OOTP6 Updates

[Ksyrup]

I only rarely check in over at the OOTP Developments forum, but I figure that maybe those who check more frequently can post bits and pieces of info in one convenient spot, since the release should happen in less than a month.

This is from Marcus on 3/1:

"OK, I will soon code the new draft routines, and for that I need a little help. The generated players will include college and highschool stats. Now, I have no idea about college and highschool baseball, so I need some info:

How many games do college/HS play per year, and what are roughly the average stats? Also, how do great players perform relative to the average?

Thanks for the help!

Cheers,
Markus

PS: OOTP 6 screenshots later this week"


And then again on 3/3:

"One thing I'd like to mention: In OOTP 6, you'll be able to totally hide the ratings http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/board/images/smilies/smile.gif Basically, you can set scales for the basic ratings, the talent ratings and ratings like defense + speed. The scales are:
- None displayed
- 1 to 5
- 2 to 8
- 1 to 10
- 1 to 20
- 1 to 100

This way guys who like the real challenge, can turn the ratings off and just go by scouting reports and stats http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/board/images/smilies/smile.gif"


Has anyone else run across some nuggets o' info? There's something on the board about an OOTP convention in June. But it's in Ohio, and any self-respecting Michigander wouldn't step foot in Ohio...;)

[Draft Dodger]

it's been very, very quiet this year.

[Ksyrup]

Yes it has. And the fact that he's just getting around to recoding the draft at the beginning of March...? Not saying it can't be done, but it sounds like ITP put OOTP seriously behind last year's pace.

[kserra]

Has anyone here even played ITP? How well did this game do compared to OOTP?

Kevin

[Sweed]

I'd say a combination of ITP and the new ootp engine for v6. When the new engine was first announced I figured it would push the normal release time back, I've just been hoping it would be ready by opening day.

[Ksyrup]

Not in the same league. It was fun for awhile, but in an arcade game manner, not a true sim. Plus, there wasn't much to do other than sim and watch how you develop.

In fact, after playing ITP for awhile, I became concerned about the free agency process of OOTP, based on how I was being treated as a free agent. Does anyone know whether the OOTP free agency model was simply inserted into ITP, or whether it was modified? I played out two careers, and in each, I was nothing more than a marginal player, but every single time I was a free agent, I would get at least 3-5 4 year offers. It didn't matter what my age was or my previous performance, by the end of the 30 day process, I had a load of offers to choose from, none of which made financial sense for any of the teams.

I'm just wondering if this is how AI teams handle free agency in OOTP as well. I hadn't really looked that closely at it until I was the player going through the process. My hope is that he tweaked it so that you would be ableto play out a long, full career regardless of ability. But that resulted in me signing 3 4-year deals, and a 2-year deal at the end of my career, and in only one instance was I actually put in the rotation - twice I was sent directly to AAA, and once I made the team as a mop-up reliever. One time I got signed, sent to AAA, and released, all by the first weekend of April.

If that's how OOTP works, this game needs far more help than I ever imagined.

[Ben E Lou]

"OK, I will soon code the new draft routines, and for that I need a little help. The generated players will include college and highschool stats. Now, I have no idea about college and highschool baseball, so I need some info:

How many games do college/HS play per year, and what are roughly the average stats? Also, how do great players perform relative to the average?Am I the only person who is concerned about this?

[Vince]

*Raises his hand*

That seems like a rather large red flag to me...

[MizzouRah]

Yeah, definitly quiet this year for some reason. I guess we'll find out soon enough.

...there's not even a preview anywhere....


Todd

[Ksyrup]

Am I the only person who is concerned about this?The thread I got that from has a bunch of people trying to explain that high school and college stats are not the predictors that minor league stats are. I'm not sure where he's going with this - on one hand, if it's a factor, I'm not sure it means much in real life and should factor in much in the game; on the other hand, if it's just window dressing, leave it for a patch/update months down the road.

It's times like these that I prefer Jim's approach better. Rather than come out with an "I'm redoing the draft and have no clue about high school and college baseball stats" out-of-the-blue post, wouldn't it be better for our confidence in the game for him to do some basic research himself, and come back with pointed questions later, or at least, ask his testers before opening it up to the board?

It's obvious that Marcus is a bright guy, but going from "I have no clue" to a solid understanding of the stats and how they might work in relation to his game in such a short period of time...that might test the limits of his brilliance.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Am I the only person who is concerned about this?
I'm betting that would be a "No".

With such a short answer, I'll offer a follow-up question, just for kicks:

Am I the only person who isn't at all surprised by this?

[CraigSca]

I spoke with Markus about this earlier today - the stats are not a complete indicator of major league performance but may provide some value in the context they are created. They're part of the process that allows people who would turn all ratings off (like myself) to have additional insight on players besides a scouting a report or drafting blindly.

Regarding free agency - I don't have ITP, so I can't comment on that, nor do I have the free agency code.

[Ben E Lou]

the stats are not a complete indicator of major league performance but may provide some value in the context they are created.Now I am more concerned.

[HornedFrog Purple]

I dunno why but for some reason I haven't had the usual anticipation for OOTP this year even with the beginning of spring training. I think it has to do with the Rangers being eliminated in 2 weeks as opposed to their usual 1st week of May.

[John Galt]

Now I am more concerned.

Why?

It isn't great to hear that things are lately developing, but frankly the draft doesn't concern me too much in baseball - this isn't football or basketball where the draft is everything. I'd like it to be better, but I can live without perfection in the draft.

As for high school or college stats, I'm not really concerned unless they actually do predict major league performance to a large degree. Most stats are impossible to gauge without a whole lot of context (and even that is probably imposible at the HS level). I'm not sure OOTP is ready for that much "context," so having them as eye candy that gives a little hint is fine with me.

Am I missing something?

[kingnebwsu]

Recoding the engine=good.

My issue with the actual results of the previous 3 games=still a major concern.

[Markus Heinsohn]

Relax, this little feature is something I wanted to build into the game since version 3. And it doesn't really take much time to do at all. The stats will not mean the world, especially HS stats when compiled while playing against easy competition (there are 5 levels of competition). But they may help people who like to play without displayed ratings and just want to pick their players based on scouting reports and college/HS stats.

By the way, ITP did delay the development a little, but the real reason why it has been relatively quiet is that I do not like to hype something anymore ;). The game will be in great shape when released, and although this time we didn't add as many 'bells and whistles' as in previous versions, it will be a big step forward. The new engine was really a huge project, and now works even better than I hoped it would. Along with lots of new AI code and tons of small but useful enhancements/tweaks, OOTP 6 will be well worth the wait.

Cheers :)

[John Galt]

By the way, ITP did delay the development a little, but the real reason why it has been relatively quiet is that I do not like to hype something anymore ;)

That is the best news I've heard about OOTP6. I think less hype is probably a good thing for the product and development. Hopefully, things turn out well and an enjoyable game is the result.

[AgPete]

Relax, this little feature is something I wanted to build into the game since version 3. And it doesn't really take much time to do at all. The stats will not mean the world, especially HS stats when compiled while playing against easy competition (there are 5 levels of competition). But they may help people who like to play without displayed ratings and just want to pick their players based on scouting reports and college/HS stats.

By the way, ITP did delay the development a little, but the real reason why it has been relatively quiet is that I do not like to hype something anymore ;). The game will be in great shape when released, and although this time we didn't add as many 'bells and whistles' as in previous versions, it will be a big step forward. The new engine was really a huge project, and now works even better than I hoped it would. Along with lots of new AI code and tons of small but useful enhancements/tweaks, OOTP 6 will be well worth the wait.

