TPF - Full list of what's missing?

[Maple Leafs]

I've been browsing through some of the TPF threads here and at .400, trying to decide whether the game would be worth a try. Just wondering if there's a list somewhere of what exactly is missing from the game at this point. I don't mean bugs, but "features" that you'd expect in a pro football sim that aren't there.

I realize there's a lengthy TPF discussion thread on the board already, but it might be helpful to have a quick-hit thread on missing features for those of us who want to make a purchase decision without going through a ton of other material.

So far I've seen mention of missing:
- 2-point conversions
- fake kicks
- onside kicks
- a full range of penalties
- trading between computer teams

Have any of these already been added? Is there any thing else?

(Edit: to reflect that timeouts are indeed in the game.)

[The_herd]

Timeouts are in now.

[miked]

What penalties are missing? For the record, I think I've seen like 5 fake kicks this season, maybe...and were mostly punts. Don't know about trading, but my urge to buy is fading....fading....RISING...RISING...fading...

Love the Simpsons

[yabanci]

there was a thread last night analysing the statistics that raised an eyebrow for me.

http://www.400softwarestudios.com/invboard/upload/index.php?showtopic=46591

[JimboJ]

I would also like to know what penalties are missing. Are we talking about obscure ones, like taking off the helmet, or are there common ones missing?

[Icy]

No trading between computer teams????
Also i wonder what is the beta testers real thoughts about it not having 2P conversions, fake and onside kicks. Some of them are respected members of the text sims community and have a big knowledge about football. I suposse they can't really tell their thoughts about that but for me is like not adding penalties to a soccer sim.
Damn, i bought it the first release day, played it 20 minutes and haven't opened it since then, specially after reading all the user reports at 400ss that doesn't help a lot to try to play it again. Probably will give it another chance after the real rooster are out.

[Karim]

No trading has killed it for me along with consistent crashes and bugs. I suppose these might be cleared up in a future patch but knowing FOF2004 is rock solid and that there are now third-party utilities that will allow me to customize it the way I want makes me eat my words and lean towards the old faithful in Solecismic.

[SFL Cat]

Yes, I too was excited by all the early eye-candy screenshots I was seeing in July-August, but I won't be purchasing TPF until I see that it is a finished product (or at least until I can play a demo). There is NO good reason for a text sim NOT to have ALL aspects of the game of football.

[mckerney]

A mock draft and post draft report that doesn't crash. Well, I need that anyway.

[HerRealName]

Originally posted by mckerney
A mock draft and post draft report that doesn't crash. Well, I need that anyway.

Do you have IE 6? I think that is the fix.

[tucker342]

Wait, there is no computer trading????????? That's really messed up....

[Neuqua]

I don't have the game but I'm reading at .400 that it isn' t possible to sign a RFA. Any truth to this?

[Eaglesfan27]

I never could get a RFA to sign with my team. However, I only tried a few times. I've since returned the game due to the lack of AI trades being my final straw. Hopefully, it will be a good game down the road worth the purchase, although I'm afraid it won't be until TPF2.

[Maple Leafs]

To be honest, I think of the list above that the no-trading ommission is the killer. No two-point conversions and onside kicks is annoying. No fake kicks is a non-issue for me. But thelack of trading makes this a no-go until that's fixed.

Trading is one of the best parts of any text sim. But like most of you (I'm guessing), I don't want to do anything in a text sim that my AI opponents can't also do. So if they can't trade, I won't trade, and that probably means I won't play.

[Tekneek]

So, without AI trading, this is a game that requires all human teams to get close to realistic? Even then, it is missing parts of the game of football that are used each weekend during the season. Certainly not the kind of thing I would throw down $34.95 for. Maybe $14.99...

Sorry for piling on. :)

[Icy]

Seems that the new patch just anounced will fix mostly of this, it's my last hope on this game, i haven't played it since i bought it, just the first 20 minutes.

[Wasabiak]

Like many, i returned the game and got a refund. The biggest killer imho is the game's stability. The last straw for me was spending 3+ hours with a brand new league and getting to week 5, then having a RTE pop up. I know i said a couple months ago that i would buy this game before i'd buy FOF2k4, and i also said that there did not appear to be enough new features in FOF to justify a purchase. But you know what? I bought both, i've played both, and i owe Jim and everyone else an apology. I was wrong. FOF2k4 has NEVER crashed on either of the pc's i have it installed on, even after hours of play. If Jim ever adds head to head play to FOF, life in my house will be complete.

