Stadium/Dome Builder and so on

[mgom27]

When building one pick where things go like where entrances are,what types of Food their is,how many Souvenirs Shops are their,what's out by Outfield Stands and so on. In the News say like Marlins plan to build a Ballpark Village around Dome/Ball Fields that's going to include Hotels and so on or plan to relocate Spring Training home to Hollywood,FL.
In Editor sort by Drafted by Teams and let's say if like not Drafted show up could hit release all then it would do it or if just show up like Drafted by Rangers could move all at once.

[Habsfan18]

Mgom, I mean no disrespect, but by reading your posts I get the impression that you're looking for more of a fancy arcade-style video game. Stick to MLB The Show.

OOTP is not an arcade video game for the PS4, it's a baseball simulation/management for the PC. You seem to want OOTP to head in the "gamey" direction and I don't think the developers share your same vision. At least IMO, anyways.

All of your many, many requests (live play by play, life-like MLB The Show type stadiums, live TV style presentations of the draft etc..) are better suited for arcade baseball games on consoles. OOTP is not that style of game. At least not yet anyways. That's not to say that one day OOTP won't be a mix of what it is now plus MLB The Show, but you're just setting yourself up for constant disappointment by requesting all of these things when OOTP is just not that style of game.

Remember..simulation/management game.

[jpeters1734]

Originally Posted by Habsfan18

Mgom, I mean no disrespect, but by reading your posts I get the impression that you're looking for more of a fancy arcade-style video game. Stick to MLB The Show.

OOTP is not an arcade video game for the PS4, it's a baseball simulation/management for the PC. You seem to want OOTP to head in the "gamey" direction and I don't think the developers share your same vision. At least IMO, anyways.

All of your many, many requests (live play by play, life-like MLB The Show type stadiums, live TV style presentations of the draft etc..) are better suited for arcade baseball games on consoles. OOTP is not that style of game. At least not yet anyways. That's not to say that one day OOTP won't be a mix of what it is now plus MLB The Show, but you're just setting yourself up for constant disappointment by requesting all of these things when OOTP is just not that style of game.

Remember..simulation/management game.

ok gatekeeper of all things sacred...Those things are not in MLB the Show either. It's not a bad idea. For someone that plays countless hours in play by play, it would be fantastic if we could easily create a more varied set of stadiums. It's not a GM's job to build stadiums you say? Neither is relocation and expansion but we do that anyway.

[mr-cpu-geek]

While I don't expect "The Show" 3D graphic experience, I think it is great to dream what could be done. The 3D experience now is pretty great, but it never hurts to ask for more.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Habsfan18]

Originally Posted by jpeters1734

ok gatekeeper of all things sacred...Those things are not in MLB the Show either. It's not a bad idea. For someone that plays countless hours in play by play, it would be fantastic if we could easily create a more varied set of stadiums. It's not a GM's job to build stadiums you say? Neither is relocation and expansion but we do that anyway.

I get the idea that a stadium building function/template would be neat, but when we're talking about the prices of hot dogs and pretzels and how many souvenir shops there are in certain sections with specific memoribilia at each one, and parking costs and how many hotels are near the Stadium etc..that's when it starts to get a bit too "gamey" for me. Of course, that's just MY personal opinion.

But what I gather (or at least try to understand) from mgom's posts, he seems to constantly request these MLB The Show big fancy graphics type features. It wasn't just directed at this specific post, but many of his. I was just simply stating that I feel he's setting himself up for disappointment with the level of specific detail he seems to be expecting with certain features.

[nico1270]

Originally Posted by Habsfan18

I get the idea that a stadium building function/template would be neat, but when we're talking about the prices of hot dogs and pretzels and how many souvenir shops there are in certain sections with specific memoribilia at each one, and parking costs and how many hotels are near the Stadium etc..that's when it starts to get a bit too "gamey" for me. Of course, that's just MY personal opinion.

But what I gather (or at least try to understand) from mgom's posts, he seems to constantly request these MLB The Show big fancy graphics type features. It wasn't just directed at this specific post, but many of his. I was just simply stating that I feel he's setting himself up for disappointment with the level of specific detail he seems to be expecting with certain features.

I do agree, we should look, and compare if possible, to Football Manager as a sports text simulator that has been evolving with some neat graphics and not compare to The Show which is a console that basically depends exclusively on graphics and gameplay, not on depth.

