OOTP 17 Update #8 HOTFIX, Version 17.10.67 Available!

[BigRed75]

Originally Posted by MKG1734

With regard to my post here: http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...8-post186.html

The issue with 'adding' to the game ... is that the game currently does not work properly.

I think that the backlash (albeit a courteous backlash) to your post (and the one like it) is that it comes across as saying "don't add any more features." Not so much yours (and thanks for the clarifying follow-up post) but certainly the other one.

One of the great things about OOTP that you don't see from other games (such as Football Manager) is the ability to turn off these new features. For example, I think the morale system, as it is currently constituted, is broken (or at least incomplete). I think that automatic league expansion is broken (well, not optimal). And I have turned off both functions.

Now, I understand that your issues are more to do with the underlying AI decision-making rather than optional features. But I would submit to you, again, that is personal priorities. For example, I have identified and posted what I consider to be a serious flaw in the AI decision-making regarding the promotion of minor leaguers through the ranks and how it doesn't match up with what teams do in real life. I have seen one or two other people also comment on this, and, understandably, I would like the dev team to make this a priority fix for the next release. Is it a problem with the underlying AI? Yes. Does it make the game not replicate the reality of professional baseball? Yes. Do I, therefore, consider the game "broken" because of it? No. Am I still able to play out entire 2016 MLB seasons still? Of course. Sure, it detracts from my enjoyment a little bit, and as I said, I wish it would be fixed post-haste, but it's not going to stop me from supporting the company.

Look, the Dev team are only able to work so many hours between releases. So prioritization must occur with regards to fixes. And I do believe there is an element of "squeaky wheel gets the grease." With regards to "only work on fixes for the next release," that's nice in theory but a disaster from a sales and marketing standpoint. Because not only do you have to differentiate yourself from your competitors, you also have to do so from your previous releases. Without new features, what you're doing is essentially releasing a roster update, and that's not something you can justify charging full price for.

[MKG1734]

Originally Posted by BigRed75

Look, the Dev team are only able to work so many hours between releases. So prioritization must occur with regards to fixes. And I do believe there is an element of "squeaky wheel gets the grease." With regards to "only work on fixes for the next release," that's nice in theory but a disaster from a sales and marketing standpoint. Because not only do you have to differentiate yourself from your competitors, you also have to do so from your previous releases. Without new features, what you're doing is essentially releasing a roster update, and that's not something you can justify charging full price for.

First: Thank you for understanding I am not trolling the thread. Because, frankly, I'm not. I'm only providing my opinion ... albeit I believe it is an opinion that should matter considering that I purchased the game for 3 consecutive years until this one.

Second: Frankly, the first sentence of your last paragraph is what this all boils down to. They really only have so many hours to work. You are exactly right. Which, honestly, is what I feel strengthens the point I was making. Fixing the known issues with the game, especially core issues, should be a priority before anything "new" is created.

When you say, "without new features" ... I understand what you are saying; however, I see if from a different angle. If the underlying AI was air-tight, squeaky-clean, that IS a reason to purchase the game. If the Free Agent system were essentially fixed, if in-game AI were essentially tightened up, if roster management was inherently sound ... that would be an entire update for the game. I mean, you could market those changes, alone, and sell the game. Furthermore, you could not only sell the game, you could sell the game and deal with such a small series of bugs (and complaints to come with them), that the game's reputation would increase (and future sales with it). Then, after the game is squeaky clean, new options can be added and tested thoroughly.

Right now ... the game's developers - who, I must say, are extremely responsive and hard working and thats no exaggeration ... are doing themselves a disservice. They are not only trying to add-add-add ... they are ALSO trying to play catch-up to the underlying, core issues with the AI. And, then, they also are trying to fix the underlying, core issues with their "additions" ... so they're playing double-catch-up. And, now the game's reputation is suffering a bit. My sincere, honest, in-good-faith recommendation to the game's developers is to slow-down on the new additions for 18 and really, really, really work on the core AI. Whether that simply means tweaks, or advanced overhauls. Get the game to the point where it can be as bug-free as possible and then start considering new features.

[ohiodevil]

Originally Posted by MKG1734

First: Thank you for understanding I am not trolling the thread. Because, frankly, I'm not. I'm only providing my opinion ... albeit I believe it is an opinion that should matter considering that I purchased the game for 3 consecutive years until this one.

Second: Frankly, the first sentence of your last paragraph is what this all boils down to. They really only have so many hours to work. You are exactly right. Which, honestly, is what I feel strengthens the point I was making. Fixing the known issues with the game, especially core issues, should be a priority before anything "new" is created.