[JimboJ]

Why all the fuss about no trades? There is hardly any trading in the NFL anyway. Granted there should be some trading between teams and it needs to be added to the game. But the average team makes maybe one or two trades per season? And then they are usually mediocre players for drafts picks. You hardly ever see big name players traded in the NFL.

Is it really THAT big a deal? Again, trading does need to be added in order to make this a realistic sim, but I honestly don't see why it would be a deal beaker for anyone.

[Dutch]

I'm not so sure anyone has said the game was perfect, but when they realized there were no trades, they returned it.

Were you under that impression?

[yabanci]

Originally posted by JimboJ
Why all the fuss about no trades? There is hardly any trading in the NFL anyway. Granted there should be some trading between teams and it needs to be added to the game. But the average team makes maybe one or two trades per season? And then they are usually mediocre players for drafts picks. You hardly ever see big name players traded in the NFL.

Is it really THAT big a deal? Again, trading does need to be added in order to make this a realistic sim, but I honestly don't see why it would be a deal beaker for anyone.

maybe you don't watch the draft too much.

[Maple Leafs]

Although in fairness, if it's realistic draft day trading that you're after, then FOF isn't exactly doing it well either.

But it's better than nothing, of course.

[Subby]

Originally posted by JimboJ
Is it really THAT big a deal? Again, trading does need to be added in order to make this a realistic sim, but I honestly don't see why it would be a deal beaker for anyone.
In and of itself maybe not, but taken with all the other issues...yes.

[MizzouRah]

Originally posted by Maple Leafs
Although in fairness, if it's realistic draft day trading that you're after, then FOF isn't exactly doing it well either.

But it's better than nothing, of course.


Kind of funny, I've seen FOF2k4 doing it quite well. In fact, only in season #3, but I've seen one draft pick go through 3 different teams as they trade players to get that specific pick.

FOF2k4 is not a 'perfect' product, but damn it does alot VERY well.


Todd

[Maple Leafs]

Originally posted by MizzouRah
Kind of funny, I've seen FOF2k4 doing it quite well. In fact, only in season #3, but I've seen one draft pick go through 3 different teams as they trade players to get that specific pick.It definitely includes draft day trades. I just don't think it's implemented all that well. For example, the trades always seem to be player-for-pick, never picks-for-picks like they (usually) are in real life. Plus I never really have a sense that a team is really targetting someone. For example, a team that desperately needs a QB doesn't seem any more likely to trade up than any other team. They almost seem to be random events. They're also mentioned only briefly, and the game moves on. If you want to find out who was traded, you need to hit the transaction log and start scrolling.

Like I said, not bad, but not great.

[MizzouRah]

They're also mentioned only briefly, and the game moves on. If you want to find out who was traded, you need to hit the transaction log and start scrolling.

Like I said, not bad, but not great.

That's true, I have to do that all the time. :) Like Bucc says, the immersion factor could be enhanced there and I *think* TPF is moving towards that, I just wish is was further along.


Todd

[JimboJ]

Originally posted by yabanci
maybe you don't watch the draft too much.

That's where most of the trades a team will make takes place. Like I said, maybe one or two per year on average.

[jamesUMD]

I have not been playing TPF much since I got it, and I do think that there are a lot of fixes that need to be made, but you can't jump on a first generation game of this calibur. The customization factor alone is amazing. They have tried to squeeze a ton of things into this game, and there are bound to be issues but IMHO this game is going to raise the bar for football text sims by a long shot.

Once they add cpu trading, 2pt conversions, and hopefully change it so you are the GM and you can actually hire a coach like in Front Office Football rather than having to be both then I will be much happier.

[MizzouRah]

They have tried to squeeze a ton of things into this game, and there are bound to be issues

I think that sums it up nicely. A much shorter feature list and a better working product would have been the way to go, imo. FOF was just like that years ago. Start out simple, and then add to your concept.


