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 17 > OOTP 17 - General Discussions

OOTP 17 - General Discussions Everything about the latest Out of the Park Baseball - officially licensed by MLB.com and the MLBPA.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-30-2016, 04:35 PM   #61
David Watts
Hall Of Famer
 
David Watts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking for a place called Leehofooks
Posts: 8,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
Like Lukas, I don't want to get into the negative stuff. I just want to say that Lukas has helped far more users than he has driven away (most likely none). He has a big hand in the rosters and is really helpful on the forums and is always friendly about it.

Oh, and me and statfreak go back a ways on the boards and he is anything but what you called him.
Yeah it's pretty hard to find better dudes than Lukas and Endgame. Don't really know them, but just reading their posts all these years makes it impossible not to respect them.
David Watts is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2016, 04:46 PM   #62
Rizon
Hall Of Famer
 
Rizon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: SF Area, California Total Posts: 531,691
Posts: 2,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post

Oh, and me and statfreak go back a ways on the boards and he is anything but what you called him.
It's like the literal opposite of statfreak. Stand up guy. Still won't let me into the Secret Forums at OTBL, though.
__________________
JML MILKSHAKES
Rizon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2016, 04:46 PM   #63
Andy
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 2,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Watts View Post
Yeah it's pretty hard to find better dudes than Lukas and Endgame. Don't really know them, but just reading their posts all these years makes it impossible not to respect them.
Endgame as well. Absolutely!
Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2016, 05:15 PM   #64
Cryomaniac
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Hucknall, Notts, UK
Posts: 4,902
Quote:
Originally Posted by PSUColonel View Post
I would argue, that limiting the number of options (trade difficulty, frequency, AI evaluation, and many others) would help the AI in a large way. I understand people might like the options available within OOTP, but I also feel that by having the AI operate on fewer levels as opposed to dozens, would help the AI to act in a much more intelligent manner.
It would, but it would take away the main draw of the game for a lot of people, which is how customisable it its.
__________________

Cryomaniac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2016, 05:44 PM   #65
mitchkenn
Hall Of Famer
 
mitchkenn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Oregon, not by design
Posts: 2,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cryomaniac View Post
It would, but it would take away the main draw of the game for a lot of people, which is how customisable it its.

Yep!!!
__________________
"This is my opening farewell " - Jackson Browne
“They make a desolation and call it peace.” ― Agha Shahid Ali
"Maybe she just has to sing, for the sake of the song - And who do I think that I am to decide that she's wrong." - Townes Van Zandt
"I saw a young man leaning on his wooden crutch - He called out to me, 'Don't ask for so much' And a young woman leaning in her darkened door She cried out to me, 'Why not ask for more?' " - Leonard Cohen
"Hello darkness, my old Friend ...." - Paul Simon
Before Mays, before DiMaggio, there was Oscar Charleston.
"All the lies about Babe Ruth are true." - Waite Hoyt

Avatar is the late great Townes Van Zandt. rip.
mitchkenn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2016, 06:45 PM   #66
Bunktown Ballers
All Star Starter
 
Bunktown Ballers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 1,330
Infractions: 0/1 (2)
Quote:
Originally Posted by tward13 View Post
Unless there was a lot more to his post you didn't quote, what was so bad about the quoted part?

And just because some people accept, and are perfectly happy with everything OOTP has put out, others would like some changes. OOTP is even asking for suggestions in this forum.
Asking is one thing. Telling developers how to do their game using the code they use is another. IE: I install transmission in a vehicle....a non mechanic comes and tells me I'm not doing it the right way, even while he says "But, I really don't know how to use your tools & I never did that before, but it looks easy" I mean come on...A bit much....It just gets to me. Suggest Things...Don't imply they don't know what they doing...And that's what he/she was saying. To the developers...Please
Bunktown Ballers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2016, 07:21 PM   #67
PSUColonel
Hall Of Famer
 