Cheers :)

I know I can always count on a fun baseball game from you guys. Hype or no hype, can't wait to play your newest version. :)

[Ksyrup]

Yes, despite my concerns, I'm still anxiously awaiting this game. I like the varying level of hiding talent ratings that you've added.

[rjolley]

Hey Markus, did you happen to add a field for Lehman(sp?) database location so you don't have to type it in every year for historical leagues?

[CraigSca]

Now I am more concerned.

More concerned? If I were implementing something like this, it's exactly how I would do it myself. Basically I'm saying their statistical performance in H.S. or college will not have a 100% direct correlation to their performance in professional baseball. If a guy looks the same to the scouts, but one batted .500 vs another guy batting .450 at a Div 1 southern college it just provides a little context to perhaps give a little hint as to who would may be better. It's not to say the .450 guy isn't, but it's always good to be armed with as much info as you can.

HOWEVER - if it were implemented in a fashion where - the best hitter in college would be the best hitter in the next available draft class all the time - I think that would stink. Statistics can provide insight based on the context they were created. At that level, I would put much more credence into scouting reports and would put their statistical output way down on the list.

[corbes]

Yes, despite my concerns, I'm still anxiously awaiting this game. I like the varying level of hiding talent ratings that you've added.ditto.

and that talk about the development algorithms getting even better. I like the unpredictability stuff that was being mentioned.

(edit: wow, what a worthless post. that's how you get to 1,000 posts, kiddos.)

[Ben E Lou]

More concerned? If I were implementing something like this, it's exactly how I would do it myself. Basically I'm saying their statistical performance in H.S. or college will not have a 100% direct correlation to their performance in professional baseball.I was feeling ok when I thought that this might be window dressing that I could simply ignore. However, if there is any correlation between an area that Markus clearly doesn't understand, and the game itself, then that's a problem.

[korme]

Markus why don't you hook it up for my birthday and release screenshots for the upcoming version of my favorite game?

[Ben E Lou]

Relax, this little feature is something I wanted to build into the game since version 3. And it doesn't really take much time to do at all. The stats will not mean the world, especially HS stats when compiled while playing against easy competition (there are 5 levels of competition). But they may help people who like to play without displayed ratings and just want to pick their players based on scouting reports and college/HS stats.Ok. I read Craig's post before I read this one. (Yeah, I know I was going backwards. :p) This makes me feel a little better. So, if we used basic/limited ratings, we can just ignore the HS/college stats I reckon.

[CraigSca]

I was feeling ok when I thought that this might be window dressing that I could simply ignore. However, if there is any correlation between an area that Markus clearly doesn't understand, and the game itself, then that's a problem.

My bet is, for all intents and purposes, you could ignore even if you were playing with ratings "off". My understanding is their correlation to performance in professional baseball will be the same as in RL - very little. :)

-Craig

[Buccaneer]

Ok. I read Craig's post before I read this one. (Yeah, I know I was going backwards. :p) This makes me feel a little better. So, if we used basic/limited ratings, we can just ignore the HS/college stats I reckon.
I never realized some people would not play on basic/limited ratings. I wonder why?

[Huckleberry]

I'm a sucker for baseball games. I'm looking forward to the release, Markus. And I've already pre-ordered DMB Version 9. Good luck with the finishing touches.

[dawgfan]

On the issue of stats for H.S./College performence for draft prospects:

I wouldn't be too concerned about Marcus' knowledge of these levels of baseball; if the stats are intended to give you slightly more info than you'd get off just the scouting report, but not be something that should be completely relied upon (much like the H.S. stats in TCY) then I think this is a nice addition. I'm assuming Marcus has some algorithm in mind to translate the actual playing ability of the prospect into statistical results, with modifiers in place to make sure the information isn't a direct predictor of future success (i.e. some guys with lesser stats could end up being sleepers, guys with monster stats could bust). By him asking for what constitutes average and great statistical performances at those levels, it sounds like he just wants a framework to figure out how what numbers his algorithm should produce, i.e. what the top performances should look like.

While obviously stats from those levels are less likely to predict future success, there is something valuable there; the A's and Billy Beane have been using college stats for some time now as part of their evaluation process. Obviously you have to make adjustments for players in less competitive conferences, but there is something of value to be gained there.

As a feature of the game that might enhance scouting, I think it's a good idea. People that are hard-core fans of H.S. and College baseball might frown at the stats the game generates and grumble about it, but I think so long as Marcus does a good job of making sure these stats don't reveal too much about the true ability level of the prospect, it will add to the game.

[Huckleberry]

dawgfan -

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but part of the Athletics' work with stats is that they have found that college stats are much better predictors than high school stats, is it not?

[dawgfan]

Yeah - I guess I didn't make that clarification in my post. I would hope that there would be a large difference in how accurate the stats would be between the H.S. players and the college players.

I would think that the H.S. stats should really be mostly window dressing, i.e. have enough variability in how accurate they are as to be mostly worthless, while the college stats should have some value, though not quite as much as low-level minor league performance.

[CentralMassHokie]

Leaving aside the fact of Marcus knowing how much HS/College stats correlate to major league performance, this is exactly the type of stuff I want to see in a baseball game.

A limited set of ratings (like the 5 tools that scouts use) combined with college/HS stats would make this game as close to being a GM as possible.

When looking at these players, you won't pay attention to BA or RBIs, you'll pay attention to walk rate, OBP, etc. Those are the things that tend to correlate very well with major league performance.

Perfect instance: you're looking for a leadoff hitter who plays the OF. Your scout finds 2 guys who he rates something like (on a scale from 20 to 80):

Hit: 50
Power: 30
Run: 70
Field: 70
Throw 60

They're both college seniors batting somewhere around .450. One has an OBP of ~.500, the other's is pretty much his BA.

That's where these stats will come in handy. Plus, it'll give you a chance to play Billy Beane and weigh college stats more than scouting opinion, or play Dan Evans and look solely at the scout's opinion.

When I heard Total Pro Baseball was going to have something similar, I immediately wrote Shaun and said I would buy his game the moment it came out.

Now I might have to upgrade OOTP5->OOTP6, as well. Kudos, Marcus (just do it right! :))

[Vince]

The first thing I thought of when I read that HS/College stats would be implemented (aside from the "Wow, he doesn't know anything about it and is putting it in a month before release?") was that I hoped there would be higher correlation with certain statistics (OBP/Walk Rate) than others (BA/Power). Good point, CentralMassHokie.

[lynchjm24]

Why?

I'd like it to be better, but I can live without perfection in the draft.

As for high school or college stats, I'm not really concerned unless they actually do predict major league performance to a large degree. Most stats are impossible to gauge without a whole lot of context (and even that is probably imposible at the HS level). I'm not sure OOTP is ready for that much "context," so having them as eye candy that gives a little hint is fine with me.

Am I missing something?

The thing I would like to see most improved is the draft combined with players moving through the minors. Of course, I'm sure I'm in the minority in this respect, as I take the day off from work to follow the first day of the MLB draft on the internet......

I'm not quite sure what the right balance between fun & work is for the game with regards to drafting. I do know that the way the draft is now is not really fun or interesting at all.

I'd really much rather see at least 5 levels of minors and more players who have huge ceilings who just never get anywhere near their projections as they move to wooden bat professional leagues.

One thing I've never seen mentioned is this. Why not build an academy aspect into the game. You pour x millions into your international academies and based on how much you spend you have 17-18 year old kids show up in your minors in rookie ball. They would (to steal a term) boom/bust or their ages would inflate during some offseason....

[CentralMassHokie]

I'm not quite sure what the right balance between fun & work is for the game with regards to drafting. I do know that the way the draft is now is not really fun or interesting at all.