When you say, "without new features" ... I understand what you are saying; however, I see if from a different angle. If the underlying AI was air-tight, squeaky-clean, that IS a reason to purchase the game. If the Free Agent system were essentially fixed, if in-game AI were essentially tightened up, if roster management was inherently sound ... that would be an entire update for the game. I mean, you could market those changes, alone, and sell the game. Furthermore, you could not only sell the game, you could sell the game and deal with such a small series of bugs (and complaints to come with them), that the game's reputation would increase (and future sales with it). Then, after the game is squeaky clean, new options can be added and tested thoroughly.

Right now ... the game's developers - who, I must say, are extremely responsive and hard working and thats no exaggeration ... are doing themselves a disservice. They are not only trying to add-add-add ... they are ALSO trying to play catch-up to the underlying, core issues with the AI. And, then, they also are trying to fix the underlying, core issues with their "additions" ... so they're playing double-catch-up. And, now the game's reputation is suffering a bit. My sincere, honest, in-good-faith recommendation to the game's developers is to slow-down on the new additions for 18 and really, really, really work on the core AI. Whether that simply means tweaks, or advanced overhauls. Get the game to the point where it can be as bug-free as possible and then start considering new features.

I completely understand what you are saying, and agree that fixing the legacy bugs and improving the AI should be the #1 priority....but if Markus and company came out and said they were going to just focus on fixing these issues from previous versions and not add anything new, the backlash would be 10x worse and their sales would suffer big time. When a game comes out each year, the people who buy it usually do so because there is some new feature or features that interest them and that is the driving force. Marketing a game as just "Bug Fixes" is not going to make most people shell out their money, even if the company does that the reputation of listening to the people who play the game like OOTP does. I stopped buying games like MLB The Show every year because they basically have become roster updates and very little new to offer (features), so I usually end up buying every 2 or 3 years.....but the difference there is 2K Sports is a MUCH larger company and can afford to take that hit in revenue, where OOTP thrives on the returning players to buy the game each year....and what makes people come back? Some new feature that makes the game even more realistic.

In my job, we release a new version of our software each year.....and when we do, there are no less than 50 to 70 new features or modules along with the 100+ enhancements/bug fixes....we also release 2 or 3 service packs over the course of the year, which consists of 100's of bug fixes....granted this is a bad example because our software is used by 15,000+ companies around the world and many times larger than OOTP is......not to mention we have 250+ developers and nearly that many in QA, so we do have the man power to fix and test the software. I am sure OOTP would love to have that kind of QA process, but being such a small company they cannot afford to, so they turn to the volunteers on the Beta team and the users to find these issues and then report them.

Anyway, what is the solution? I have been around since OOTP 4 and from past experience, I have no doubt that Markus, Matt and Andreas are looking at all options and will choose the one(s) they deem best for the company and game.

So maybe if/when that call for Beta testers comes out, some of the people that are being the loudest should step up and help test out the game so these issues can be found and fixed before release. I think the one thing that separates OOTP from other games is the community is willing to help out and the developers do listen to us and take our feedback into consideration....and I know this to be true, because there have been many changes made because the community asked for them.

[risp2out]

I had a strange dream last night in which I started a campaign with red hats that said "Make OOTP Great Again."

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by MKG1734

Fixing the known issues with the game, especially core issues, should be a priority before anything "new" is created.

When you say, "without new features" ... I understand what you are saying; however, I see if from a different angle. If the underlying AI was air-tight, squeaky-clean, that IS a reason to purchase the game. If the Free Agent system were essentially fixed, if in-game AI were essentially tightened up, if roster management was inherently sound ... that would be an entire update for the game. I mean, you could market those changes, alone, and sell the game. Furthermore, you could not only sell the game, you could sell the game and deal with such a small series of bugs (and complaints to come with them), that the game's reputation would increase (and future sales with it). Then, after the game is squeaky clean, new options can be added and tested thoroughly.

.....

Get the game to the point where it can be as bug-free as possible and then start considering new features.

I agree with your point.

In addition, a 3D mode without the obvious and numerous screen glitches could be marketed as a new feature, since it has been rejected as "too buggy" by many long-time users so far. I enjoy the 3D so much that I play it despite the bugs, but I would certainly enjoy it more if every play displayed a normal result.

A historical minor league structure that is complete with a reserve roster for teams without affiliates and an answer for players lost due to affiliate movements is again essentially a new feature since it has been discarded by some users (including me) as unplayable in its current form.

The addition of uniforms for historical major and minor league teams could also be marketed as a new feature, presumably with a monetary licensing cost but no programming work.

