FOF7 July 30th Developer Chat Log

[Sef0r]

Biggest thing for me was still allowing TCY importation which means player attributes remain the same. As a new game, and for something different, was kind of hoping for new attributes...

...having said that I am looking forward to more of the game. Especially if this goes Alpha and you allow people to register to help out development.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Sef0r

Biggest thing for me was still allowing TCY importation which means player attributes remain the same.

That doesn't mean that at all. TCY imports were there for FOF4, FOF2K4, and FOF2K7 even as more ratings were added. The new ratings aren't in TCY imports.

[corbes]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the plans for a total overhaul of the way players are scouted and revealed in the game. That strikes me as a MAJOR change to the core gameplay, especially for MP purposes. I mean, (other than gameplanning, which also sounds like it is on the road to overhaul) identifying the players you want on your team is pretty much the heart of the game, right?

[Antmeister]

I am excited about this. For both multiplayer and single player there are a number of things I am excited about. For 1, you already know he didn't give the details about everything. I am sure there is a major overhaul of things that were not asked. And the new ways that the offseason is going to work makes me excited above some of the most boring stages. On top of that, people are not realizing how big the .csv dumps are going to helps. Because if this includes game day data and other data we priviously didnt' have access to, then this can potentially allow people to customize the data for their own needs when developing sites and there is going to be some new information that helps with the immersion of these leagues. And on top of that, I no longer need 3rd party tools for a majority of these things which is actually quite huge. It is nice to know that a lot of this stuff will now be in-game and knowing he is also streamlining this makes me feel good about not having to drudge through a bad season in MP fudging with things.

[NorvTurnerOverdrive]

[Dutch]

The MP data dumps is what I want to know about most of all. Can't wait!

[Logan]

Originally Posted by corbes

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the plans for a total overhaul of the way players are scouted and revealed in the game. That strikes me as a MAJOR change to the core gameplay, especially for MP purposes. I mean, (other than gameplanning, which also sounds like it is on the road to overhaul) identifying the players you want on your team is pretty much the heart of the game, right?

And this is something that I don't really like for SP either, which led to my post about passing, unless I'm failing to understand how it works (highly possible, I'm a moron these days). I want scouting to be much more in depth than it used to be. I don't just want the people who are doing it to change. I want updates on draft-eligible players weekly, a more detailed scouting combine, ability to deploy scouts to other teams, etc. It seems like instead he is taking away one of the only areas that actually gives more information (the rookie interviews).

[digamma]

Thanks for doing the chat Jim and to Ben for organizing, running it and posting the log.

We are a Mac family now. I play my mp leagues on a beat up laptop that sometimes works and sometimes doesn't. I guess it is time for me to figure out a parallels work around.

[PackerFanatic]

Great read here. I am excited for the changes!

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by Prinzar

How does the NFL licence work with the game? I think I read that EA renewed their exclusive rights to use NFL player names.
Its obviously something that can be customised, but is there a workaround out of the box?

Based on C.B.C. Distribution vs. Major League Baseball there's probably no license needed to use NFL player names in a video game. It was a lawsuit over a fantasy sports game using real player names that found that players have no rights of publicity to their names or player records and even if they did it is within a fantasy sports games First Amendment free speech rights to use them. If it applies to fantasy sports is like applies to sports video games too. Using a players likeness and photo would be a different issue.

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by Danny

Was hoping for something to get excited about, but nothing there for me. I am sure this will appeal to FOF die hards though.

Same for me. I grew bored with the older FOF games and it doesn't look like this new version changes enough with the formula to excite me.

[tald]

I have no idea what people were expecting. Jim designed a game that all of us have played many times of the years. He is a one person company unlike EA Sports or others. I for one will be buying the new game as soon as I can. Yes there are things I would like to see change, but for one person to take on the many changes we could suggest would be too much. In the end if we like the game we buy it, if not find a better one and buy it. I like many of you have tried others and none match what Jim has designed, even with all our so called faults.

[Young Drachma]

Kudos to Jim on a new game. I'm glad he's still in the saddle and even though I barely play much FOF (And surely hope he makes uploading MP exports easier..it's what keeps me away from that side of the game.) these days I'm looking forward to the refresh. It's been a long time overdue and I'll be getting it first thing.

[nilodor]

Put me in the would have liked to see custom size league camp as well. It would add a lot of value to historic play, especially early on when there are twice the number of actual teams and the draft becomes very dilute.

