Is this a trend???

PSUColonel · 06-03-2006, 09:13 AM

I am noticing a distinct trend in marketing when I look at the SI message boards versus the ones here and other places. It appears to me (and this is just my observation) that European sports sim gamers (and my taste is more along the lines of this) tend to prefer sports sims that are extremely in depth and detailed, while American (even though I am American I am not in this camp) sports sim fans prefer their games to be be easier to use and quick even if it means less depth. It also seems to me that Americans seem to have less patience when trying to learn a new game. Has anyone else noticed this trend? I guess this thread might be of particular interest to SI's marketing wizzard, Marc Duffy.

Rod · 06-03-2006, 09:16 AM

Maybe it has something to do with the American culture at large? Not much patience... a bit shallow...

Jestre · 06-03-2006, 09:36 AM

I would tend to blame it on the marketing strategy of most American companies, dumb it down to sell to the largest possible audience. I find the notion that the average Euro is more 'sophisticated' than the average American 'flawed' to say the least.

scuffleball · 06-03-2006, 09:48 AM

I tend to agree with you. Our entire society (in USA) is built on instant gratification these days, so the gaming world here is the same

We Americans are a strange lot. We don't like change if we feel (collectively) that something is fine as is, but if we determine it's not, then we demand changes until it works . . .

I think that's contributing to some of the issues with OOTP 2006. Many people felt it (the interface, some other things) was fine as it was, so changes are seen more as 'fluff' or 'unwarranted'. I liked the old interface, but I also like the new one. I also recall that as the old game went through its iterations, there was much praise for 'improving' the interface, and 'making things clearer' and 'easier to find' as Marcus released a new version.

My view is that the old game's level of achievement (interface and other things) got to a point where collectively it was seen 'fine' and 'comfortable'. So Americans, being the people we are, react to that differently than if we feel that something 'needed' changed.

PSUColonel · 06-03-2006, 10:08 AM

Yes, byt what people don't understand is that OOTP had reached the point where it couldn't be advanced any further as it was. This new build is going to allow for much more building in the future. What may be percieved as an omission when it comes to features, may in fact simply be the result of future planning. I wish Americans could grasp this concept better. I'm not sure about all that goes into the coding of OOTP, but I would hate to see developers wasting time to appease some temporarily for the sake of PR rather than stick with their original blue print and just continue working toward those goals. I'm not saying that is what SI is doing, I just think the public should trust SI based on it's track record.

lahoward · 06-03-2006, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I wish Americans could grasp this concept better.

Hmm many say that America is no longer a superpower but a Hyperpower as no one is even in the same league. So pick on America all you like but when you have some evil dictator take over your country guess who you will call. After we resolve the matter for you guess who will continue to take cheap shots due to the jealousy factor.

Yeah maybe Americans don't want to spend all day in the game setup screen when there is lakes to be fished, work to be done, golf to be played etc. Maybe that's shallow to you but then please refer back to Hyperpower.

lynchjm24 · 06-03-2006, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

Yes, byt what people don't understand is that OOTP had reached the point where it couldn't be advanced any further as it was.

If this is the premise behind your posts lately you are dead wrong. There was plenty that could have been done with OOTP 6.5. I'm not saying it's wrong to have taken the course that they have, but the idea that the prior game could not have been improved is silly.

Spielman · 06-03-2006, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lahoward

Hmm many say that America is no longer a superpower but a Hyperpower as no one is even in the same league. So pick on America all you like but when you have some evil dictator take over your country guess who you will call. After we resolve the matter for you guess who will continue to take cheap shots due to the jealousy factor.

Yeah maybe Americans don't want to spend all day in the game setup screen when there is lakes to be fished, work to be done, golf to be played etc. Maybe that's shallow to you but then please refer back to Hyperpower.

Good grief.

Bears5122 · 06-03-2006, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rod

Maybe it has something to do with the American culture at large? Not much patience... a bit shallow...

Or just busy? A lot of people in America work long hours, have families, etc. Some people just can't put 6 hours a day into their computer baseball universe.