[Cryomaniac]

This reminds me that there have been arguments going back years about whether or not to include graphics of any description.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by Habsfan18

I get the idea that a stadium building function/template would be neat, but when we're talking about the prices of hot dogs and pretzels and how many souvenir shops there are in certain sections with specific memoribilia at each one, and parking costs and how many hotels are near the Stadium etc..that's when it starts to get a bit too "gamey" for me. Of course, that's just MY personal opinion.

But what I gather (or at least try to understand) from mgom's posts, he seems to constantly request these MLB The Show big fancy graphics type features. It wasn't just directed at this specific post, but many of his. I was just simply stating that I feel he's setting himself up for disappointment with the level of specific detail he seems to be expecting with certain features.

Originally Posted by Cryomaniac

This reminds me that there have been arguments going back years about whether or not to include graphics of any description.

I agree with Habsfan18 in that I never want to see items like "live TV style presentations of the draft" come to the fore and be the prominent draw of this game to the detriment of "simulation/management game."

I tend to be conservative in this regard (3D pawn dances got mundane very quickly) but Cryomaniac indirectly brings up the point that some graphics need to be included; it cannot all be text. It's old news now, but even I cannot live without FaceGen now.

I think the developers know how to balance this and will keep introducing some crowd-pleasing (and buck-making) frills without sacrificing the core quality of OOTPB.

[Cryomaniac]

Going on what was said in the old threads, the main argument seemed to be that "If they include graphics it will take development time away from everything else and make the game worse".

I personally don't think that has been borne out by reality, so it's somewhat disappointing to see the same arguments every time there is any mention of improving the graphics.

[jpeters1734]

Originally Posted by Cryomaniac

Going on what was said in the old threads, the main argument seemed to be that "If they include graphics it will take development time away from everything else and make the game worse".

I personally don't think that has been borne out by reality, so it's somewhat disappointing to see the same arguments every time there is any mention of improving the graphics.

Agreed. I don't see how wanting something better to look at is so taboo to some people. Sure ootp started out as a text only sim, but that was over 15 years ago!!

[rhinosaurus]

Ahhh, the classic no graphics train.

[nico1270]

To compare, this is how FM looks this year, after a few editions of a 3d engine.

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

As you can see, is not even close to FIFA or PES. If you compare it, looks more like a pc video game from the early 2000s. And it's still pretty good for a text sim.

OOTP should not look to the The Show. Objective could be something like this in the coming years, a decent 3d engine.

I do not know sizes of devs teams, but FM really looks like the big brother of sports sims.

[Habsfan18]

Originally Posted by rhinosaurus

Ahhh, the classic no graphics train.

I consider it more of a "realistic about the type of game we're talking about" train.

I'm not completely against graphics, but I'm also aware of that fact that this is OOTP Baseball, not PS4's MLB The Show.

[Statsman1]

The graphics part of the game mentioned above could tie in with the finances of the game, but I agree that development time on the one shouldn't harm the development of the other.

Having said that, I could see OOTP (or some approved mod group) building a "Stadium Construction Set" that would allow a user to build / design the stadium of your dreams - an "add-on" if you will, that would allow the user to build a stadium OUTSIDE of the OOTP program functionality, and then use that final product (whatever the stadium actually is, in that sense) to be imported INTO OOTP as the home ballpark for the user's team.

The tricky part comes from actually working out what the financial impact of that stadium really is - the $$$ from the various concessions, souvenirs, etc - that would be a HUGE undertaking for the financial engine, and as such, would be a daunting task. At least, I think it would. It seems easier to say, "If you have a game attendance of X people, we estimate they'd buy Y hotdogs and drink Z beers." than it would to calculate the game-day income from 8 souvenir shops in a custom ballpark.

Then there's always the issue of "I spent 200 hours designing this ballpark, now I want it used in the game's 3D engine for my home games." which, again, might be problematic, if it's that intricate.

I'd love the ability to (as the owner of a team, which isn't technically a role we play in OOTP) ask taxpayers to pay for my new ballpark, then raise funds over a couple of seasons (or have them turn the proposal down and see if I could foot the bill, again as an owner).