I'd really much rather see at least 5 levels of minors and more players who have huge ceilings who just never get anywhere near their projections as they move to wooden bat professional leagues.


The way minor leaguers are handled in OOTP is one of my major gripes with the game.

First, you don't know enough about the players to draft anything more than "take the highest power guy", "take the highest K guy", etc. As it stands today, the draft is the worst part of the game.

Secondly, with only 3 levels of minor leagues, you have to limit the number of players you draft. Since the baseball draft is much more of a crapshoot than in any other profession, you don't get enough chances to offset the times that guys don't develop. It's simply draft and pray.

Guys don't seem to develop in according to the way they do in real life. You end up seeing pitchers out of college who are still gaining experience in AAA at 25-26. Part of the problem is that age doesn't seem to have any influence on development other than as a starting point. The other portion of the problem is that there's no way for guys to move around the minors. With no option years, no Rule 5 draft, and no minor league free agency, potentially talented guys get stuck behind other potentially talented guys and simply don't develop.

I'm not sure how to get around this other than having more levels of minor league ball, expanding the draft, a Rule 5 draft, a 40 man roster, and options. Options are a must.

There's just not enough player movement for OOTP to be a fun GM game. It's great from a macroscopic level - I draft some guys, put them in the minors, shift guys around, rinse, repeat. There's very little reason to scout other teams other than the top prospects.

Honestly, what I want out of a baseball sim (and this is probably where I differ from a lot of people) is to be a GM. I want to hire a manager who'll set the lineups and rotations. If he plays smallball after I built a team based around the longball, I want to fire him (with the potenial drop in chemistry/happiness/X Factor of your choice).

I want to spend my time scouring the low minors for players who I can take a flyer on in the Rule 5 draft.

I want to pick up a player who slipped through waivers because his team had a string of injuries and burned his option years.

If there was a game that did that stuff in a fun way, I'd probably lose my job.

[MizzouRah]

Gimme some screenies baby!


Todd

[CraigSca]

The way minor leaguers are handled in OOTP is one of my major gripes with the game.

Secondly, with only 3 levels of minor leagues, you have to limit the number of players you draft. Since the baseball draft is much more of a crapshoot than in any other profession, you don't get enough chances to offset the times that guys don't develop. It's simply draft and pray.

Part of the problem is that age doesn't seem to have any influence on development other than as a starting point. The other portion of the problem is that there's no way for guys to move around the minors. With no option years, no Rule 5 draft, and no minor league free agency, potentially talented guys get stuck behind other potentially talented guys and simply don't develop.


I'll talk to Markus about the player development issue regarding age as a start point. Oh, and OOTP5 may be the last iteration where 40-man rosters, rule 5 draft, free agent compensation, etc., aren't part of the equation :).

[hukarez]

rule 5 draft
I know awhile ago, I had posted on the OOTP boards inquiring about this Rule V draft...since I'm pretty much clueless as to what it is. Someone had posted a link for me to follow...but it was a bit too wordy for me - probably a bit too detailed in what it encompasses. Anyone care to break it down in layman's terms? That is, if it is possible. :confused:

[Carligula]

I know awhile ago, I had posted on the OOTP boards inquiring about this Rule V draft...since I'm pretty much clueless as to what it is. Someone had posted a link for me to follow...but it was a bit too wordy for me - probably a bit too detailed in what it encompasses. Anyone care to break it down in layman's terms? That is, if it is possible. :confused:

Basically, every December there is a draft in which teams, picking in the next season's draft order (reverse order of standings), can select players from other organizations who have 3 seasons of minor-league experience and are not on the 40-man roster. The selecting team has to keep that player on its major-league roster (or major-league disabled list) for the entire following season, or else offer the player back to his original club. Once he's spent a full year on the major-league roster, they can treat him like any other player - send him back to the minors if he has options, etc.

George Bell (if you remember him from the '80s) is probably the best player to come out of Rule 5, but most teams don't use it much any more. Jose Guillen is one of the best examples of a hot prospect whose career was really messed up by being forced to play in the majors before he was quite ready... that's basically it.

[Marmel]

Besides the fact that it has good multiplayer capabilities, OOTP is total crap.

[Chief Rum]

Besides the fact that it has good multiplayer capabilities, OOTP is total crap.

I don't know about crap, but I think Marmel is on the right track here. Don't get me wrong; I love what Markus has done with the series.

But, really, what would it take to get someone with an innate understanding of the game and simulating a basic physics model and incorproating all of the different facets of modern baseball to step in here? I see a diamond opportunity. I think after six versions, it's clear that there are limitations for Markus and his sense with the game. He didn't grow up with it. It would be like me being the head developer of a soccer or rugby sim.

I am definitely keeping an eye on Shaun Sullivan's new game. That might eb the next best hope for a truly intuitive baseball experience.

Chief Rum

[Cecil Fielder]

besides the fact that he is a good commish, Marmel is total crap.

Hey he even runs a team called the Crap.

[Crapshoot]

I don't know about crap, but I think Marmel is on the right track here. Don't get me wrong; I love what Markus has done with the series.

But, really, what would it take to get someone with an innate understanding of the game and simulating a basic physics model and incorproating all of the different facets of modern baseball to step in here? I see a diamond opportunity. I think after six versions, it's clear that there are limitations for Markus and his sense with the game. He didn't grow up with it. It would be like me being the head developer of a soccer or rugby sim.
.

Chief Rum

I think that's a ridiculous statement to make, especially the idea that him not growing up with it somehow limits his understanding of the game. Im Indian, and I didn't really get to watch baseball with any regularity until I was 17- and I feel confident I know more about the sport than any average Joe American. Without delving further into the national identity bits, I thinks the physics modelling is interesting, but probably more suited to a graphical- for a text-based game, modelling the statistical probabilities to produce results in line with sabremetric research is pretty cutting edge. I don't want a DMB, where the fun aspect goes to hell- I want a game that can simulate baseball and an intruging environment, and I think that OOTP is on the right path to that.

[Chief Rum]

It's taken six versions to get some things into the game that should have been in right away. Full minor league stats took five versions. We still don't have spring training or a Rule V draft or waivers. There remains no rhyme nor reason for the talent bumps and drops in the game, and the finances still get screwy (try watching merchandising revenue some time). Markus still has an engine in place that determines outs and then determines the type of out, rather than running a play and seeing what happens (with an out occuring as it occurs naturally). I'm sure there's ton of other stuff people can tell you. SkyDog's quest for the properly utilized fifth starter logic is infamous around here, for instance.

OOTP does a lot of nice things, and I applaud what Markus has done, especially given his initial limitations (top computer programmer, yes, but not initially too savvy with baseball itself). He has given me what amounts to full days of enjoyment (end-to-end) via both single player and multiplayer experience, especially the latter.

But there are just times when I see how OOTP does stuff and it makes me think that someone with a more intuitive initial knowledge of the sport would have had certain things in palce from the very beginning.

Feel free to disagree, but I have been with OOTP since OOTP2, so I am pretty familiar with what the man has put out, and I have been a baseball fan all my life.

CR

[cincyreds]

I have enjoyed OOTP, escpecially the last version.

BUT!

I think the draft needs to be improved a bunch. I think there just isn't enough talent in the draft. I have to lower the draft to 5 rds because after that there just isn't enough talent that is even worth drafting.

I hope Markus really blows us away with his game this year, but right now I am a bit hesitant about it.

[The_herd]

One of the big problems I see with player development in the minors is I never feel like have any control over his progression through the system. All I do is wait until I see the arrows pointing to the next level and move him up accordingly. All my experiences in moving players before the scouts recommend it have ended pretty badly. I would like to see this portion of the game out of the mostly in my hands, with maybe the opinion of the scout thrown in. The thing with it now is the scouts seem to always know the perfect time to call a guy up.