Not saying other countries aren't, but don't act like the reason we want things easier is because we aren't patient and shallow.

lynchjm24 · 06-03-2006, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I'm not saying that is what SI is doing, I just think the public should trust SI based on it's track record.

That's the problem I guess. Not all of us are that impressed by SI's track record. Yes, they have made some very impressive games. I've tried them all, and have never found any of them to be any fun at all. I do not have the time or the desire to crawl through a season every three months in FM or EHM.

It's got nothing to do with being 'American' or 'instant gratification' or not 'subscribing to SI's vision'. It has everything to do with a GAME being an enjoyable way to spend some free time. Becoming completely frustrated by not being able to make a trade without 8 hours of research is not an enjoyable way for me (and many others) to spend what little free time we have.

emysdk · 06-03-2006, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lahoward

Hmm many say that America is no longer a superpower but a Hyperpower as no one is even in the same league. So pick on America all you like but when you have some evil dictator take over your country guess who you will call. After we resolve the matter for you guess who will continue to take cheap shots due to the jealousy factor.

Yeah maybe Americans don't want to spend all day in the game setup screen when there is lakes to be fished, work to be done, golf to be played etc. Maybe that's shallow to you but then please refer back to Hyperpower.

Whilst this is undoubtedly true, the law of diminishing returns almost certainly applies. Markus was being limited by decisions he had made about the database and code years ago. The amount of work he would have to put in to get even a tiny improvement in the game would just get higher and higher the longer he left things as they were. By restarting from scratch, he can avoid any self-created problems from the old codebase and plan ahead for any major changes which might be needed in the future.

Craig Scarborough · 06-03-2006, 11:08 AM

I like deep and richly-detailed simulations as much as the next guy. However, one reason I like to be able to fastplay is for verification purposes. If I'm going to invest my time in a "realistic" simulation of a professional sport, I want to be ensured that the game is going to live up to its side of the bargain. I've been disappointed countless times with other sims, so what's the harm in being able to play the game fast OR slow?

Btw, I second the "good grief" by Spielman.

<Pion> · 06-03-2006, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

Has anyone else noticed this trend?

It's something I've wondered about since the early 90's. Baseball used to be king but has been surpassed by speed/violence (football) and speed (basketball). Not sure when it all started and everyone will have a different view (some would say TV started it all, but there are many different ways to look at it). But I wouldn't personally think of it as a new trend.

Craig Scarborough · 06-03-2006, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lynchjm24

That's the problem I guess. Not all of us are that impressed by SI's track record. Yes, they have made some very impressive games. I've tried them all, and have never found any of them to be any fun at all. I do not have the time or the desire to crawl through a season every three months in FM or EHM.

It's got nothing to do with being 'American' or 'instant gratification' or not 'subscribing to SI's vision'. It has everything to do with a GAME being an enjoyable way to spend some free time. Becoming completely frustrated by not being able to make a trade without 8 hours of research is not an enjoyable way for me (and many others) to spend what little free time we have.

YES. While realism is paramount, game developers have to make decisions and, ultimately this becomes a realism vs. fun factor debate. I LOVE FOF and I especially loved TCY (though it is dated at this point). However, having to look through a list of 100 scouts every couple of years to find the "best" scout for the Great Lakes region was as much fun as doing the laundry for me. Yes, in real life a coach has to find scouts, but when that process becomes an exercise in clicking to see who has the best ratings over and over and over... it's no longer fun.

Erithtotl · 06-03-2006, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lynchjm24

That's the problem I guess. Not all of us are that impressed by SI's track record. Yes, they have made some very impressive games. I've tried them all, and have never found any of them to be any fun at all. I do not have the time or the desire to crawl through a season every three months in FM or EHM.

It's got nothing to do with being 'American' or 'instant gratification' or not 'subscribing to SI's vision'. It has everything to do with a GAME being an enjoyable way to spend some free time. Becoming completely frustrated by not being able to make a trade without 8 hours of research is not an enjoyable way for me (and many others) to spend what little free time we have.