I certainly like that it sounds like you can build a team in many different ways to win and if the AI roster building logic is much improved it seems like a FOF 2k4 to 2k7 jump to me.

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by tald

I have no idea what people were expecting. Jim designed a game that all of us have played many times of the years. He is a one person company unlike EA Sports or others. I for one will be buying the new game as soon as I can. Yes there are things I would like to see change, but for one person to take on the many changes we could suggest would be too much. In the end if we like the game we buy it, if not find a better one and buy it. I like many of you have tried others and none match what Jim has designed, even with all our so called faults.

Wasn't really expecting to see anything different, I just don't think it's something I'm really gonna be interested in.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by tald

I have no idea what people were expecting. Jim designed a game that all of us have played many times of the years. He is a one person company unlike EA Sports or others. I for one will be buying the new game as soon as I can. Yes there are things I would like to see change, but for one person to take on the many changes we could suggest would be too much. In the end if we like the game we buy it, if not find a better one and buy it. I like many of you have tried others and none match what Jim has designed, even with all our so called faults.

I play games very differently today than I did when I was playing the hell out of FOF a decade ago. I think that's why, for me, I need a good amount more from it to be interested than a bunch of under-the-hood improvements. Again, just IMO.

(btw there is some crazy code embedded in your quote)

[Autumn]

[19:59] SOLECISMIC: Q: Will the league playing style evolve with time or is it more set to mimic the current state of the NFL? (For more clarity, will we see things like teams or the league as a whole moving from being heavy rushing, deep pass oriented to short, quick passes instead of runs, to option based attacks, etc.)
[19:59] SOLECISMIC: This is something I've wanted to do for a long time. I don't know, though. If it can be done without seeming hokey, it will get in there.

It seems to me that by implementing a system in which coaches have different styles (a pass heavy offensive coach, a 3-4 Defensive coach, etc), you would automatically generate this. As coaches were generated and retire you would get a changing landscape of preferences in the league. I think that would be great.

[Autumn]

Originally Posted by Young Drachma

Kudos to Jim on a new game. I'm glad he's still in the saddle and even though I barely play much FOF (And surely hope he makes uploading MP exports easier..it's what keeps me away from that side of the game.) these days I'm looking forward to the refresh. It's been a long time overdue and I'll be getting it first thing.

Yes, just being able to handle MP leagues from within the program would be a huge step up. Being able to track player ratings within the program will be a huge time saver too and encourage me to keep playing .

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by MikaV84

Im in the same boat with a lot of guys in the sentiment that this is an evolution, not a revolution. Sadly, from what i gather, Jim will look at the sales of this product when thinking about continuing.

The thing is, and i mean no offense whatsoever, is that the user interface is bad beyond acceptable. That will be the absolute biggest problem with a Steam Greenlight campaign, when you have to sell your product based on a description and screenshots.

For us, who've played it for years, we become blind to the UI. It's absolutely the same for Jim. When you've used it and looked at it for long enough, you become sanitized to it. The reality is, Jim has probably lost at least a third of FOF sales in the last few versions becouse of the horrendeus UI. It has, and will, turn gamers away.

If a steam greenlight campaign is to be done, there's no point in doing it until significant work has been done on the UI. I'd argue that outside of the core fans on this forum, all these listed changes are fine and dandy, but the market will not respond in large to a game which - in all honestly - looks and works like its from the 90's.

Just all in all, the UI and UX are by far the most important aspects in making this product popular outside of us core fans.

Edit: forgot to mention - if you tell the current generation of gamers that they'll need to use FTP to play multiplayer, thats not going to cut it.

I'm not sure where to begin with this beauty of a post. Really I guess just two points...

1. Jim has said on here that FOF2K7 outsold any of his other products. If he's lost 1/3 of his customers over the last few versions, I guess that means he's gained a new 34% or more, eh?

2. OOTP uses in-game FTP. PFS uses in-game FTP. How else would you propose he handle MP? Make the files magically appear on your computer? With in-game FTP, you just enter the credentials one time in your copy of the league, and from then on, just press a button that says "import latest league files" or something like that when you want to get the latest league update. And when you want to send your export, you hit another button that says "send files to commish" or something along those lines.

[Subby]

I am glad this is an evolution and not a revolution. Kudos to Jim for working to get it right rather than releasing a whole new feature set every version.

YOU HAD ME AT IN GAME FTP.