It also aggravates me to see players with good hitting ability batting .125 with 1HR and 5RBI's or solid pitching prospects with an ERA over 6.00 after their 1st 20 or so games at a new level. Good players are going to play better than that, even at a new level in minors.

Another thing is I never see guys with high contact ratings developed anywhere near as much as the guys with high power ratings. I usually see guys arrive at A ball with 0 or 1 in contact, while good power guys can come out of the draft at a 5 or 6.

[MizzouRah]

You point is well taken CR, but until Shawn shows me a fun game, what else is there?

I'm honestly excited about MVP, ASB, and ESPN baseball on the consoles this year. Ootp has taken many, many hours of my time, but I'm not pumped this year for some reason. Maybe it's because I'm slowly losing interest in baseball, maybe it's becuase I have two other sports sims occupying my time (FOF, FBCB)... or maybe it's because the lid is closed tight on ootp6?? Whatever the factor(s), I think ootp6 has to have some innovation this year or it might not be a purchase for me. (Did I say that? :) )

Markus has done one hell of a job with the series though and I'm really wondering what he has in store for v6. Also, I'm hoping Shawn can "woo" me with his sim.


Todd

[Lucky Jim]

I agree with a lot of what has been said here. The draft/minors are probably the most frustrating parts of any text sim I play regularly. Prospects simply aren't treated the way prospects are treated in the real world. It's one of those things where I have to turn off logic and use "game logic." It bothers me knowing that my scout is right to tell me to move a guy up from double A who's hitting .240 when there are guys hitting .338 with 15 bombs and monster OPS numbers. Stats should matter more, and they should be the key indicator on moving guys up. And there needs to be more of a boom/bust variable. Something like the "volatility" rating from FOF is desperately in need. It sounds like Markus understands the spirit of this with what I've heard about about skill vs. tool prospects for the new game, but I'll be waiting and seeing. Really I just never get immersed in OOTP. If the game handled "news" more like CM it would be a vastly improved experience. I never go to the newspaper screen. Just some thoughts

[Alan T]

I still long for the Rule V draft, 40 man rosters, Waiver wires, waiver trading, compensational picks, etc... I also long for the engine to be a bit more realistic to real life baseball, so you don't have to learn a brand new game so to speak to find the secret to success.

With that said, I can't think of any game I have played more than OOTP over the last 5? years (however long its been)..

[JonInMiddleGA]

... it makes me think that someone with a more intuitive initial knowledge of the sport would have had certain things in palce from the very beginning.
Thanks for summing up anything else I probably could have/would have added to this topic.

Bottom line for me -- OOTP is what it is. I've played it plenty, and feel like the Lahman database inclusion & the possibilities it opens up is one of the very best & most enjoyable things I've ever found in any game ever.

But at no time has it ever really, truly, "felt like" baseball to me. For whatever is there, there's also a lot missing.

Honestly, once I gave up on it ever reaching the point of actually feeling like it "was" baseball, I actually softened my feelings about it quite a bit.
Then again, the amount of time I spent with it dropped quite a bit too.

[Buccaneer]

And that is why, for me, OOTP is the most fun to play and by far the best text sim out there, for me - it plays like a strategy game instead of a complicated numbers simulation. But as I had said before, I wouldn't be playing OOTP if it wasn't for the Lahman database and historical league structures - I need that extra level of immersion.

[mgadfly]

Does anyone know the URL to the OOTP home page? My main computer is broke, and I can't recall the address. If you have the one for the site making the next version of Puresim, that'd be appreciated as well.

[Barkeep49]

http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/

The website for Puresim is: www.puresim.com (http://www.puresim.com)

The message board for Puresim (now Total Pro Baseball) is:

http://www.400softwarestudios.com/invboard/upload/index.php?c=69

[mgadfly]

Thanks!

[Young Drachma]

The way minor leaguers are handled in OOTP is one of my major gripes with the game.

First, you don't know enough about the players to draft anything more than "take the highest power guy", "take the highest K guy", etc. As it stands today, the draft is the worst part of the game.

Secondly, with only 3 levels of minor leagues, you have to limit the number of players you draft. Since the baseball draft is much more of a crapshoot than in any other profession, you don't get enough chances to offset the times that guys don't develop. It's simply draft and pray.

Guys don't seem to develop in according to the way they do in real life. You end up seeing pitchers out of college who are still gaining experience in AAA at 25-26. Part of the problem is that age doesn't seem to have any influence on development other than as a starting point. The other portion of the problem is that there's no way for guys to move around the minors. With no option years, no Rule 5 draft, and no minor league free agency, potentially talented guys get stuck behind other potentially talented guys and simply don't develop.

I'm not sure how to get around this other than having more levels of minor league ball, expanding the draft, a Rule 5 draft, a 40 man roster, and options. Options are a must.

There's just not enough player movement for OOTP to be a fun GM game. It's great from a macroscopic level - I draft some guys, put them in the minors, shift guys around, rinse, repeat. There's very little reason to scout other teams other than the top prospects.

Honestly, what I want out of a baseball sim (and this is probably where I differ from a lot of people) is to be a GM. I want to hire a manager who'll set the lineups and rotations. If he plays smallball after I built a team based around the longball, I want to fire him (with the potenial drop in chemistry/happiness/X Factor of your choice).

I want to spend my time scouring the low minors for players who I can take a flyer on in the Rule 5 draft.

I want to pick up a player who slipped through waivers because his team had a string of injuries and burned his option years.

If there was a game that did that stuff in a fun way, I'd probably lose my job.

I couldn't have said this better myself. Except, since I left my job two years ago to go to college - I'd probably spend more time in classes playing OOTP on my laptop than I do now.

Good thing I'll be done fairly soon. :)

But yeah, I'm really not interested in the managerial aspects of the game. I want to be a GM and run a baseball team. I want to get involved in the arcane aspects of the minor league systems, drafting and player development. I want to build a winner through the draft and right now, its damn near impossible to really have a system about player development because of the seemingly inconsistent way players develop.

[korme]

Well, to not make this a whole hate on OOTP thread, I would like to note that EHM's way of produing trades into their news is great and would be a nice addition to OOTP.

[CraigSca]

Regarding some of the complaints listed here surrounding OOTP - I'll just say a lot of this stuff is being addressed.

[Ben E Lou]

Regarding some of the complaints listed here surrounding OOTP - I'll just say a lot of this stuff is being addressed.Well....how 'bout those non-remembering sorts??? That would be a *great* thing to get fixed. :)

[GoSeahawks]

Well, to not make this a whole hate on OOTP thread, I would like to note that EHM's way of produing trades into their news is great and would be a nice addition to OOTP.
How are trades handled in EHM?

[kingnebwsu]

Non-remembering sorts? Bah...I always care about one category only! GO DAVE KINGMAN/CECIL FIELDER/MICKEY TETTLETON POWER TEAM!!! :)

[Danny]

A lot of the complaints here are very valid, but IMO OOTP is currently the best simulation available in any sport when it comes to simulating fictional, historic and multiplayer leagues.

[lynchjm24]

A lot of the complaints here are very valid, but IMO OOTP is currently the best simulation available in any sport when it comes to simulating fictional, historic and multiplayer leagues.

I think that is why people are so passionate in their views. That and the fact that baseball is a game of individual events and it's the easiest to compare to 'reality'.

[CentralMassHokie]

A lot of the complaints here are very valid, but IMO OOTP is currently the best simulation available in any sport when it comes to simulating fictional, historic and multiplayer leagues.

Yep. It's absolutely the most enjoyable baseball simulation around right now. Puresim was a better sim, but not as fun to play.