Don't confuse one issue with the other. I'm annoyed as anybody about the awkwardness of the trade interface, but that has nothing to do with the 'SI Vision', but rather design decisions that were maybe not complete thought out with OOTP 2006. With Football Manager it's about 100 times easier to initiate a trade or find someone to trade with.

The challenge of complexity is keeping that complexity managable. OOTP 2006 is still trying to figure out how to do that. It is my hope that with some work by the team, and listening to feedback by us that it will get that way.

As for the idea that Markus should have just kept building on top of OOTP 6.5, I think this shows a distinct lack of how programming works. It's important to remember that while Markus is obviously a talentend, and extremely hard working programmer, he's also relatively young. It's clear from his design diaries that being exposed to SI's code was a revelation for him. As a programmer, especially one working largely in a vacuum, it's pretty easy to code yourself into a corner, where you codebase becomes so 'hard coded' and convoluted that the only way to move forward is to rewrite. Markus clearly saw an opportunity to take advantage of all the work and learning SI programmers had done before him to make his job easier, while expanding the functionality of the game, which I think was a great move.

Moving forward our goal as a community should be to make clear to the OOTP team to not confuse complexity and usability. You can have both at the same time. What we don't want is a reduction in complexity, but rather a focus on those key things that we feel are missing that would make the game more playable, for example, something akin to a trading block, being able to view statistics for the previous season in the roster screens, more hyperlinks in the news articles, UI screens that remember their settings from visit to visit, etc..

HolyCow98 · 06-03-2006, 11:23 AM

I know that I was pretty much burnt out on OOTP in large part as it had not evolved or even changed that much over the last few years. Some of that had to do with the 2 year wait, but mostly it was due from V3 to V6.x it was a very similar game with pretty much an identical layout. I still would recommend the game for sure...but after 5 years of play....I had done all I could in the game and was actually getting frustrated that I couldn't enjoy it anymore in the same way I could before.

For me it doesn't really matter how or if the old game could have been changed...the fact of the matter is I had a game that as time went on I grew tired of to the point where I retired from online play, didn't have any solo leagues and really wasn't playing anymore. I wanted to play, and would start, but then I would lose interest which is something that never really happened in the past. I definately am liking he differences between the new version and the old version. However, this newer version is more for people who like to micromanage in games. This is something some people love to do but is also something other people won't enjoy doing (and hence won't enjoy the game).

I think they will have a hard time winning over people who don't micromanage. Is it possible to make a game that will satisfy people who like to micromanage and people who want a game that can be played at a faster pace? If the answer is no...they will have hard sell to some people.

I third the "good grief" by Spielman

Claybor · 06-03-2006, 12:01 PM

I think some folks just want something that is easy to use. So far to me this version sounds like far to much work is needed for the casual gamer who doesnt want to spend hours tweaking things to get them to where they are wanted. I have been playing baseball games for years now (33), and I have yet to have to read a manual on any game, yet it seems to me that it will be necessary to do so for this one. I am not sure that is a good thing for many game players who just want to jump in and play, and after all it is baseball, a very simple game if taken down to its basics.

I am looking forward to getting a look at the demo, but from reading the forums I dont see myself purchasing this version until it has progressed through a few patches, and perhaps not even then. It doesnt look bad, it just doesnt look like its for me. Hopefully I am wrong, but I dont think so.

sixto · 06-03-2006, 12:03 PM

I think Markus's and SI's ongoing challenge will be to serve both markets. Based on just my first few days of OOTP 2006, vs. five years of Football Manager, it's my impression that this game is twice as ambitious as anything else SI has done. SI generally has hard-coded databases, and it's a curious tribute to both Markus and this community that OOTP has largely customizable databases, and yet the users are still not satisfied. Talk about setting the bar higher and higher.

I would argue that if the game is too complex, then this entire community is to blame, though blame is obviously the wrong word. I mean SI surely would have been happy with a game that could recreate the leagues of the world as they stand today - and exactly nothing else. But we demanded more, and Markus wanted to please us (and himself).