I think that the team could come up with several more low investment new "features" such as these to sufficiently market the game as more than a roster update. But the fine work by the roster team is by itself worth paying for in my opinion.

Many current users, such as myself, buy the game every year to support the company. I don't even look at the new features before I pre-order. I don't think I am alone. This year, I have noticed some comments by people who did not buy this version, saying that the new features were inadequate or they don't buy every new version anyway. Maybe some of the fence sitters would be motivated to purchase by AI improvements to roster management, lineup structure, substitution patterns, bullpen usage, and low investment programming upgrades to existing features such as the morale system and storylines.

I suspect that the company would still achieve sales growth with a strategy of marketing (a) tighter/improved AI, (b) fully functional 3D, (c) fully functional historical minors, (d) complete logos, facegen, and uniforms for historical leagues, and (e) the new roster set. I think the game would be better for the loyal users with this strategy, and I am confident that most loyal users would still buy the game without new features in order to support the company.

[BigRed75]

MKG, thanks for your measured response. I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree with regards to the efficacy of a "bug fixes only" major release. Ohiodevil pretty much said everything that I would have said and a bit more as to why I feel that way (despite being from the wrong end of Ohio :P), so I'll just share a personal anecdote:

There is another sports computer game (whose name I won't mention because it feels like 'talking behind the game's back') that I would eagerly get upon every release, on the release day or as soon as possible. However, after a few years it became readily apparent to me that while in odd-numbered years, releases were feature-rich, in even-numbered years, they basically amounted to little more than a roster update. Well, it isn't hard to figure out what happened next - I would buy odd-number releases on the debut date, and either skip the even-numbered releases or wait until the game was available at a deep discount. Both of those outcomes, of course, come at a financial detriment to the developer.

I understand why you're saying that the dev team should focus the majority of their time on bug fixes, and your reasons are certainly logical. However, to not include any new features would make the release difficult to market and most likely result in diminished sales.

Thanks for this conversation. It's nice to deal with someone who's been nothing but pleasant.

[JMDurron]

Originally Posted by Orcin

Many current users, such as myself, buy the game every year to support the company. I don't even look at the new features before I pre-order. I don't think I am alone. This year, I have noticed some comments by people who did not buy this version, saying that the new features were inadequate or they don't buy every new version anyway. Maybe some of the fence sitters would be motivated to purchase by AI improvements to roster management, lineup structure, substitution patterns, bullpen usage, and low investment programming upgrades to existing features such as the morale system and storylines.

I suspect that the company would still achieve sales growth with a strategy of marketing (a) tighter/improved AI, (b) fully functional 3D, (c) fully functional historical minors, (d) complete logos, facegen, and uniforms for historical leagues, and (e) the new roster set. I think the game would be better for the loyal users with this strategy, and I am confident that most loyal users would still buy the game without new features in order to support the company.

You are not alone, as I also buy every version independent of the features to support the company.

However, I think that your point about the number of fence-sitters here actually undermines the point in your second paragraph. I think we need to accept as a basic premise that the vast majority (80%? 90%?) of people who purchase OOTP do not participate in these forums. If we accept that premise, then it stands to reason that only the most passionate customers who are already invested in the product make up the 10-20% of customers who participate here.

If even a noticeable minority of the 10-20% most passionate, involved users are skipping versions due to a new features list that they find underwhelming, then I'd argue that it would be suicidal for OOTPD to issue a "fixes only" type release, no matter how comprehensive such an effort would happen to be. The 80-90% of the customer base are most likely just looking at the headlines, not under the hood for detailed improvements that they might not even notice. Features drive sales, not fixes, so I think that OOTPD's basic strategy of rolling out major new features in initial releases, then issuing patches to fix issues as they are discovered is a sound one. I strongly disagree that enough of those customers who haven't purchased this year due to the new features not being compelling enough would be motivated to purchase a full release with essentially no new features at all. Having a roughly 75/25 split in the forums' user base regarding interest in more detailed, less shiny improvements does not mean that we can project that over to the rest of the customer base. 75% of only 20% of the overall customer base is really only 15% of overall customers, so OOTPD would be risking 85% of their revenues with such an approach. For such a relatively small company, that could be an existential threat unless they have been very careful with how previous revenues have been saved/invested.