[Ben E Lou]

Some of the responses in here remind me of a comment that Markus makes pretty much every year regarding OOTP. Inevitably, someone posts at OOTPDev: "Markus, for this year, how about just fix/tweak the stuff that doesn't work optimally and don't bother with new features!"

And Markus responds essentially: "I have to have major new features or people will get upset and not buy the latest version. I'll do what I can to tweak the stuff I added five years ago and still doesn't really work quite right, but new features come first!" (Yes, I'm paraphrasing, but that's very clearly his message.)

Jim appears to be doing the opposite here: rather than adding a ton of attention-grabbing "new features," it looks like there are some crucial and much-needed tweaks/fixes (SP roster-building AI, free agency offers, scouting algorithm changes, salary structures, end-game time management, WR tweaking, etc.), some very nice new reporting elements (draft history, QB performance, ratings tracking, etc.), and several strategic new features that some would consider small, but that could be game-changing (game film, FTP for MP, staff changes, etc.)

Overall, I'm excited.

[Ben E Lou]

Dola:

And frankly, I'm particularly encouraged that Jim is listening to the community. Roughly three months ago, he posted in this forum and essentially said that tracking ratings over time was cheating, but after the community's response to that, he's adding it as a much-needed report in the game itself.

[molson]

Originally Posted by aston217

I would've assumed a significant plurality of players, both in SP and in MP, play this game for the real NFL teams. And different league numbers would make sense for MP leagues unable to support a sensible number of teams (which is something I hope the AI makes easier, anyway)....so it's kind of a super niche demographic, no? Maybe the vocal-ness outweighs the actual %, or maybe I'm wrong...

I'm a pretty casual SP-only player who uses real teams and players, and while it's not a deal breaker for me, some modest league structure options increase immersion. I'm not looking to sim the CFL, just to play a long dynasty where things change over time, as they do in real life. Like expansion, re-alignment, playoff structure tweaks, etc. So I'm disappointed that won't be there, but I'll certainly still purchase. I mean really, if it's the same game as the last one but with significantly improved game mechanics as far as AI and whatnot, I'll be more than satisfied. Really, the under-the-hood improvements are MORE important to me than anything else, because all I want is a nuts-and-bolts text sim that works really well, I think 90% of modern text sim features are completely lost on me because I'm just not going to get that deep into this stuff anymore.

[Gallifrey]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Some of the responses in here remind me of a comment that Markus makes pretty much every year regarding OOTP. Inevitably, someone posts at OOTPDev: "Markus, for this year, how about just fix/tweak the stuff that doesn't work optimally and don't bother with new features!"

And Markus responds essentially: "I have to have major new features or people will get upset and not buy the latest version. I'll do what I can to tweak the stuff I added five years ago and still doesn't really work quite right, but new features come first!" (Yes, I'm paraphrasing, but that's very clearly his message.)

Jim appears to be doing the opposite here: rather than adding a ton of attention-grabbing "new features," it looks like there are some crucial and much-needed tweaks/fixes (SP roster-building AI, free agency offers, scouting algorithm changes, salary structures, end-game time management, WR tweaking, etc.), some very nice new reporting elements (draft history, QB performance, ratings tracking, etc.), and several strategic new features that some would consider small, but that could be game-changing (game film, FTP for MP, staff changes, etc.)

Overall, I'm excited.

Thank you Ben.

[Draft Dodger]

Originally Posted by Subby

I am glad this is an evolution and not a revolution. Kudos to Jim for working to get it right rather than releasing a whole new feature set every version.

YOU HAD ME AT IN GAME FTP.

that's a huge thing. I wonder if there's any chance to support multiple universes (so we can run a SP with real teams and MP with fake teams without the use of batch files)

[molson]

Originally Posted by Autumn

It seems to me that by implementing a system in which coaches have different styles (a pass heavy offensive coach, a 3-4 Defensive coach, etc), you would automatically generate this. As coaches were generated and retire you would get a changing landscape of preferences in the league. I think that would be great.

I'd much rather be able to hire coaches with their own game plans than have to design my own. This game has evolved from "front office" football to "sideline" football, which I'm sure is necessary from a business perspective, but that's a great example of one of the downsides to constantly adding new "features" - depending on how you play, those features could be completely wasted on you, or could even hinder your enjoyment of the game. Improved game mechanics create a better experience for everyone.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by digamma

Thanks for doing the chat Jim and to Ben for organizing, running it and posting the log.