That being said, OOTP is a mediocre baseball simulation. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of the interface, but that's minor. The major things have been discussed in this thread. There's a million baseball things OOTP does wrong. Fortunately for Marcus, no game has come along and done them right yet, so he's got the lead.

Thankfully for all of us baseball sim fans, Shaun has come along and now there's some competition. And that's good for everybody.

[PSUColonel1]

maybe not- He mentioned something about cancelling the project. Also- if it TBP does come out- it may not be for a long way. Right now it's looking like this game may never come to fruition.

[hukarez]

maybe not- He mentioned something about cancelling the project. Also- if it TBP does come out- it may not be for a long way. Right now it's looking like this game may never come to fruition.
Burnt out and stuff?

[Danny]

Shaun the developer of Pure Sim and TPB has a full time job besides programming these games and I guess has been swamped at work and hasnt had any time for TPB.

[kcchief19]

And that is why, for me, OOTP is the most fun to play and by far the best text sim out there, for me - it plays like a strategy game instead of a complicated numbers simulation. But as I had said before, I wouldn't be playing OOTP if it wasn't for the Lahman database and historical league structures - I need that extra level of immersion.This intrigues me because I believe the exact opposite.

My experience has been that the best way to build a team in OOTP is to simply compile the best team of players, which correlates into compiling the players with the best ratings. I have found little, if any, benefit to employing strategy in the game, if for other reason than strategy options are quite limited. For example, the lack of pitch-by-pitch mode immediately eliminates most in-game strategy. Even "big-picture" strategy is limited in that in that you can set things like when the pitcher's get the hook, when players steal and whatnot, but that seems to have little bearing on the outcomes.

That being said, OOTP is currently the best baseball sim on the market. It does some things extremely well (multi-player). It has ambitious and innovative features that while fun are ultimately flawed (historical play). And as a single-player game, OOTP is not the best in the genre. It's come along way, but I'd be much more eager about OOTP6 if I knew that Markus was leaving MP alone and was working solely on the solo aspects.

I'd love to see a fresh take on the subject. Puresim always interested me, but my tryouts of the demo have been less than satisfying because it feels like its nothing more than OOTP with a much better stats engine -- it didn't seem to advance the strategy options much. Maybe the final version will.

I'd also like to see Jim's take on baseball. I have to side with Chief Rum on this one. I think OOTP may have advanced in some aspects as far as it can given Markus' relationship with baseball. I think this is true of any sport, but maybe more so with baseball. I have 30 years of experience watching and playing baseball since I first developed motor skills and I'm still learning about the game. There is always more to learn. Granted, Markus will continue to learn more, but research will only take you so far. There is an innate quality to baseball that only comes from growing up with the game.

[Danny]

Let's not forget that Markus is only 25 years old and logically should still be able to improve both his baseball knowledge and programming skills as time passes. Plus, they brough in Craig, a programmer who is one of those guys who grew up with baseball to help with development.

[Markus Heinsohn]

Just a little background: I am following MLB since 1994, and since the internet became affordable, I have spent thousands of hours studying boxscores, stats, players/teams, history etc. I got 1-2 MLB games on TV per week for 8 years now, and I watched almost everyone of it, although it meant getting up at 1 am most of the time. Since MLB.tv I am watching almost 5 games per week. Also, I have been playing/coaching baseball for 10 years now... granted our league wouldn't hold up against any highschool league, but still I have some feel for actually playing the game. Of course, this doesn't match the baseball experience that some of you obviously have, but I am not an amateur either. ;)

As far as OOTP 6 goes, I have focused mainly on 'behind the scenes' stuff, and I think most of you will be pleasantly surprised. The first screenshots will be posted tomorrow. :)

[Danny]

The first screenshots will be posted tomorrow. :)

Awesome, I look forward to those.

[Chief Rum]

That's great, Markus. I am looking forward to seeing them.

I guess I should say this about your knowledge of baseball. I don't think any of us are questioning your research, or knowledge of the game now, both as a spectator from afar and as a coach/player on a field. I was just pointing out that there is an advantage for people who grew up with the game, like kcchief and I did. Most of the guys here (in the States anyway) probably played Little League and have been following baseball as long as they remember. When you're a kid, things just seem to sink in so much easier, and that stuff just takes root in you permanently. That was the kind of intuition about thew game I was talking about before.

I have no doubt that in the course of the OOTP series' development, you have learned a lot about baseball, and in many ways, your knowledge of minuteia and detail of baseball probably even surpasses some of the most ardent fans.

I think the best example I can give is language. A child raised to speak a language will speak that language naturally and fluently and without any thought to the language itself when communicating with others. But a person who learns that language later in life, as an adult, can get very good at spealing that language, but it will never be as intuitive and natural as the person who learned it growing up.

Anyway, I hope that makes it clearer. I look forward to seeing the new screenshots.

CR

[Crapshoot]

That's great, Markus. I am looking forward to seeing them.

I guess I should say this about your knowledge of baseball. I don't think any of us are questioning your research, or knowledge of the game now, both as a spectator from afar and as a coach/player on a field. I was just pointing out that there is an advantage for people who grew up with the game, like kcchief and I did. Most of the guys here (in the States anyway) probably played Little League and have been following baseball as long as they remember. When you're a kid, things just seem to sink in so much easier, and that stuff just takes root in you permanently. That was the kind of intuition about thew game I was talking about before.

I have no doubt that in the course of the OOTP series' development, you have learned a lot about baseball, and in many ways, your knowledge of minuteia and detail of baseball probably even surpasses some of the most ardent fans.

I think the best example I can give is language. A child raised to speak a language will speak that language naturally and fluently and without any thought to the language itself when communicating with others. But a person who learns that language later in life, as an adult, can get very good at spealing that language, but it will never be as intuitive and natural as the person who learned it growing up.

Anyway, I hope that makes it clearer. I look forward to seeing the new screenshots.

CR

With all due respect CR, (and this may just me be taking it personally because I've heard similar things before ), I find that to be a fairly condescending attitude about other baseball fans. The intuition about the game is learnt/acquired in many ways at many different ages- and I think if anything, you're more likely to understand the game better as an adult, than as a child, because you can better appreciate the complexity and simplicity.

[Danny]

I'm 100% with Aadik on this one. I'm a regular reader at the OOTP forums and Aadik is more intune with the intuition of the game than 99.9% of the Americans I have met who "grew" up with it.

Well, except for his unhealhty obsession with Barry Bonds :)

[Chief Rum]

You're free to disagree, although it wasn't my intent to be condescending. That's just my impression. Just like I said before, I think there are a lot of things that haven't gotten into OOTP yet or that took a few versions that a baseball-born-and-raised guy would have made sure to incude from the beginning.

I think Markus has done a wonderful job catching up (as it were) in that respect and his games are, as mentioned, the most fun in simulation baseball. But it's still a work in progress, and there are still things about OOTP that I think could and should have been changed or looked at long ago (and maybe even initially).

As for the condescension in an opinion about one who learns the games as a child to one as an adult, you might not be fully grasping what one learns as a child. As a child, the lessons take root far further than they do as an adult, when one's mind is not so malleable. And you are making the mistake in thinking the guy who learns about baseball as a child then stops learning. Wrong. His knowledge and intuition of the game would grow and floruish as his mind becomes more capable of appreciating the finer details of the game.

I dojn't think it's much of a stretch to suggest that someone learning the game in such a mannver and over the span of decades and an entire life would have an advantage over someone just picking it up as an adult ten years ago.