As to a divide between Euro and U.S. users, I'd say it's overstated. On one hand, the stereotype is that Europeans have more free time and put a higher value on leisure time - and leisurely time. I'm not European nor am I in Europe, so I can't confirm this - but it would be consistent with a user base that wants more time to explore a game.

As to Americans, we probably have a higher incidence of young users, and their expectations are to be satisfied instantaneously if not sooner. We have an enormous amount of disposable income and no problem blowing $35 on this game today and $500 on XBOX 360 and a few games tomorrow. With that kind of pressure, I think it behooves the developers to ignore the bleating and focus on their vision. I'm not happy with everything in the v1.0.0 - far from it - but I am happy with what this game could be, and I'm surprised at the alarm from experienced OOTP users from whom Markus seems to have earned no trust.

Giants44 · 06-03-2006, 01:42 PM

I have no knowledge on the European Market, so I have no comment there.

However I disagree completely with your theory on people wanting a simple, easy and shallow game. I want an in-depth game and my biggest problem with this new version is not what has been added – but what has been taken out!!!

Disappointment in this game does not always equal a lack of patience or intellect. If I wanted a “dumbed down” baseball game I could just play Mogul. But while Mogul has some nice things about it, it is still child’s play when compared to OOTP.

I also think the idea that 6.5 could not have been improved upon is off base, at least from a design standpoint. I could easily “improve” 6.5 with 100 things theoretically. However, Markus did say that the code had become quite unwieldy (and the speed of the two games definitely bears that out) and so improvement from a programming perspective is probably very accurate – If Markus says the game needed to be re-coded who am I to argue.

However I do feel that I have room to argue, or at least voice my opinion on design decisions. I have been playing simulation baseball longer then a good many of the people here have been alive. I have very strong opinions about my baseball sims.

Now I have said this time and time again, I have faith in Markus and I see the potential in the new game – So I will stay here and I know that the game will improve. There are 20 things I HATE about the new game, but there are also 20 that I LOVE. With time I hope to discover more good and watch the bad be eatin away by patches.

I forgot who posted it, but someone mentioned looking at this games as BaseBall Manger 1.0 instead of OOTP 7.0. Ever since I have read that, I have tried to do that and I agree it does make the experience better. There is no doubt that if “some new programmer” had released this game and I wasn’t comparing it to OOTP I would be much happier. It is just past versions have set the bar so high.

No, I don’t want a stupid simple game – the game I want has twice the depth of this game and I am sure that I will never be completely satisfied with the game unless I programmed it myself and since my only programming experience is something along the lines of:

10 PRINT “Hi”
20 GOTO 10

I don’t think anyone would want a game that I programmed.

Claybor · 06-03-2006, 01:50 PM

If anyone is refering to my post, I never said the word simple. I said easy to use, there is a big difference. I am sure it may just be a "getting used to it thing", which is why I plan on continuing to monitor the boards and see how folks adapt to it and feel about it as time goes by.

06-03-2006, 09:13 AM	#1
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,108	Is this a trend??? I am noticing a distinct trend in marketing when I look at the SI message boards versus the ones here and other places. It appears to me (and this is just my observation) that European sports sim gamers (and my taste is more along the lines of this) tend to prefer sports sims that are extremely in depth and detailed, while American (even though I am American I am not in this camp) sports sim fans prefer their games to be be easier to use and quick even if it means less depth. It also seems to me that Americans seem to have less patience when trying to learn a new game. Has anyone else noticed this trend? I guess this thread might be of particular interest to SI's marketing wizzard, Marc Duffy.

06-03-2006, 09:16 AM	#2
Rod Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 29	Maybe it has something to do with the American culture at large? Not much patience... a bit shallow... Last edited by Rod; 06-03-2006 at 09:17 AM.