PSUColonel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 12,978
Blog Entries: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cryomaniac View Post
It would, but it would take away the main draw of the game for a lot of people, which is how customisable it its.
would you rather have an engine that has to work on so many levels (options) that it makes a lot of mistakes, or a simplified uniform system which is complex in it's own right, but functions very very well because it doesn't have to take so many other variables into consideration?
PSUColonel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2016, 08:02 PM   #68
endgame
Hall Of Famer
 
endgame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 16,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by PSUColonel View Post
would you rather have an engine that has to work on so many levels (options) that it makes a lot of mistakes, or a simplified uniform system which is complex in it's own right, but functions very very well because it doesn't have to take so many other variables into consideration?
It's irrelevant, IMHO. We're not going backwards. It might be some things could be simplified, but as goes engine requirements, the impetus of the audience in general will always be to demand more. Whether, as a whole, they're willing to accept the sacrifice- often response time, think package trades -is another matter altogether.

You're misrepresenting the idea of options, too, I think. Just because one exists doesn't mean it's exerting a force on engine energies. Wow. That's a phrase. It has to be turned on to integrate with other options and only if they're interconnected. Options alone don't mean complexity, but using a combination of options, the nature of which are misunderstood, may be likely to create unexpected consequences. More related to this a bit later.

Also, lots of mistakes is a bit misleading, as well. Generally speaking, with the exception of the last couple of patches maybe, any specific game error is typically isolated to the area in which it occurs and can, once it's logged, replicated, and proven, be remedied with relative ease.

On the table for many versions has been the idea of a difficulty scaling for the user ranging from Basic to Expert or the like on the front end, offering a nearly automatic selection of options on/off. In the niche we represent, we always want more complexity, more options, more customizations and more, gradually, mirroring of real world baseball, minus the tedium that is not adding any fun or enjoyment factor to the game, but added just for the sake of realism. That's rarely good.

Back on point. Complexity alone does not generate mistakes. It's a matter of having more opportunities for enjoyment and possibility for error, but an error that arises out of a compartment, not out of structure. Think of a class of students. Sure, a 10 chair classroom is easier to control and manage, but is unlikely to match the diversity of a 35 chair classroom in terms of viewpoints, exchanges, and opportunities to explore one's own interaction with the class, potentially learning more. I'd go so far as to say will likely learn more, just like Everyday Joe clicks a button he's never tried before, asks questions on the forum and, Voila!, finds a new feature that adds to his game. In that same classroom, more responses may be wrong, but it doesn't have to affect the rest of the students. In fact, they can learn from the errant response, much like we learn (and improve) the game from the Bug Reports. The instructor (developer) is not without blame or exempt from due praise. What is designed / taught should be done so with clarity and definition. We don't always do that or provide that, but we're working on getting better at it. Can't know what's wrong if you're not sure what's right.

Okay, rambled a bit there. Apologies. Complexity is not cause.
__________________
"Try again. Fail again. Fail better." -- Samuel Beckett
_____________________________________________

Last edited by endgame; 09-30-2016 at 08:26 PM.
endgame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2016, 08:18 PM   #69
Déjà Bru
Hall Of Famer
 
Déjà Bru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 10,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by lukasberger View Post
Please don't turn this thread into a flame war guys.

People can criticize the game if they want/need to. We'll even use whatever parts of the criticisms are valid to improve the game in the future.

I understand that the tone of some of the complaints can be a bit irritating, but attacking the guys making the complaints really doesn't help out at all. If you're a fan of OOTP and want to help out, please don't do so by attacking those who bring up some perceived issues, even if their tone is less than 100% perfect. It doesn't actually help defend OOTP any, it just makes the boards more toxic.

In the end more people are likely to get turned off of the game by seeing a toxic atmosphere here on the boards with lots of personal attacks going back and forth than they are by a few legitimate or even less than legitimate complaints and criticisms posted here.

If you want to help out, then post about the things you like about the game, what it gets right, what makes you excited about it, and just try to let the negative stuff go and let people have their say in peace.
Post of the Year.
__________________

- Bru


Déjà Bru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2016, 09:02 PM   #70
PSUColonel
Hall Of Famer
 
PSUColonel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 12,978
Blog Entries: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by endgame View Post
It's irrelevant, IMHO. We're not going backwards. It might be some things could be simplified, but as goes engine requirements, the impetus of the audience in general will always be to demand more. Whether, as a whole, they're willing to accept the sacrifice- often response time, think package trades -is another matter altogether.