CR

[Buccaneer]

Chief, I also have to disagree. I have been following baseball since well before you were born but what I have experienced among all baseball fans is the different levels of "intuition". Much like any history or current events, we get out of it what we enjoy. For some, it's the players and their stats and events. For others, it's more of team-oriented. Some can quote a certain inning, pitch for pitch, from 30 years ago while others (like myself) can tell you the 1969 standings. Some can quote all the stats of one player while others can trace the advent of free agency and all of the big contracts that were signed. Some can memorize a book like "Knotty Problems in Baseball" and while others can delve into the Baseball Encyclopedia or Moneyball. I doubt you would any that can do all of the above. In other words, most of this can be learned or has to be learned because of selective memories.

The advantage of learning these things latter in life is that you can do it without the biases of a childhood. For example, growing up I did not know anything about baseball in the decades of the 1900s and 1910s (how could I?). Now I do and I can add that to my personal selective knowledge of baseball in the 1970s.

[Alan T]

This intrigues me because I believe the exact opposite.

My experience has been that the best way to build a team in OOTP is to simply compile the best team of players, which correlates into compiling the players with the best ratings. I have found little, if any, benefit to employing strategy in the game, if for other reason than strategy options are quite limited. For example, the lack of pitch-by-pitch mode immediately eliminates most in-game strategy. Even "big-picture" strategy is limited in that in that you can set things like when the pitcher's get the hook, when players steal and whatnot, but that seems to have little bearing on the outcomes.

That being said, OOTP is currently the best baseball sim on the market. It does some things extremely well (multi-player). It has ambitious and innovative features that while fun are ultimately flawed (historical play). And as a single-player game, OOTP is not the best in the genre. It's come along way, but I'd be much more eager about OOTP6 if I knew that Markus was leaving MP alone and was working solely on the solo aspects.

I'd love to see a fresh take on the subject. Puresim always interested me, but my tryouts of the demo have been less than satisfying because it feels like its nothing more than OOTP with a much better stats engine -- it didn't seem to advance the strategy options much. Maybe the final version will.

I'd also like to see Jim's take on baseball. I have to side with Chief Rum on this one. I think OOTP may have advanced in some aspects as far as it can given Markus' relationship with baseball. I think this is true of any sport, but maybe more so with baseball. I have 30 years of experience watching and playing baseball since I first developed motor skills and I'm still learning about the game. There is always more to learn. Granted, Markus will continue to learn more, but research will only take you so far. There is an innate quality to baseball that only comes from growing up with the game.


I disagree.. I think there is alot of strategy in OOTP that gets hidden by people looking just at the ratings... My bigges complaint is the strategies are not necessarily realistic or resembling real life. So the secret to OOTP is to figure out where those differ.

[John Galt]

Chief, I'm also skeptical of your belief in the 1 true path to baseball enlightenment. A great many people follow that path and are still utterly clueless about the game and its mechanics. Others come to it later in life (as the love of other sports fade) and gain an appreciation and knowledge that surpasses the 1 true path. I've often felt that Markus has missed the boat on a few important baseball issues, but I don't think it is because he didn't follow the normal course of things - I think it is because people have different views about how the game works (see Jason Stark v. Baseball Prospectus v. local beat writer v. Dusty Baker). And I think Markus's perspective is growing (just as everyone's does) and I think OOTP will be better for it.

And as an aside, I think the 1 true path has been part of the problem with OOTP so far as lots of the fanboys have pushed Markus to work on things that really didn't add to the game because they thought they understood how baseball worked. Maybe, I'm wrong, but I think the debate about baseball and its foundations is a lot better on the OOTP boards than it used to be.

[kcchief19]

I disagree.. I think there is alot of strategy in OOTP that gets hidden by people looking just at the ratings... My bigges complaint is the strategies are not necessarily realistic or resembling real life. So the secret to OOTP is to figure out where those differ.I will say this -- I enjoyed taking over an awful team in a MP league much more so than playing OOTP in SP because it was too easy to build a team that would win 110 games without house rules of some sort. And while I agree that there is more to OOTP than ratings, there's not much more. The information is there if you look hard enough.

I don't think Rum or I are saying there is "one true path to baseball enlightenment" -- whatever the hell that means. What I think he's saying, and I agree with, is that growing up with a sport gives you a certain perspective and understanding, an "intuition" that is difficult if not impossible to development if you "come to it later in life." And I don't think that's true with just baseball -- I think it's true of a lot of things, both in and out of sports. I could study French every hour of every day, yet if I went to Paris certain subleties would be lost on me because it isn't second nature.

CR is completely right when he says there were and are things in OOTP that aren't quite right and I think he's 100 percent right when he says those are things that would probably be different if Markus had grown up with the game.

This isn't a knock against Markus. In fact, I think he's done a remarkable job. And I don't think debating he's knowledge or understanding of baseball will improve OOTP. What will improve OOTP is Markus continuing to get a better understanding of the game and listening to other people who have a better understanding.

[Chief Rum]

Thank you, kcchief. He said that much better than I did.

It's not that knowledge can't be gained at the conscious level that rivals similar knoledge gained at other times. Ten years learning the game as a child can be the equivalent to learning the game between the ages of 40-50. I'm just saying I believe there's another, subconscious level at which the game is understood and appreciated that is difficult to tap unless you are doing it with the impressionable mind of a child.

And that subconscious intuition can have an effect on your innate understanding of the game and what makes it tick.

CR

[John Galt]

And I still say "crap" (pardon my French). A ton of people play the game, watch tons of games, even play the game professionally, and their "intuition" makes them believe in nonsense things like clutch hitters (to use an easy example). On the other hand, I've known many people who never played a game, only followed baseball a little bit during childhood, but have a vast and incredible understanding of baseball. Yes, childhoood experience can be valuable, but it can also mislead. The fact that Markus doesn't have it is really irrelevant in my mind - he has learned a lot and will learn more - the romanticization of childhood and even professional experience is why we have dumbasses like Rob Dibble explaining how the game "really works" when he is out of it on more things than not.

[Chief Rum]

Crap to your opinion, too. :)

But, hey, it's just opinion. And a lot of evidence in OOTP's design. But I digress... ;)

CR

[John Galt]

Crap to your opinion, too. :)

But, hey, it's just opinion. And a lot of evidence in OOTP's design. But I digress... ;)

CR

I won't disagree about the problems in OOTP's design - I've been a vocal critic of many things in the game - I just think it is too easy to blame Markus's background. I would gladly take the Markus game (even though I've yet to really enjoy a version) over the Rob Dibble as programmer one. ;)

[Danny]

Very well said JG

[JonInMiddleGA]

Thank you, kcchief. He said that much better than I did.

Actually, I thought you both were doing a pretty good job of saying what you were saying, regardless of how many people are willing to listen & grasp what you're getting at.

As I've mentioned several times myself -- what's missing (among other things) from OOTP is it "feeling like baseball". And unless you know internally, instinctively, in your heart & soul, with the very core of your being, what baseball "feels like", I don't believe you'll ever be able to duplicate it. And AFAIC, picking up baseball beyond childhood is a handicap to that internal / subconscious understanding that is extremely unlikely to be overcome.

Same as me being highly unlikely to ever have a similar understanding of soccer, no matter how much I watch or study or whatever.

I could "know soccer" but soccer will never be "a part of me", not the way it is for those who grow up with it. And I imagine there are folks from cold climates who could make the same case for hockey as well.

[Young Drachma]

I think the debate here that has raged hinges on something pretty simple.

No game can be all things for all people. Markus has done a great job putting together something that has kept the attention of a lot of us. But yes, I agree too that there has been this stall in the development of text-sim baseball games because of the proliferation of "Madden-Like" graphics baseball games that were all the rage.