We are a Mac family now. I play my mp leagues on a beat up laptop that sometimes works and sometimes doesn't. I guess it is time for me to figure out a parallels work around.

I failed to mention in my earlier post, but I also echo thanks to Jim for the chat and Ben for organizing it.

I run FOF on Parallels and it works like a charm. Parallels can be a bit quirky at times, but I'm generally happy with the results. I've been able to run high-end applications like Photoshop with no problems. Memory is essential though. You can run it with 4GB but 8GB obviously will work better.

[kcchief19]

On the Steam points and questions ... First, I'm amused that people think Jim's dated UI wouldn't fly on Steam. There are tons of games on Steam with dated UI or graphics that look like they are from "BC's Quest for Tires."

Second, I'm not sure why Jim would ever need to go through the Greenlight process. He's modest and selling himself short thinking he needs to. Greenlight is for first-time indie publishers and completely unknown games. FOF is easily one of the three most revered sports text sims in the market, had a distribution deal with EA and has been reviewed time and again by the big reviewers and sites. I'd be surprised if Steam doesn't hunt him down wanting to publish the game for him.

[QuikSand]

I am pleased beyond words that there's going to be a new version of this game, and Jim has proven to me that he understands what I want out of a game like this far better than any other develop ever has. I'm not going to dwell on too many specifics, I'm just really happy to see this coming together.

I will say that the space it takes to talk about better AI decision making and so forth -- that really undervalues that sort of effort. No, it's not an eye-catching "new feature" but that is the bread and butter of these games, and Jim's ongoing attention to this sort of thing is why FOF, even six years old, remains the absolute titan in its niche.

I have every reason to believe and expect that a great game is going to get better. I'm in.

[tej2101]

Super psyched for the new game, but I'm not really sold on the staff draft.

[Drake]

I'm still holding out for a player editor.

I mean, I'll line up with my $40 or whatever on release day, but under my breath I'll be grumbling about not having a player editor.

(I fully admit that I only want a player editor because sometimes I like to cheat. Sometimes I like to make a player, give him my name, and have the virtual me make Dan Marino's career look like Gino Torretta's. You can bad mouth the virtual me with his millions of dollars and dozen Super Bowl rings all you like. Haters gonna hate.)

Really, I'm just psyched about a new version of FOF and thrilled that Jim's back at it again.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

I will say that the space it takes to talk about better AI decision making and so forth -- that really undervalues that sort of effort. No, it's not an eye-catching "new feature" but that is the bread and butter of these games, and Jim's ongoing attention to this sort of thing is why FOF, even six years old, remains the absolute titan in its niche.

The fact that you didn't use the phrase "improved algorithyms" even once hurts me. Hurts me deeply.

[Julio Riddols]

I'm totally down to do art for the game for free. If I had an idea of what is needed, I'd start now. I'm no pro, but I'd bust my ass to make things look as good as possible. I literally only have one other responsibility in my daily life, and that is making sure my son doesn't die in my care. He's a smart little guy, so that doesn't take a ton of work.

Edit: If I were to be taken up on this offer, and payment was absolutely necessary, a copy of the game would suffice.

[muns]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

I am pleased beyond words that there's going to be a new version of this game, and Jim has proven to me that he understands what I want out of a game like this far better than any other develop ever has. I'm not going to dwell on too many specifics, I'm just really happy to see this coming together.

I will say that the space it takes to talk about better AI decision making and so forth -- that really undervalues that sort of effort. No, it's not an eye-catching "new feature" but that is the bread and butter of these games, and Jim's ongoing attention to this sort of thing is why FOF, even six years old, remains the absolute titan in its niche.

I have every reason to believe and expect that a great game is going to get better. I'm in.

+1 although I'm partial to HR with FBB

I for one am looking forward to the game a lot. It has been my experience in working with HR that when you leave the market for a bit (like both Jim and Brian have) the expectations the community has and then place on the developer on their return are just crazy. Looking forward to seeing all of the AI improvements and all the under the hood things that don’t make the game sexy. It will just make FOF a hell of a lot more fun to play. Welcome back Jim and thanks to you and Ben for doing the chat!

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

On the Steam points and questions ... First, I'm amused that people think Jim's dated UI wouldn't fly on Steam. There are tons of games on Steam with dated UI or graphics that look like they are from "BC's Quest for Tires."