Todd

[Rich1033]

I get the impression that they are making this game from the outside in, rather then the inside out. What I mean is that if I were making it the basic things(solid stats, timeouts, onside kicks, fakes, ect..) would be the first elemets I would concentrate on, then I would look to add the other features. But hey, all those extra features are what actually bring the game to a bigger market, right?

Oh well, I guess all that really matters is how the game turns out in the end. Best of luck to .400, I will probably end up giving it a try near the end of january.

[JimboJ]

Originally posted by MizzouRah
I think that sums it up nicely. A much shorter feature list and a better working product would have been the way to go, imo. FOF was just like that years ago. Start out simple, and then add to your concept.

This is exactly the dilema they, or any other developers, face. On the one hand they have people telling them to keep it simple and get the basic stuff right. On the other hand you have people screaming that there aren't any trades between CPU teams.

I could see how trading between CPU teams would be extremely difficult to program. Add to that the fact the trading is done very infrequently in the NFL compared to other sports. I'm sure they decided rather than doing a half-ass job with it, they would leave it out for this version, and add it later.

[Dutch]

On the one hand they have people telling them to keep it simple and get the basic stuff right. On the other hand you have people screaming that there aren't any trades between CPU teams.

Well, I think it's becoming pretty obvious which fan base they are looking out for first. They got the pretty graphics down pat. I'm sure they didn't skimp on any of the colors either. :)

[JonInMiddleGA]

Just in case anyone else is curious like I was ...

On draft days 2003 there were ...

22 trades between NFL teams
19 were picks for picks
2 were picks for players
1 was player for player

[rkmsuf]

Originally posted by JonInMiddleGA
Just in case anyone else is curious like I was ...

On draft days 2003 there were ...

22 trades between NFL teams
19 were picks for picks
2 were picks for players
1 was player for player

I can see why this was left out of the game then...

[miked]

Is your insinuation that they spent all their time making pretty colors and skimped in other areas because their fan base is less concerned with certain things? What exactly do you think they were trying to accomplish and why do you think their fan base only cares about pretty colors ;) That would be somewhat of an insult to the beta-testers who made sure the stats and drafts were more or less consistent.

Disclaimer: I do not own TPF and have some interest in purchasing it down the road.

[rkmsuf]

Originally posted by miked
Is your insinuation that they spent all their time making pretty colors and skimped in other areas because their fan base is less concerned with certain things? What exactly do you think they were trying to accomplish and why do you think their fan base only cares about pretty colors ;) That would be somewhat of an insult to the beta-testers who made sure the stats and drafts were more or less consistent.

Disclaimer: I do not own TPF and have some interest in purchasing it down the road.

Based on the missing features and bugs the message seems clear...the game is currently substandard...

[Subby]

Originally posted by JimboJ
This is exactly the dilema they, or any other developers, face. On the one hand they have people telling them to keep it simple and get the basic stuff right. On the other hand you have people screaming that there aren't any trades between CPU teams.
Last time I checked, trading falls under the "basic stuff" category.

Why are you even bothering to defend such a fundamental oversight?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally posted by Subby
Why are you even bothering to defend such a fundamental oversight?

Glad you asked that one, 'cause I've been wondering the same thing myself.

[JimboJ]

Originally posted by Subby
Last time I checked, trading falls under the "basic stuff" category.

Why are you even bothering to defend such a fundamental oversight?

Because I don't think its fundamental. In other sports, yes. In football, no. As someone else posted, there were 22 trades on draft day last year. That's less than 2 per team. Add in the few more that occur other times in the season, and you get maybe 2 trades per team. There's not that big a difference between 0 and 2, when you're talking about a 53 man roster.

Yes I would like to see trades added. I would just rather wait until they have time to do it right, rather than have teams making bonehead trades just for the sake of saying it's in the game.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by JimboJ
There's not that big a difference between 0 and 1.Wow. I don't even know how to respond to this...

[Buccaneer]

Originally posted by JonInMiddleGA
Just in case anyone else is curious like I was ...

On draft days 2003 there were ...

22 trades between NFL teams
19 were picks for picks
2 were picks for players
1 was player for player

How does FOF stack up with this?

Also, aren't you forgetting about draft picks for coaches and other compensations?

[Buccaneer]

Originally posted by JimboJ
Yes I would like to see trades added. I would just rather wait until they have time to do it right, rather than have teams making bonehead trades just for the sake of saying it's in the game.