You're misrepresenting the idea of options, too, I think. Just because one exists doesn't mean it's exerting a force on engine energies. Wow. That's a phrase. It has to be turned on to integrate with other options and only if they're interconnected. Options alone don't mean complexity, but using a combination of options, the nature of which are misunderstood, may be likely to create unexpected consequences. More related to this a bit later.

Also, lots of mistakes is a bit misleading, as well. Generally speaking, with the exception of the last couple of patches maybe, any specific game error is typically isolated to the area in which it occurs and can, once it's logged, replicated, and proven, be remedied with relative ease.

On the table for many versions has been the idea of a difficulty scaling for the user ranging from Basic to Expert or the like on the front end, offering a nearly automatic selection of options on/off. In the niche we represent, we always want more complexity, more options, more customizations and more, gradually, mirroring of real world baseball, minus the tedium that is not adding any fun or enjoyment factor to the game, but added just for the sake of realism. That's rarely good.

Back on point. Complexity alone does not generate mistakes. It's a matter of having more opportunities for enjoyment and possibility for error, but an error that arises out of a compartment, not out of structure. Think of a class of students. Sure, a 10 chair classroom is easier to control and manage, but is unlikely to match the diversity of a 35 chair classroom in terms of viewpoints, exchanges, and opportunities to explore one's own interaction with the class, potentially learning more. I'd go so far as to say will likely learn more, just like Everyday Joe clicks a button he's never tried before, asks questions on the forum and, Voila!, finds a new feature that adds to his game. In that same classroom, more responses may be wrong, but it doesn't have to affect the rest of the students. In fact, they can learn from the errant response, much like we learn (and improve) the game from the Bug Reports. The instructor (developer) is not without blame or exempt from due praise. What is designed / taught should be done so with clarity and definition. We don't always do that or provide that, but we're working on getting better at it. Can't know what's wrong if you're not sure what's right.

Okay, rambled a bit there. Apologies. Complexity is not cause.
Perhaps complexity is not the right word...but rather "too many multiple variables" is the phrase I should be using.
PSUColonel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2016, 11:40 PM   #71
BIG17EASY
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,291
Quote:
Originally Posted by PSUColonel View Post
would you rather have an engine that has to work on so many levels (options) that it makes a lot of mistakes, or a simplified uniform system which is complex in it's own right, but functions very very well because it doesn't have to take so many other variables into consideration?
I'd rather have what we have -- a complex, customizable game that works pretty darn well right now and could be tremendous with a few small improvements.
BIG17EASY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2016, 12:28 AM   #72
termcl
Minors (Double A)
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 121
Not to derail the thread, but has anyone noticed new issues/bugs with the latest patch? That seems to have been lost somewhere along the way.
termcl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2016, 05:20 AM   #73
Markus Heinsohn
Developer OOTP
 
Markus Heinsohn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Germany
Posts: 24,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by termcl View Post
Not to derail the thread, but has anyone noticed new issues/bugs with the latest patch? That seems to have been lost somewhere along the way.
Hopefully no one has, this is supposed to be the last patch
Markus Heinsohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2016, 05:22 AM   #74
Markus Heinsohn
Developer OOTP
 
Markus Heinsohn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Germany
Posts: 24,709
Regarding AI, one thing that people often forget is that the more complex an AI gets, the slower the game runs. There are areas where we could improve the AI in a meaningful way (so that people would actually notice the effect), however that would slow down the game to an unplayable state (think 2 minutes simulation time per day). We always have to find the right balance between cleverness of the AI and processing speed.
Markus Heinsohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2016, 05:26 AM   #75
Markus Heinsohn
Developer OOTP
 
Markus Heinsohn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Germany
Posts: 24,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by hefalumps View Post
Since we're talking about this, can you disable auto-expansion of *JUST* the historical minor leagues? I like not having to move all the big league teams around manually anymore, so if I had to turn off major league auto-expansion to keep the minor leagues from being reorganized every year, that would be kind of a bummer.
No, that is not possible, and for good reason. If minors would not expand, where would all the new minor league players go? What about major league expansion, the new teams would not have a minor league system unless the user manually adds this. All this could lead to unexpected behavior of the game.
Markus Heinsohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2016, 08:00 AM   #76
PSUColonel
Hall Of Famer
 