I think its taken game developers forever to recognize that after awhile it gets old just bashing homers over the fence or trading all your favorite players to a team to win the World Series. People want something more, they want to develop franchises and play them.

I like OOTP a lot. Before it, I played Mogul and before that...I used to do a lot of what I do in dynasty reports by hand. So, I'm appreciative that there is something out there. If I could design games, I have no doubt that I could add a lot to to the game because I grew up as a baseball stathead junkie and I've never really lost that. I've learned more about the game, but I think the major point being made here by the Chiefs, is that with that background it would make it a lot easier to include those things, rather than working backwards to add things.

I think this horse has been sufficently beat, but I wanted to say that I don't think the position that his background has hindered development is off-base or an unfair assessment. I think we have all agreed the game is good and gives a lot of us plenty of hours of gaming pleasure (that sounds weird...) but its just to say that there is room for improvement and that it would be nice if there was an alternative so we had a choice.

At least, that's what I'm saying.

[bhlloy]

I'd disagree very strongly that you need to grow up with something to really understand it... being from the UK I never grew up with football but I picked it up at about at about the age of 15 watching and 18 playing and now I'm certain I know more about the game than 95% of Americans.

On the flip side I've played soccer since I was 4 and I would never claim that I have a built in "intuition" - maybe I understand what it's like to play on a wet and windy Saturday morning or in a Sunday pub league but what relevance does that have to the Premiership or the tactics of the English national team - absolutely squat. Anybody who watches a lot of games probably knows more about soccer right now than I do because I lost interest quite a while ago.

I can't believe that you really understand baseball strategy or the nuances of the game more because you played it in high school or you "grew up with it" -surely if you understood baseball strategy that well at that age there would be a lot more 23 year old coaches. I'd say it's something that comes with experience, and it certainly sounds like Markus isn't lacking in that department.

[Young Drachma]

I don't think its an issue of strategy. It's more about "intangibles" That doesn't mean that someone can't/doesn't/won't learn them. It just means that it might come naturally to someone who spent hours as a kid doing "fantasy baseball" teams creating players, stats and writing reports for a group of friends by hand, simply for the "love of the game."

I think that's an intrinsic sort of love that you can't "create" or "learn". It just happens. The love affair can also happen as an adult, so that's not what I'm saying. I just think that while that legacy/history could be a hinderance, it could also allow things to flourish.

just .05

[The_herd]

In a fantasy league of mine, I play with 4 Germans that lived in the area where I worked. When I met them they weren't very big baseball fans, but they loved football (our football) from both the statistical standpoint and watching the games. I mentioned how great the statistical aspect of baseball is, and they jumped at the chance of joining our league. That was 4 seasons ago. Thus far, a German has won 2 of the 4 league championships. While that is just the statistical side, these guys have taken to the game so pasionately, reading everything they can about the sport, checking every boxscore, watching every game on television that they can, that I would have a hard time believing that these guys know less about the sport than a casual fan right now. That's with only 4 years of interest in the sport.

What I'm trying to get at, I guess, is that if you care enough about a sport to have what many would consider an obsession in the statistical aspect, then everything else will come around eventually. It may take time, but I think its arrogance to say that if we grew up with the game, then we automatically know more about the game, and always will know more about the game than an outsider. If you dedicate your time, and immerse yourself with anything to do with the game, then I can't see why someone can't have the same knowledge a native fan would have.

[JonInMiddleGA]

... then I can't see why someone can't have the same knowledge a native fan would have.
I believe what's happening in part here is that it isn't "knowledge" that's being discussed here entirely, it's the "understanding" aspect that seems to be a focus. And not just "intellectual" understanding, but rather "inherent" or "instinctive" understanding.

It can be quite a subtle thing but I believe it's legitimate difference.

[The_herd]

I believe what's happening in part here is that it isn't "knowledge" that's being discussed here entirely, it's the "understanding" aspect that seems to be a focus. And not just "intellectual" understanding, but rather "inherent" or "instinctive" understanding.

It can be quite a subtle thing but I believe it's legitimate difference.

I'm with Galt on this one, it sounds too much like a "Clutch Hitting" or "Poise" sort of thing. I can't see how my insticts from playing little league baseball are going to help me develop a baseball game. None of here have played pro baseball, so we don't necessarily have an inherent or instictive understanding of that game.

I think what it comes down to here is as Markus' knowledge of baseball has grown, he's added things to the game. Instead of tearing apart the entire engine and starting over from the ground up, he's kept the core engine intact for the most part. Were he starting now, I'm sure things would be different, he's probably learned a lot about baseball since the 1st OOTP game. But I have a hard time knocking his inherent understanding of baseball at this stage.

[JonInMiddleGA]

... so we don't necessarily have an inherent or instictive understanding of that game.
Sigh.

But for some reason, some of us have an understanding that at least allows us to recognize when things like:

- stealing bases
- hit-and-run plays
- the use of 5th starters
- bullpen mgmt
- pitcher roles
- roster mgmt
- player usage (i.e. in-game decision-making concernings subs, etc)
- and other facets of the game that aren't quite perfectly statistically quantifiable but are nonetheless reasonable obvious within certain norms to "baseball people"

still (at least as of my last playing of OOTP5) remain essentially FUBAR.

Now, if you want to say that's true because "he's kept the core engine intact for the most part" then fine. But it doesn't take away from how & why those things were mishandled in the first place.

And each of the items could pretty much be described as a "nuance".
Not something detailed in the written rulebook nor illustrated particularly well by 1000's of statistics, but still a very important part of the (real) game of baseball.

Sigh again.

I think I'm pretty much done on this subject. It appears to be just another one of those things that people either "get" or "don't get".

For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who don't, no explanation will suffice.

{take 5 bonus points for yourself if you recognize the origin of the quote I've borrowed & slightly paraphrased at the end}

[Buccaneer]

Jon: Real life baseball is one thing but programming these is entirely different. Even FOF can't get some of these right, even after 5 versions (because it is difficult to program an AI). Think you can do better instead of condensending those that "don't get it" in your mind?

[Chief Rum]

I love how when one man is simply expressing his opinion, that another feels it is all right to discount it because he feels it is "condescending." This has happened twice now in this thread. What say we leave off the ad hominems and personal stuff and just argue on the basis of the arguments themselves, hmm?

If we limited ourselves to only discussing what we truly know, then precious few of us would be allowed to talk about anything, and I daresay there wouldn't be a soul on either side of this discussion who would be truly qualified about talking about playing baseball professionally (none) or designing a bseball sim (Markus excepted).

Jon has the right to express his opinion, because that's how we do things around here, and Jon is a baseball fan, too, so he isn't completly without credibility, anymore than the other baseball fans in this discussion. So let's not just excuse his opinion in this manner and just attack the opinion on its merits and supporting evidence/arguments, rarther than the arguer himself.

Bucc, I believe this is the second time I have called you on this, although you are certainly not the worst transgressor of it on this forum.

CR

[Buccaneer]

CR: Read this again

It appears to be just another one of those things that people either "get" or "don't get".

For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who don't, no explanation will suffice.

Does that not sound condensending at all to you, even for an opinion? Sounds like he dismissing all of us who disagrees with him because we "don't get it" and then taking his toys and going home in a snit. Like SkyDog is apt to say: calling a spade a spade.

[Buccaneer]

just attack the opinion on its merits and supporting evidence/argumentsI did, that was the first part of my post you attacked. Maybe I should quote Jim G:

You cannot teach the computer common sense

[Chief Rum]

It doesn't matter if it's condescending, and his point is also relevant to what he is saying. His concept of "getting it" relates directly to the intuitive knowledge he is referring to.