Holy crap....I just had a massive flashback. Great reference!

Second, I'm not sure why Jim would ever need to go through the Greenlight process. He's modest and selling himself short thinking he needs to. Greenlight is for first-time indie publishers and completely unknown games. FOF is easily one of the three most revered sports text sims in the market, had a distribution deal with EA and has been reviewed time and again by the big reviewers and sites. I'd be surprised if Steam doesn't hunt him down wanting to publish the game for him.

Agreed 100%, Steam isn't big on graphics as long as you are an Indie. Steam would be fucking high to by-pass this. Just throw it on the site and let sales speak for themselves.

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

Second, I'm not sure why Jim would ever need to go through the Greenlight process. He's modest and selling himself short thinking he needs to. Greenlight is for first-time indie publishers and completely unknown games. FOF is easily one of the three most revered sports text sims in the market, had a distribution deal with EA and has been reviewed time and again by the big reviewers and sites. I'd be surprised if Steam doesn't hunt him down wanting to publish the game for him.

I'd be really surprised if Jim didn't have to go through Greenlight

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by mckerney

I'd be really surprised if Jim didn't have to go through Greenlight

Don't sales speak for themselves?

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by Mike D

Don't sales speak for themselves?

Has anyone at Valve seen sales numbers? If not, how else besides Greenlight are they going to? All indications are that unless a developer has other games on Steam or an existed relationship with someone at Valve they don't really look at pitches for games unless it's on Greenlight. So short of someone who works on Steam being a fan of and familiar with the sports management sim niche (an with OOTP failing to get through Greenlight that doesn't look like the case) and reaching out to Jim there probably isn't much of a chance they see anything about FOF any other way.

[MikaV84]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

I'm not sure where to begin with this beauty of a post. Really I guess just two points...

1. Jim has said on here that FOF2K7 outsold any of his other products. If he's lost 1/3 of his customers over the last few versions, I guess that means he's gained a new 34% or more, eh?

2. OOTP uses in-game FTP. PFS uses in-game FTP. How else would you propose he handle MP? Make the files magically appear on your computer? With in-game FTP, you just enter the credentials one time in your copy of the league, and from then on, just press a button that says "import latest league files" or something like that when you want to get the latest league update. And when you want to send your export, you hit another button that says "send files to commish" or something along those lines.

That was me wording the point poorly (losing cumulative sales since the UI has become more dated, not losing sales COMPARED to the last version). And OOTP didnt get on steam either, and it's sales and UI are at a greater level.

My general point stands, and theres no need to get so defensive, since you really didnt even contend the main point. For the record, i've already told Jim - like someone else in this thread did - that i'd help out with the UX and graphics if needed. So im not attacking the game itself, or Jim for that matter, but the point is very clear: if you want a game like this to go big - or even greenlight, the UX needs a complete overhaul.

EDIT: no reason to get into the FTP stuff until we see the implementation - it might be seamless. I deleted a snarky comment on it.

[Goldschmidt]

A little underwhelming at this point, but it's early, so there's hope.

I am disappointed at the developer's casual dismissal of feature requests like league/player customization. These are immensely fun in OOTP.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by MikaV84

That was me wording the point poorly (losing cumulative sales since the UI has become more dated, not losing sales COMPARED to the last version). And OOTP didnt get on steam either, and it's sales and UI are at a greater level.

My general point stands, and theres no need to get so defensive, since you really didnt even contend the main point. For the record, i've already told Jim - like someone else in this thread did - that i'd help out with the UX and graphics if needed. So im not attacking the game itself, or Jim for that matter, but the point is very clear: if you want a game like this to go big - or even greenlight, the UX needs a complete overhaul.

EDIT: no reason to get into the FTP stuff until we see the implementation - it might be seamless. I deleted a snarky comment on it.

Eh, I wasn't defensive. No reason for me to be defensive. If it wasn't clear, I was laughing at your post because I found it funny.

Yes, I generally find it humorous when people talk about FOF "going big." FOF's a great niche game, and clearly sells enough to make a living for its developer. Forget the UI and graphics, though: the things that make FOF great and that Jim focuses on just don't play to the masses. If OOTP with all its bells and whistles hasn't "gone big," then what on earth makes anyone think FOF is going to??? It just seems silly to think that way. FOF with a pretty interface and cool graphics is a game with a pretty interface and cool graphics that's all about roster management, numbers, details, and spreadsheets. Sure, he might sell more games to the "oooh..this looks kewl" impulse purchase crowd; but I suspect that they wouldn't actually play the game more than a hot minute, or ever buy another version.