PSUColonel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 12,978
Blog Entries: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn View Post
Regarding AI, one thing that people often forget is that the more complex an AI gets, the slower the game runs. There are areas where we could improve the AI in a meaningful way (so that people would actually notice the effect), however that would slow down the game to an unplayable state (think 2 minutes simulation time per day). We always have to find the right balance between cleverness of the AI and processing speed.
lol...I'd actually be OK with that...to me, a smarter AI increases OOTP's value right there. Two minutes for a day (at lest to me) doesn't seem so bad if the trade off is a much more intelligent opponent and therefore much better solo experience. Actual day = 24 hours....OOTP Day = 2 minutes..not bad to me.
PSUColonel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2016, 09:30 AM   #77
NotMuchTime
Minors (Double A)
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by PSUColonel View Post
I would argue, that limiting the number of options (trade difficulty, frequency, AI evaluation, and many others) would help the AI in a large way. I understand people might like the options available within OOTP, but I also feel that by having the AI operate on fewer levels as opposed to dozens, would help the AI to act in a much more intelligent manner.
Great post. This x1000

It's my opinion, and I've stated it several times, that the scouting model needs fixed. There should be no options for scouting and scouting should simulate reality.
NotMuchTime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2016, 10:38 AM   #78
PSUColonel
Hall Of Famer
 
PSUColonel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 12,978
Blog Entries: 37
Part of the problems to me, and this should interest Markus, is with the AI having to account for SO MANY variables (scouting accuracy, trade difficulty, trade frequency, AI evaluation, etc..) it will often produce results that many people don't like. They think they like them because they like their settings, but don't really understand what they actually do, and what kind of results to expect. Consequently what happens, is people begin to criticize the AI and its behavior because it does in fact act oddly, and out of the norm.

My contention is not to simplify OOTP...on the contrary. I feel as many real MLB & MiLB, international and independent league rules should implemented as possible. That means lots of roster rules including many restrictions, contract rules and the like. It also means a very good AI needs to be the core of OOTP.

Operating on a level it is designed to work on (an inner default AI) is paramount IMO. By eliminating so many variables which can cause the AI to act in so many different ways eliminates a lot of what may be considered "screwy" AI behavior, and would ultimately allow developers to concentrate on expanding the game while maintaining a good working core AI, without constantly having to make adjustments.

So I don't see this as a move backwards, I really see it as a move forward. An AI which is more analytical (albeit slower) without so many variables, to me, is a progressive step in the right direction.

Last edited by PSUColonel; 10-02-2016 at 07:49 AM.
PSUColonel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2016, 10:40 AM   #79
PSUColonel
Hall Of Famer
 
PSUColonel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 12,978
Blog Entries: 37
I guess one big question we must ask ourselves: Do we want a simulator, or a game?
PSUColonel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2016, 01:40 PM   #80
Nino33
Major Leagues
 
Nino33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn View Post
Regarding AI, one thing that people often forget is that the more complex an AI gets, the slower the game runs. There are areas where we could improve the AI in a meaningful way (so that people would actually notice the effect), however that would slow down the game to an unplayable state (think 2 minutes simulation time per day). We always have to find the right balance between cleverness of the AI and processing speed.
Could the better AI be an option that could be turned off by those that want to sim quickly? I don't think 2 minutes to sim a day is to long at all myself (2 minutes to sim a day with a simulation game isn't even close to "unplayable" to me, while for me the AI issues I've read about are a significant problem)


Since FHM began development I've bought OOTP twice (to support the company) but haven't played it because of all I've read in the Forum; I'd be interested in continuing to purchase and actually play OOTP if the AI was noticeably better


As I said in the FHM3 thread when Sebastian said "FHM is not really meant to be a fast sim game" - So glad to hear this! I simply don't believe a game that you can fast sim through a season in minutes has the level of detail and attention to detail that I'm looking for
Nino33 is offline   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 03:51 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