[PSUColonel]

The truth in all of this comes down to one word in my mind: resources. You can do more with more, and less with less. It's that simple. At some point, when Markus deems the company has done well enough financially that it can afford to hire more developers who also understand whatever Markus' vision is, then Markus could hire more people to achieve all of this fairly easily, if he wanted to. He may not want to, or may not be able to afford to...I don't pretend to know....but this I do know, it's his company, and he's going to run it in a way that is 1. financially profitable for himself, and 2. Is his vision. That's it. I am sure the input is greatly appreciated, but until more resources can be sunk back into the product (and I don't pretend to know when that will be or if ever) then there is going to have to be a formula for doing things in order to stay afloat. Basically: Introduce new features at every release selling points) and continue to tweak where and when possible. Yes, those tweaks at times are likely getting more and more complicated. It becomes a gem of cack a mole I suspect. You squash one, only two have two more pop up...which is likely a never ending cycle, unless you can really afford more resources to tie up the messy and loose ends.

[Let'sGoBraves]

You all do realize that at some point in the very near future they are going to focus their full attention to OOTP2018 and we will be expected to (and many, myself included) pay for the new version regardless of what is fixed or not and then wait for patches again. It is what it is to some extent. It could be much worse. A lot of companies, when the game gets more complicated and they can't easily fix it they just abandon it (FPS Football series, NFL Head Coach...). What seems too anger people and keep this thread going is that there are so many people that feel the need to add what a great company OOTPD and how splendid the game is. The company is, and the game is. The people fanboys keep replying to already know both of those. That's why they expect more from both the company and the game.

It is very difficult to start any sort of thread here without someone changing it's direction to point out how terrific the game is and how great Marcus is. Both are true, we already know that. But it's almost as if a select few have been appointed the official spin doctors. There is a thread going on now where someone was making a sarcastic point about the players in real life that are having down years and how people would be cmplaining if it happened in their game. It was a very funny post that someone misunderstood but then was sorted out. STILL someone felt the need to jump on it and explain what a great game this is and how great the company is.

Someone referred to the issues with the game as a dead horse earlier I believe. We get it, the company gets it. Same goes for tooting OOTPD's horn. We all know it already. It's why we keep coming to the forums to see if there is a new feature they threw at us or fixed something we asked them to. Because we KNOW they will. We get it. Hostility arises when people who point out things that don't work for them, in the proper place mind you, get told to pipe down, it's a great company and Marcus is a great guy. All of it gets old.

The boards are great for the most part. I had a problem just the other day that I came here with. I had a solution from board members in minutes. I contacted support who, given the time difference, solved my issue immediately. It's all great. They will fix this or incorporate it into the next version which many of us will buy. Should we have to pay for the fixes to the previous version? I would say no but it's pretty standard for games. Do other games release patches that solve their issues? Yes usually. Do they release free new content for that game? Probably not.

I have never viewed OOTP as a closed end product. I view it as a $40(ish) yearly subscription for the best text sim ever made. It seems a small price to pay for a game that is constantly evolving, even within individual products.

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by JMDurron

However, I think that your point about the number of fence-sitters here actually undermines the point in your second paragraph. I think we need to accept as a basic premise that the vast majority (80%? 90%?) of people who purchase OOTP do not participate in these forums. If we accept that premise, then it stands to reason that only the most passionate customers who are already invested in the product make up the 10-20% of customers who participate here.

If even a noticeable minority of the 10-20% most passionate, involved users are skipping versions due to a new features list that they find underwhelming, then I'd argue that it would be suicidal for OOTPD to issue a "fixes only" type release, no matter how comprehensive such an effort would happen to be. The 80-90% of the customer base are most likely just looking at the headlines, not under the hood for detailed improvements that they might not even notice. Features drive sales, not fixes, so I think that OOTPD's basic strategy of rolling out major new features in initial releases, then issuing patches to fix issues as they are discovered is a sound one. I strongly disagree that enough of those customers who haven't purchased this year due to the new features not being compelling enough would be motivated to purchase a full release with essentially no new features at all. Having a roughly 75/25 split in the forums' user base regarding interest in more detailed, less shiny improvements does not mean that we can project that over to the rest of the customer base. 75% of only 20% of the overall customer base is really only 15% of overall customers, so OOTPD would be risking 85% of their revenues with such an approach. For such a relatively small company, that could be an existential threat unless they have been very careful with how previous revenues have been saved/invested.

You are throwing a lot of numbers around here, but I think your conclusion that a failure to release new features would crash the revenue stream is an opinion rather than a fact. I don't dispute that a big majority of users do not come to these forums, but that doesn't mean that new features are required to drive casual customers to purchase. It could just as easily be argued that these casual customers would buy the new product for the roster update alone, or for the additional improvements to the AI and cosmetic changes that I listed in my post. Without hard marketing data to back it up, we have no idea what would drive customers make a purchase of next year's product. Presumably, Markus does and will do what is best for the business regardless of what is suggested here. No harm in expressing our opinion anyway.