I agree with this. OOTP certainly has lots of AI trades but many of them don't make sense (as well as in-season FAs and releases).

[JonInMiddleGA]

Bucc -- the only full-season x-actions lists I could find online were organized team-by-team and month-by-month (profootballweekly I think) or in 3-day segments (espn.com), and I didn't have time right now to sort through those for a full count.

I thought the 22 number was pretty damned significant just by itself, certainly more than the 'one or two per year" argument that a few people have tried to make in defending this particular c.f.

I haven't done a year-by-year count of FOF draft day deals (and I'd skew it a little by being extremely active anyway) but just from watching 30+ seasons worth of draft days, there's pretty regularly a half dozen or more in the first round or two alone.

FWIW, I'd say FOF2k4 probably underemphasizes draft day trading (related to the AI unwillingness to do much of anything with regard to dumping current year picks to save on cap allocation) but at least the upper-level swaps seem to be represented.

[JimboJ]

Originally posted by JonInMiddleGA
I thought the 22 number was pretty damned significant just by itself, certainly more than the 'one or two per year" argument that a few people have tried to make in defending this particular c.f.

That's one or two per year <b>per team</b>.

[Subby]

Originally posted by JimboJ
That's one or two per year <b>per team</b>.
Yeah and that is <b>significant</b>.

You have three avenues available to you when building your team...FA, the draft, and trades. Removing trades is a huge oversight.

Its like leaving out 2-pointers or fake kicks because they aren't attempted that much.

Ok, so that was a bad example :)

[JonInMiddleGA]

But it's "one or two per year per team" that often has a disproportionate impact to salary structure vs roster size.

2 guys out of 53? Possibily insignificant.

Moving 10% or more of your available salary cap dollars in those two trades? Very significant.

[HornedFrog Purple]

It seems to me no trading other than what the user instigates makes the league as a whole very static.

[JimboJ]

Originally posted by JonInMiddleGA
Moving 10% or more of your available salary cap dollars in those two trades? Very significant.

The salary cap is exactly why player for player trades are so very infrequent in the NFL, and why they almost never involve high paid players. How many significant players (not draft picks) can you name who have been traded in the last 10 years?

[VPI97]

If you define "significant" as solid starters, here's some names from the last few years that were all parts of trades:

Ricky Williams
Marshall Faulk
Drew Bledsoe
Peerless Price
Ahman Green
Rob Johnson
Keyshawn Johnson
Hugh Douglas
Eric Allen

That's just off the top of my head...but I'm pretty sure that if you find a NFL trade repository, you'd find that plenty of starters have been involved in trades.

[KWhit]

And don't forget that Michael Vick is now a Falcon because they traded up to get him.

[HornedFrog Purple]

I predict "We had to cut off the features at some point or else the game would never be released." :D

[Dutch]

How do teams really go for it on 4th down? I mean, how many games have been dramatically altered because some team went for it on 4th down? I think the AI should just automatically punt for you if you are 35 yards out and kick a FG if you are closer than 35 yards.

I mean, really. Doesn't that make sense? Oh....but as long as the AI tells me that's what it's doing in 3D color graphics...

[Ksyrup]

Favre and Brunell were each acquired by trade.

[sabotai]

A lot of starters have been traded, but those trades were almost always player for picks, or player for player and picks. (Rarely, if ever, is a starter traded for a starter).

[Sweed]

Originally posted by JonInMiddleGA
Just in case anyone else is curious like I was ...

On draft days 2003 there were ...

22 trades between NFL teams
19 were picks for picks
2 were picks for players
1 was player for player

Buccaneer asked how this stacke up against fof2k4, the same thing I was curious about. I'll preface by saying I have both fof2k4 and tpf. Fof2k4 is more stable as it should be imho, TPF shows alot of promise that I'm willing to be patient for. I grew up in Iowa and some of these threads are like watching Hawkeye fans and Cyclone fans fight, kind of dumb. I want to see both teams and both games succeed. Maybe I'm a duel fanboy:) or can you be that?

On to my very small sample and unscientifc look at fof draft day trades. This is base on one season as it's all the stats I have to look at as I just completed a season. I don't really base any conclusions on this one look at fof but post the results from my league for information purposes only. Perhaps if others do the same a respectable size sample can be obtained.