I think the primary issue is that after all this time there's still not another football sim that holds a candle to FOF, so people end up looking to FOF to be all things for all types of players like OOTP, when it's just not, and there's really no reason that reasonable people should think that it's going to be. Jim's made it clear (over and over again) that he's not interested in sacrificing screen space where numbers can go in order to fit in more graphical content. Yet people keep hoping and pining for him to sacrifice screen space where numbers can go. That is just plain funny to me.

[Dutch]

You've been here many times before, Ben. Not everybody gets it. However, all that about pretty graphics aside (yeah, I'd like them too, but it's wishful dreaming) there are some UI improvements that could be made to ensure that we don't have to click the mouse button 10,000 per session.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Mike D

...there are some UI improvements that could be made to ensure that we don't have to click the mouse button 10,000 per session...

Oh, I absolutely agree with that and would engage seriously on that topic, but that post wasn't about that. It was about all the things that FOF needs to do to go big, get on Steam, reach a bunch more people, etc. etc. etc., and it was also sprinkled with some obviously-horrid made-up numbers. When I see all of that sort of talk, I don't engage seriously; I just chuckle. Usually I just point and laugh without posting, but that one was just so over-the-top that I couldn't resist.

[TroyF]

Just to add to the QS post, To all of the people saying it's an evolution or not enough features or it can't be a spreadsheet. . . I don't get it.

Don't get me wrong, you are all entitled to your opinion. I just don't understand. I fell in love with the game originally because of how it combined deep strategy with the ease of playing just one more season before I go to bed.

The thought of an FOF that is more challenging with better AI is beyond salivating to me. I am not interested in card or board games, so Jim didn't see any of my money the last while. I'll be buying this the second it comes out.

[gstelmack]

I've said it before, I'll say it again: the main issue I have with the UI is the modal nature of the windows. I want a roster window AND the depth chart window open at once. Otherwise the actual presentation is fine for me for what the game does.

Aside from that, there are usability improvements as alluded to. Weight training was a chore, for example, and could be very streamlined if you had a single screen report of everyone's weight status along with buttons to train up / down for each player. Interviews are similar.

[AlexB]

I only play single player (or to be fair 'played' given how long it's been since fired up FOF seriously). I didn't like the gameplanning screens and like most found it way too easy to win, even without massively exploiting the AI.

So really pleased to hear the AI is going to be much tougher, gameplanning made simpler. Also huge that ratings will be tracked: will at least the current year's combines be listed too do we know?

I would like the financial side to be much improved, so that seems to be addressed too, although maybe not quite as much as i'd hope but difficult to tell exactly what's in store, which is I think what Jim intended.

The coach draft seems a bit bizarre tbh, but it's not going to stop me buying on the first weekend, the rest of the improvements merit it. Let's be frank, the last FOF is still the best football managment game even after all this time, and if FOF7 is an improved development of that it's a no-brainer!

[Mike7273]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

Unfortunately, I have to join the crowd who gives this a big meh. Lack of customization in league sizes and financial setup makes it a good (make that a very good) NFL simulator, but due to FM and other such text sims out there, I want more than just a NFL simulator.

FM?

[Goldschmidt]

Originally Posted by TroyF

Just to add to the QS post, To all of the people saying it's an evolution or not enough features or it can't be a spreadsheet. . . I don't get it.

Don't get me wrong, you are all entitled to your opinion. I just don't understand. I fell in love with the game originally because of how it combined deep strategy with the ease of playing just one more season before I go to bed.

The thought of an FOF that is more challenging with better AI is beyond salivating to me. I am not interested in card or board games, so Jim didn't see any of my money the last while. I'll be buying this the second it comes out.

My only gripe is the lack of customization. The game used to support expansion. I don't care if the graphics change at all - I would think custom league sizes and in-game player editing would be a reasonable feature request for a text-based sim.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

FOF's a great niche game, and clearly sells enough to make a living for its developer.

I don't believe this is true - Jim's had a "real world" job for a while now IIRC. Maybe I'm misremembering, but I seem to recall that being the case.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

I don't believe this is true - Jim's had a "real world" job for a while now IIRC. Maybe I'm misremembering, but I seem to recall that being the case.

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/...ad.php?t=86369