06-03-2006, 09:36 AM	#3
Jestre All Star Reserve Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: North Smithfield,Ri,USA Posts: 612	I would tend to blame it on the marketing strategy of most American companies, dumb it down to sell to the largest possible audience. I find the notion that the average Euro is more 'sophisticated' than the average American 'flawed' to say the least. __________________ My eyes perceive the present, but my roots are imbedded deeply in the grandeur of the past. "Chief Meyers"

06-03-2006, 09:48 AM	#4
scuffleball Major Leagues Join Date: May 2003 Location: USA Posts: 358	I tend to agree with you. Our entire society (in USA) is built on instant gratification these days, so the gaming world here is the same We Americans are a strange lot. We don't like change if we feel (collectively) that something is fine as is, but if we determine it's not, then we demand changes until it works . . . I think that's contributing to some of the issues with OOTP 2006. Many people felt it (the interface, some other things) was fine as it was, so changes are seen more as 'fluff' or 'unwarranted'. I liked the old interface, but I also like the new one. I also recall that as the old game went through its iterations, there was much praise for 'improving' the interface, and 'making things clearer' and 'easier to find' as Marcus released a new version. My view is that the old game's level of achievement (interface and other things) got to a point where collectively it was seen 'fine' and 'comfortable'. So Americans, being the people we are, react to that differently than if we feel that something 'needed' changed. __________________ I came. I saw. I played OOTP. The Storm Tigers - my book, check it out!

06-03-2006, 11:23 AM	#16
HolyCow98 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Douglasville, GA Posts: 2,735	I know that I was pretty much burnt out on OOTP in large part as it had not evolved or even changed that much over the last few years. Some of that had to do with the 2 year wait, but mostly it was due from V3 to V6.x it was a very similar game with pretty much an identical layout. I still would recommend the game for sure...but after 5 years of play....I had done all I could in the game and was actually getting frustrated that I couldn't enjoy it anymore in the same way I could before. For me it doesn't really matter how or if the old game could have been changed...the fact of the matter is I had a game that as time went on I grew tired of to the point where I retired from online play, didn't have any solo leagues and really wasn't playing anymore. I wanted to play, and would start, but then I would lose interest which is something that never really happened in the past. I definately am liking he differences between the new version and the old version. However, this newer version is more for people who like to micromanage in games. This is something some people love to do but is also something other people won't enjoy doing (and hence won't enjoy the game). I think they will have a hard time winning over people who don't micromanage. Is it possible to make a game that will satisfy people who like to micromanage and people who want a game that can be played at a faster pace? If the answer is no...they will have hard sell to some people. I third the "good grief" by Spielman __________________ NPBL Enjoying its 60th season Georgia GM

06-03-2006, 10:08 AM	#5
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,108	Yes, byt what people don't understand is that OOTP had reached the point where it couldn't be advanced any further as it was. This new build is going to allow for much more building in the future. What may be percieved as an omission when it comes to features, may in fact simply be the result of future planning. I wish Americans could grasp this concept better. I'm not sure about all that goes into the coding of OOTP, but I would hate to see developers wasting time to appease some temporarily for the sake of PR rather than stick with their original blue print and just continue working toward those goals. I'm not saying that is what SI is doing, I just think the public should trust SI based on it's track record.

06-03-2006, 11:08 AM	#12
Craig Scarborough All Star Reserve Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 551	I like deep and richly-detailed simulations as much as the next guy. However, one reason I like to be able to fastplay is for verification purposes. If I'm going to invest my time in a "realistic" simulation of a professional sport, I want to be ensured that the game is going to live up to its side of the bargain. I've been disappointed countless times with other sims, so what's the harm in being able to play the game fast OR slow? Btw, I second the "good grief" by Spielman.

06-03-2006, 12:01 PM	#17
Claybor All Star Starter Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 1,360 Infractions: 0/1 (1)	I think some folks just want something that is easy to use. So far to me this version sounds like far to much work is needed for the casual gamer who doesnt want to spend hours tweaking things to get them to where they are wanted. I have been playing baseball games for years now (33), and I have yet to have to read a manual on any game, yet it seems to me that it will be necessary to do so for this one. I am not sure that is a good thing for many game players who just want to jump in and play, and after all it is baseball, a very simple game if taken down to its basics. I am looking forward to getting a look at the demo, but from reading the forums I dont see myself purchasing this version until it has progressed through a few patches, and perhaps not even then. It doesnt look bad, it just doesnt look like its for me. Hopefully I am wrong, but I dont think so.