In my league there were 13 draft day trades including the one I participated in. I will leave out the trade I did and only post the AI trades.

Totat AI trades 12

All trades were player for pick no picks for picks.

Needs of teams met according to the list of team needs that fof creates.

Both teams needs met .. 2 (1st round for DE 68-68)(cb 40-57 for 2nd rounder)

Team getting picks needs..0 (this could be significant in the fact that the team traded to get this pick as it came up, so was it looking at it's needs?)


team getting player...1 (DE 49-49 for 2nd round #12. team getting pick took a TE 30-58 with a TE on roster rated 62-63 and 3 yrs left on contract.)

Neither team getting needs...9

of the 9 teams filling no needs the picks broke down this way..

1-1st, 2-2nds, 2-3rds, 2-4ths, 1-6th, and 1-7th

I can understand late round picks not getting a need as the pool is depleted but you would think that if you traded for a one or two you would fill a need. Of course so many things go into this who's scouts doing the evaluation, is there a quality player to fill the need availabel etc. But if there's not a quality player to fill a need why trade up?

One of the good things I do see here though is that you have to give quality to get a good pick and that pick won't necessarily end up being a good player. As IRL you take your chances when trading away an established player for a pick.

Anyway mabye some of you other guys can take a look at your leagues it would make interesting reading.

[Ksyrup]

Originally posted by Sweed
Maybe I'm a duel fanboy

I think that's what we have here...dueling fanboys.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally posted by JimboJ
The salary cap is exactly why player for player trades are so very infrequent in the NFL, and why they almost never involve high paid players. How many significant players (not draft picks) can you name who have been traded in the last 10 years?

You're missing my point -- I'm talking about managing available cap money, trading down in those cases where the pick isn't worth the cost.

Or trading up, on years when the talent pool and your salary situation dictates doing so.

Gee, almost like ... the NFL.

[Buccaneer]

Originally posted by Sweed
Buccaneer asked how this stacke up against fof2k4, the same thing I was curious about. I'll preface by saying I have both fof2k4 and tpf. Fof2k4 is more stable as it should be imho, TPF shows alot of promise that I'm willing to be patient for. I grew up in Iowa and some of these threads are like watching Hawkeye fans and Cyclone fans fight, kind of dumb. I want to see both teams and both games succeed. Maybe I'm a duel fanboy:) or can you be that?

On to my very small sample and unscientifc look at fof draft day trades. This is base on one season as it's all the stats I have to look at as I just completed a season. I don't really base any conclusions on this one look at fof but post the results from my league for information purposes only. Perhaps if others do the same a respectable size sample can be obtained.

In my league there were 13 draft day trades including the one I participated in. I will leave out the trade I did and only post the AI trades.

Totat AI trades 12

All trades were player for pick no picks for picks.

Needs of teams met according to the list of team needs that fof creates.

Both teams needs met .. 2 (1st round for DE 68-68)(cb 40-57 for 2nd rounder)

Team getting picks needs..0 (this could be significant in the fact that the team traded to get this pick as it came up, so was it looking at it's needs?)


team getting player...1 (DE 49-49 for 2nd round #12. team getting pick took a TE 30-58 with a TE on roster rated 62-63 and 3 yrs left on contract.)

Neither team getting needs...9

of the 9 teams filling no needs the picks broke down this way..

1-1st, 2-2nds, 2-3rds, 2-4ths, 1-6th, and 1-7th

I can understand late round picks not getting a need as the pool is depleted but you would think that if you traded for a one or two you would fill a need. Of course so many things go into this who's scouts doing the evaluation, is there a quality player to fill the need availabel etc. But if there's not a quality player to fill a need why trade up?

One of the good things I do see here though is that you have to give quality to get a good pick and that pick won't necessarily end up being a good player. As IRL you take your chances when trading away an established player for a pick.

Anyway mabye some of you other guys can take a look at your leagues it would make interesting reading.

Nice work, thanks.

[jamesUMD]

I really think that TPF also shows a ton of promise. They have tried to implement things that we have been clamoring for in FOF for ages. FOF in it's what, 5th incarnation has still left out things that we are at least seeing .400 try in their first generation.