[bwburke94]

The really ironic thing about this whole thread?

Other than early historical Rule 5, nothing is broken in this patch that wasn't broken beforehand.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by bwburke94

The really ironic thing about this whole thread?

Other than early historical Rule 5, nothing is broken in this patch that wasn't broken beforehand.

you are correct (with the exception of the top 100 prospect rankings) But usually around this time of year people grow angry over legacy issues, and probably for very good reason. The reason is they see the door shutting on one development cycle, and a new one about to begin, and yet there are still many long legacy issues which have not been addressed.

I will offer my opinion. I don't know if I am correct or not, but it's my belief that most of the "legacy issues" cannot be fixed...and if they can they might break something else, and it becomes a case of "pick your poison."

I think there are certain core elements of the game which Markus relies upon almost like a building block or jengo set. If you begin to take out pieces, and then try to insert new ones, well you know what happens.

It may just be the only way to fix a lot of issues, would be to tear it all down and start from scratch. I'm sure there's a lot Markus has learned about programming and such since he started this, and I'm sure there may be a bunch of stuff he might do differently today, if he could without unravelling the whole thing. it's is appearing to me, that could be part of or the whole issue.

[bwburke94]

OOTP has started from scratch once before, and it ended badly.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by bwburke94

OOTP has started from scratch once before, and it ended badly.

I don't think starting over is preferable, or even on the table. To me, internal company resources is probably what OOTPD needs, but again, I don't know if Markus can afford or wants to hire more programmers. That's a decision only he can make or can speculate on.

[highandoutside]

Instead of having to deal with adding a whole new set of features by a certain date each year and repackaging the whole game, why not just sell subscriptions? Features and tweaks are added as the development team can get to them. Marcus could publish "to be added" list and agenda and the game can continue to evolve organically.

[edm]

Originally Posted by highandoutside

Instead of having to deal with adding a whole new set of features by a certain date each year and repackaging the whole game, why not just sell subscriptions? Features and tweaks are added as the development team can get to them. Marcus could publish "to be added" list and agenda and the game can continue to evolve organically.

No offense to you, but I really hope that would never happen.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by highandoutside

Instead of having to deal with adding a whole new set of features by a certain date each year and repackaging the whole game, why not just sell subscriptions? Features and tweaks are added as the development team can get to them. Marcus could publish "to be added" list and agenda and the game can continue to evolve organically.

You already do this....it's basically an annual subscription.

[pbreen]

Originally Posted by bwburke94

The really ironic thing about this whole thread?

Other than early historical Rule 5, nothing is broken in this patch that wasn't broken beforehand.

And the edited player problem...

[mitchkenn]

Originally Posted by pbreen

And the edited player problem...

haven't seen this in my game ....

[Chillidog]

Originally Posted by Orcin

A historical minor league structure that is complete with a reserve roster for teams without affiliates and an answer for players lost due to affiliate movements is again essentially a new feature since it has been discarded by some users (including me) as unplayable in its current form.

The addition of uniforms for historical major and minor league teams could also be marketed as a new feature, presumably with a monetary licensing cost but no programming work.

I think that the team could come up with several more low investment new "features" such as these to sufficiently market the game as more than a roster update. But the fine work by the roster team is by itself worth paying for in my opinion.

Many current users, such as myself, buy the game every year to support the company. I don't even look at the new features before I pre-order. I don't think I am alone. This year, I have noticed some comments by people who did not buy this version, saying that the new features were inadequate or they don't buy every new version anyway. Maybe some of the fence sitters would be motivated to purchase by AI improvements to roster management, lineup structure, substitution patterns, bullpen usage, and low investment programming upgrades to existing features such as the morale system and storylines.

I suspect that the company would still achieve sales growth with a strategy of marketing (a) tighter/improved AI, (b) fully functional 3D, (c) fully functional historical minors, (d) complete logos, facegen, and uniforms for historical leagues, and (e) the new roster set. I think the game would be better for the loyal users with this strategy, and I am confident that most loyal users would still buy the game without new features in order to support the company.

what you say above is what I would be looking for in OOTP18 and NOT new features.


If they market the new OOTP18 based on "New Features" I for 1 will NOT purchase. If they do tighten up the existing "buggy" features then I WILL purchase OOTP18.


It is my opinion you need as a developer come out with as close as possible a "squeaky clean game" BEFORE delving into new/unknown features.


Until I am satisfied they have tightened up the features that are already in OOTP17, I am not going to throw more good money into a new buggy product