in resources is an oversimplification, just as is the claim that SI has had a vastly easier path because of the sport involved. Trust me, there have been countless football management sims since the early 1980s, but only one has ever achieved true, lasting success. And it has faced a far larger competitive environment due to the popularity of the sport. The road is littered with failures. So it's not as simple as the sport merely being more popular. On my view, attempts to simplify it in those terms are just another form of deflection and defense.

Think of it this way. Let's say that you own and really like a particular car but then you buy a second car from a different company and you like it better for various reasons. Wouldn't it be pretty lame if you were a long-time contributor on the forums of the first car maker and you mentioned that you liked the other car and certain features better, and then the first car maker responded by pointing out that the other company has more employees? Or what if the first car maker pointed out that the other company had it much easier because it makes a certain style of car that is more popular? It just doesn't seem very becoming of the company or very relevant.

To me, referencing the disparity in resources when people praise a different product and want to see something similar in yours is like bringing up the big advantage that Apple or Microsoft has if someone compares your product to theirs and wants to see something similar from you. Yes, it's patently obvious that they have huge advantages in resources and experience, but that doesn't stop other companies or developers from trying to do better and beat them with fewer resources. Whether it's Samsung crushing the iPhone right now or tiny SaaS companies delivering a better CRM solution than Microsoft, companies can get it done. And they don't seem to get into this refrain about comparing resources because that's not necessarily what's driving anything.

Tesla recently achieved the highest safety score in the history of auto manufacturing despite having far fewer employees, far fewer resources, and nowhere near the total funding and investor support that companies like GM, Ford, or Toyota have. It's only been in business for a relatively small number of years, and it was nearly bankrupt not too long ago. But it managed climb out of the hole and get it done.

And OOTP has managed to do quite well for itself too. And it's done this despite relying largely on a single programmer for many years. So are the resources really all that relevant? Or does it really come down to talent and what you do with it?

I think the more interesting question is whether OOTP may actually choose to remain smaller and not aggressively pursue expansion for various reasons, including keeping things more personally manageable and avoiding debt or financial risk. Some companies choose this path, though it's unconventional. I have a client that takes a similar approach and only wants to grow its newest subsidiary to a certain level and then keep it sustainable at that level.

Based on my experiences with other companies and startups over the years, and based on the stability, success, and potential that we've seen from OOTP, I've always felt that OOTP would have a good shot at securing business loans and/or some private financing to fund a more rapid expansion and growth strategy. Hell, even the production and launch of MicroLeague Baseball was originally funded by private investors that were found by networking at a local athletic club and simply showing them the basic mathematical model that churned out results.

But I suspect that OOTP is more comfortable with the way it has always done things, slowly and steadily, rather than pursuing rapid growth and expansion and having to assume the corresponding risks and stresses. Those can be significant, so it comes down to your personal preferences and your tolerance for that.

Now, maybe some of these observations will send some of you into a rage. But I have to think that it's that defense mechanism kicking in again. Some folks seem to really take issue with praise being given to other products here or to someone having a a strong opinion that doesn't fit with their view of OOTP. It's rare that I mention other products on the forums, but I have consistently praised FM on occasion over the years, and I maintain that it is the better product, it has done better relative to the available resources, and I like the way that SI has approached things better. That does not imply that OOTP is somehow an awful company. It's a simple comparison. I make no apologies for that, and I make no apologies for my view that repeated references to disparities in resources between OOTP and other companies downplays the achievements of those other companies and is a defensive, deflective maneuver.

If this somehow offends you on a deep level, then I invite you to use the ignore option and disregard my posts. But I think I've laid it out pretty clearly, and I don't think there is much else to be said from my standpoint.

Last edited by Charlie Hough; 04-11-2014 at 05:36 AM.
Charlie Hough is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2014, 05:44 AM   #40
dmytron
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by Honorable_Pawn View Post
All I got to say is: Soccer Sucks.
To you, Americans, maybe. To us, Europeans, Asians, Africans and South Americans, not at all. Baseball? Sucks. Soccer? No way!
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:43 PM.

 

Major League and Minor League Baseball trademarks and copyrights are used with permission of Major League Baseball. Visit MLB.com and MiLB.com.

Officially Licensed Product – MLB Players, Inc.

Out of the Park Baseball is a registered trademark of Out of the Park Developments GmbH & Co. KG

Google Play is a trademark of Google Inc.

Apple, iPhone, iPod touch and iPad are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries.

COPYRIGHT © 2023 OUT OF THE PARK DEVELOPMENTS. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright © 2020 Out of the Park Developments