06-03-2006, 12:03 PM	#18
sixto Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,262	I think Markus's and SI's ongoing challenge will be to serve both markets. Based on just my first few days of OOTP 2006, vs. five years of Football Manager, it's my impression that this game is twice as ambitious as anything else SI has done. SI generally has hard-coded databases, and it's a curious tribute to both Markus and this community that OOTP has largely customizable databases, and yet the users are still not satisfied. Talk about setting the bar higher and higher. I would argue that if the game is too complex, then this entire community is to blame, though blame is obviously the wrong word. I mean SI surely would have been happy with a game that could recreate the leagues of the world as they stand today - and exactly nothing else. But we demanded more, and Markus wanted to please us (and himself). As to a divide between Euro and U.S. users, I'd say it's overstated. On one hand, the stereotype is that Europeans have more free time and put a higher value on leisure time - and leisurely time. I'm not European nor am I in Europe, so I can't confirm this - but it would be consistent with a user base that wants more time to explore a game. As to Americans, we probably have a higher incidence of young users, and their expectations are to be satisfied instantaneously if not sooner. We have an enormous amount of disposable income and no problem blowing $35 on this game today and $500 on XBOX 360 and a few games tomorrow. With that kind of pressure, I think it behooves the developers to ignore the bleating and focus on their vision. I'm not happy with everything in the v1.0.0 - far from it - but I am happy with what this game could be, and I'm surprised at the alarm from experienced OOTP users from whom Markus seems to have earned no trust.

06-03-2006, 01:42 PM	#19
Giants44 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: San Francisco Bay Area Posts: 2,408	I have no knowledge on the European Market, so I have no comment there. However I disagree completely with your theory on people wanting a simple, easy and shallow game. I want an in-depth game and my biggest problem with this new version is not what has been added – but what has been taken out!!! Disappointment in this game does not always equal a lack of patience or intellect. If I wanted a “dumbed down” baseball game I could just play Mogul. But while Mogul has some nice things about it, it is still child’s play when compared to OOTP. I also think the idea that 6.5 could not have been improved upon is off base, at least from a design standpoint. I could easily “improve” 6.5 with 100 things theoretically. However, Markus did say that the code had become quite unwieldy (and the speed of the two games definitely bears that out) and so improvement from a programming perspective is probably very accurate – If Markus says the game needed to be re-coded who am I to argue. However I do feel that I have room to argue, or at least voice my opinion on design decisions. I have been playing simulation baseball longer then a good many of the people here have been alive. I have very strong opinions about my baseball sims. Now I have said this time and time again, I have faith in Markus and I see the potential in the new game – So I will stay here and I know that the game will improve. There are 20 things I HATE about the new game, but there are also 20 that I LOVE. With time I hope to discover more good and watch the bad be eatin away by patches. I forgot who posted it, but someone mentioned looking at this games as BaseBall Manger 1.0 instead of OOTP 7.0. Ever since I have read that, I have tried to do that and I agree it does make the experience better. There is no doubt that if “some new programmer” had released this game and I wasn’t comparing it to OOTP I would be much happier. It is just past versions have set the bar so high. No, I don’t want a stupid simple game – the game I want has twice the depth of this game and I am sure that I will never be completely satisfied with the game unless I programmed it myself and since my only programming experience is something along the lines of: 10 PRINT “Hi” 20 GOTO 10 I don’t think anyone would want a game that I programmed.

06-03-2006, 01:50 PM	#20
Claybor All Star Starter Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 1,360 Infractions: 0/1 (1)	If anyone is refering to my post, I never said the word simple. I said easy to use, there is a big difference. I am sure it may just be a "getting used to it thing", which is why I plan on continuing to monitor the boards and see how folks adapt to it and feel about it as time goes by.