At the very least this tells me that they are trying to develop a game that is in the customer's vision of football, rather than the developers vision. I will be patient as the developers seem to really want to implement everything that the fan base asks for, rather than getting clandestine answers from Jim in the form of "yes" , "no", and "maybe."

I have an easier time being patient when there seems to be a genuinely open dialogue between the developers and the fans. The fans may be your harshest critic, but they can also be your best ally through that same criticism.

[sabotai]

At the very least this tells me that they are trying to develop a game that is in the customer's vision of football, rather than the developers vision.

And maybe that's the problem. Maybe .400 is trying to do too much. Trying to please everyone. They try to put in everything...and it turns out not to be so good.

The more I look at it, the more it makes sense to me that a developer should just focus on some things and go with it, instead of trying to do EVERYTHING.

[yabanci]

Just look at the first round of the draft for the past two years then tell me trading is not an important part of pro football:

http://www.nfl.com/draft/drafttracker/round/round1

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2002/round/round1.html

[Killebrew]

Originally posted by sabotai
And maybe that's the problem. Maybe .400 is trying to do too much. Trying to please everyone. They try to put in everything...and it turns out not to be so good.

The more I look at it, the more it makes sense to me that a developer should just focus on some things and go with it, instead of trying to do EVERYTHING.
Yes yes, if a game depends on the users for it's design focus that will be one guaranteed messed up game since the users will rarely agree on anyting:). One of Jim Gindin's great strengths in the design of the various FOF versions has been his personal design focus, but at times he has probably been too focused on his vision - his aversion to attempting multiplayer for instance. It's important to not completely disregard user requests/complaints, as long as the users do not drive the games design.

[yabanci]

like building a house, they should start with a solid foundation first, then add what everybody wants. Only a fool builds a beautiful house on an incomplete foundation.

[Buccaneer]

Only if we all can agree what the foundation should include.

[yabanci]

All I meant by foundation was the basic rules of pro football, like onside kicks, 2pt conversions, trading, etc. This are things any pro football simulation should have. It's not rocket science.

[Buccaneer]

Originally posted by yabanci
All I meant by foundation was the basic rules of pro football, like onside kicks, 2pt conversions, trading, etc. This are things any pro football simulation should have. It's not rocket science.

On-field rules only? If so, current year rule books only but not next or last years? You mentioned trading, so off-field rules as well? If so, which ones? Let's say we can agree on what the "basic" rules of pro football, how do we implement them? Who's to say that such a game must include PBP or even a log or a box score? Why not just the final score, as long as the basic rules are there behind the scenes? In part I am playing devil's advocate but you assume that it is so simple. It is not, many choices, tradeoffs and compromises have to be made along the way. This does not imply that 2pt conv and onside kicks should not be there but I would argue in the manner it should be there.

[yabanci]

you are arguing for the sake of listening to yourself argue.

[The_herd]

I can see where Buc's coming from. .400 is creating a game that's going to be updated every year in all likelyhood. That means that they are trying to build a solid base with this seasons game, while at the same time looking forward to future releases of the product. They took the things they found important for their series and made sure they were in the game. 2pt conv and onside kicks are in the game, as Arlie said, they just weren't activated for use, so they did find some importance in them being in the game. There are some things this game does very well, so I don't think its fair to say the game isn't a serious football sim.

Several people noticed from the outset that TPF's initial Features list was way too optimistic. They had to make some cutbacks and this, I'm sure, took up a lot of time in development, as they decided on the final feature list. As cuts start getting made, things get forgotten or pushed to the backburner. I'm going to force my self to make an exception for this game and judge it soley on the final product, not the release product, but I can promise Arlie that this is the last game released by .400 that I make such exception for. If there aren't some major improvements in the release products for the 2nd release of their games, I won't be buying any more.

This is a game that can only get better with future releases, we can't expect perfection in the 1st release. But there are some things that we should expect to be in the game and of the things that are missing and broken, the one that bothers me the most is the trading or lack thereof. It's a horribly done feature that has a lot more importance to people that play text sims than to real NFL GM's. In the end we are looking for a fun game and trading is a big part of the fun factor in text sims. Without it a lot of people get tired of they game as their team becomes "stale".