The either use that money to design that new park, or, if that whole scenario is not possible, just create the park itself, open it up, see if it attracts new customers and free agents and what-have-you, and have the inner workings have an actual impact on the overall game...but after writing this e-mail, it seems like it would be a rather large initiative.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Statsman1

The tricky part comes from actually working out what the financial impact of that stadium really is - the $$$ from the various concessions, souvenirs, etc - that would be a HUGE undertaking for the financial engine, and as such, would be a daunting task. At least, I think it would. It seems easier to say, "If you have a game attendance of X people, we estimate they'd buy Y hotdogs and drink Z beers." than it would to calculate the game-day income from 8 souvenir shops in a custom ballpark.

The problem there is that little, if any, real-world reference data is available.

There is enough baseball financial info to work out general or aggregate sources of club revenue. But specificity in terms how many of each class of ticket is sold, or how much is spent on stadium upgrades every so often, just isn't publicly available.

[Statsman1]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

The problem there is that little, if any, real-world reference data is available.

There is enough baseball financial info to work out general or aggregate sources of club revenue. But specificity in terms how many of each class of ticket is sold, or how much is spent on stadium upgrades every so often, just isn't publicly available.

That's what I mean - the actual impact of all the bells-and-whistles of a custom-designed ballpark with everything you put into it probably cannot be measured.

I can tell you from experience, though, that the Blue Jays believe everyone who goes to Rogers Centre to see a game has $2,000 of disposable income to spend on food and drink.

Jeez, it's ludicrously expensive there, and I personally don't believe the prices are suitable for the demographics in attendance. It isn't a true application of economic theory, it's captive market economic theory.

[BusterKing]

I would be happy with something like this that existed 20 years ago graphic wise

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

[bleachercreature]

Originally Posted by Habsfan18

Mgom, I mean no disrespect, but by reading your posts I get the impression that you're looking for more of a fancy arcade-style video game. Stick to MLB The Show.

OOTP is not an arcade video game for the PS4, it's a baseball simulation/management for the PC. You seem to want OOTP to head in the "gamey" direction and I don't think the developers share your same vision. At least IMO, anyways.

All of your many, many requests (live play by play, life-like MLB The Show type stadiums, live TV style presentations of the draft etc..) are better suited for arcade baseball games on consoles. OOTP is not that style of game. At least not yet anyways. That's not to say that one day OOTP won't be a mix of what it is now plus MLB The Show, but you're just setting yourself up for constant disappointment by requesting all of these things when OOTP is just not that style of game.

Remember..simulation/management game.

This has been a long standing problem with this board and the game in general. If you don't share the view of the developers, it's like you committed a triple homicide.

ANYTIME somebody on this board that has less than 1500 posts makes a suggestion they're jumped all over and completely and utterly disrespected and the OOTP czars (Markus and company let it happen.)

For a game that the developers love to run around patting themselves on the back for all the different ways it can be played. They don't like to hear opinions of people who play the game.

Maybe some ideas are unrealistic or impossible to implement. But that doesn't mean people shouldn't have the right to express their thoughts, unless of course it's in this forum because it's clear that only those who agree 100 percent with the development team are allowed to have any opinion whatsoever.

[jpeters1734]

Note that habsfan is not a developer. I certainly don't share his views. I wouldn't necessarily say the developers share his views. But you are right that there's a certain section of the hardcore gamers that wants to keep the game how it was 15 years ago. Asking for graphics does not make you less of a simulation player. But some people like to paint those that ask for it as arcadey players

[Cryomaniac]

Originally Posted by bleachercreature

This has been a long standing problem with this board and the game in general. If you don't share the view of the developers, it's like you committed a triple homicide.

ANYTIME somebody on this board that has less than 1500 posts makes a suggestion they're jumped all over and completely and utterly disrespected and the OOTP czars (Markus and company let it happen.)

For a game that the developers love to run around patting themselves on the back for all the different ways it can be played. They don't like to hear opinions of people who play the game.

Maybe some ideas are unrealistic or impossible to implement. But that doesn't mean people shouldn't have the right to express their thoughts, unless of course it's in this forum because it's clear that only those who agree 100 percent with the development team are allowed to have any opinion whatsoever.

I wouldn't quite go that far, and I would suggest reporting posts you think go too far, but you do have a point that newer members tend to get jumped on a bit at times. I for one have spoken against that happening a number of times.