It's a prefectly relevant stance to this discussion. The fact you find it condescending is irrelevant, and to attack as Jon as being condescending, rather than attacking his argument, moves this into a personal realm. It is on that basis I call you out.

CR

[Chief Rum]

I did, that was the first part of my post you attacked. Maybe I should quote Jim G:

The next time, stop writing your post after you make the first meritorious attack on Jon's arguemnt and leave out the "condescension" ad hominem.

I didn't say your post was without merit. I just noted you used part of it to dismiss Jon's opinion because of Jon himself.

CR

[Axxon]

It doesn't matter if it's condescending, and his point is also relevant to what he is saying. His concept of "getting it" relates directly to the intuitive knowledge he is referring to.

It's a prefectly relevant stance to this discussion. The fact you find it condescending is irrelevant, and to attack as Jon as being condescending, rather than attacking his argument, moves this into a personal realm. It is on that basis I call you out.

CR

I call you out in the name of my father, Domingo Montoya. Prepare to die.

[Buccaneer]

But Matt, understanding these things from real life is different than trying to program these perfectly in a computer game, esp in a game of baseball where so many variables have to be accounted for. You hold up CM and FOF as models and I know Marc and Jim would be the first to say that their sims are far from perfect. That's what I don't think Jon fully appreciates. You know I have my criticisms of OOTP but the point of this thread was if not growing up with baseball had something to do with the limitations of OOTP. I disagreed and still do because it doesn't matter. I'm willing to bet that a long lifetime baseball fan who is also a programmer would still not get all of these right - because no one else have ever done so at this point!

[samifan24]

I call you out in the name of my father, Domingo Montoya. Prepare to die.

Classic movie.

[Chief Rum]

But Matt, understanding these things from real life is different than trying to program these perfectly in a computer game, esp in a game of baseball where so many variables have to be accounted for. You hold up CM and FOF as models and I know Marc and Jim would be the first to say that their sims are far from perfect. That's what I don't think Jon fully appreciates. You know I have my criticisms of OOTP but the point of this thread was if not growing up with baseball had something to do with the limitations of OOTP. I disagreed and still do because it doesn't matter. I'm willing to bet that a long lifetime baseball fan who is also a programmer would still not get all of these right - because no one else have ever done so at this point!

Fair enough. I understand your point of view, although I never said (nor thought) that CM and FOF were representative of the correct way of doing things as opposed to Markus (that might have been another's argument). My argument on those titles as it relates to here is that I believe the fact Jim grew up loving football and Marc football ( ;) ) aided in the development of those games, at least relative to what would have been accomplished by non-native developers of sims in those sports.

My main stance in the past few posts was just pointing out the need to attack Jon's arguments via his support logic and evidentiary backing as opposed to labeling Jon's opinion as condescending. I'm happy to see we can ignore that and move on to the relevant issues you have addressed above (if you don't mind my saying so).

How much a programmer gets "right" about a sim, of course, has a lot to do with other factors as well, such as the advances of computers at the time he is developing (and their ability to handle the needed programming for the "ideal" sim), as well as the programing talents of that developer.

Perhaps it is unfair to call out Markus on this basis, given the possibility for other causes to the problems we are seeing in some aspects and designs of OOTP. That said, though, it is perfectly within the realm of reason to suggest that his approach to designing the game was affected by his knowledge of the game, subconscious or overt. It is also notable that much of the basics of the OOTP design have remained in place through multiple versions, meaning that some of the issues we might see in earlier versions have been carried over, even while Markus's own personal knowledge of the may have imporved significantly.

It's one reason to look forward to OOTP6, IMO, because my understanding is Markus has completely redesigned the game engine and other aspects of the game in probably the single biggest redesign sine the series started. And that should no doubt benefit from his continued exposure to baseball (as well as the lessons learned along the way programming the other versions).

Still, you know how it works. Until we see it, it's all theoretical, and we're left to talk about the ups and downs of the current game. And those are the issues upon which some of us are saying may have resulted from an intial lack of that intuitive knowledge of baseball that is present in native followers of the game. Obviously, you disagree and that's fine, but that doesn't mean it's an invalid argument to make, condescending or not.

CR

[JimboJ]

Hold on a minute here folks. When did baseball all of a sudden become some sort of rocket science or brain surgery that takes years of study to master?

When people start talking about intuition and feel for the game, I think they forget that we are talking about a computer simulation of the sport. These things are human feelings and emotions, that no matter how hard we try, will never be simulated on a computer. Yes, some people with more baseball experience than Markus may be able to judge the type of pitch by the rotation of the ball in the split second it takes to get from the pitcher to the plate. And some of us may be able to look a tired pitcher in the eyes and tell that he is done for the day. And some of us may be able to look at a batter's stance and guess that he's looking for a fastball, so therefore we're going to throw him an offspeed pitch. And some of us may be able to look at a baserunner and tell that he's going to steal on the next pitch. But how does any of this apply to a computer simulation?

If that's the kind of realism you're looking for, then get the hell off the computer, and go outside, lace up the cleats, and pick up a bat.

[oykib]

I think this Markus is German so he doens't "feel" baseball stuff is nonsense. I am unsatisfied with OOTP (although I've bought 2, 3, and 5). But it's from things that have nothing to do with intuitive feel or little things.

OOTP misses because of big things. The financials don't work solidly with the AI. The statistical correlations don't match up with baseball as we know it. Some of us don't care for the interface. There don't seem to be clear success cycles for AI teams and so trading, drafting, and free agency don't work right.

None of these things have to do with intuitive feel.

Perhaps the fifth starter issue does. But that's not my biggest complaint.

My biggest complaints are all programming, mathematical, and game design issues.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Sounds like he dismissing all of us who disagrees with him because we "don't get it" and then taking his toys and going home in a snit.
Actually, my intention was more to dismiss any real purpose to me trying to explain what I'm getting at in a different way.

BTW, the quote I "borrowed" is usually attributed to second-generation pro wrestler Jeff Jarrett, as he commented on trying to explain the appeal of that business to a fan. I believe the actual quote was, IIRC, "for those who understand no explanation is needed, for those who don't, no explanation will do."

And that's how I'm feeling about this subject -- if you see what I'm getting at then there's no need to explain it. If you don't see the things I'm talking about, then I don't believe any amount of further explanation will "make" you see them.

Honestly though, it isn't meant to give anybody an inferiority complex, it's just a way to express my resignation to the disparity of viewpoints being so great that they're irreconcilable IMO.

Jon

[Markus Heinsohn]

But Matt, understanding these things from real life is different than trying to program these perfectly in a computer game, esp in a game of baseball where so many variables have to be accounted for. You hold up CM and FOF as models and I know Marc and Jim would be the first to say that their sims are far from perfect. That's what I don't think Jon fully appreciates. You know I have my criticisms of OOTP but the point of this thread was if not growing up with baseball had something to do with the limitations of OOTP. I disagreed and still do because it doesn't matter. I'm willing to bet that a long lifetime baseball fan who is also a programmer would still not get all of these right - because no one else have ever done so at this point!

The problem with programming is that you have to abstract, and then put things into a language that the computer understands (programming language). Baseball in real life is very very complex, even when it comes to rather basic things like bullpen management / pitching changes. There are so many variables, and a human being has the huge advantage that it may use logic and experience, where the computer AI only has it's logic that is statically coded. I could code a pinch-hitting AI with 5000 lines, and still find situations when it acted not the way a human manager would have acted.

I too play OOTP, and when I see the AI making strange moves, I immediately jump into the code and check why this has happened. Many times, it is very complex and fixing it would create a 'rat tail' (like we Germans say), meaning that elsewhere things would be influenced and possibly broken.

The real art of programming an AI that is needed for sports sims is to perfectly abstract and cover as many variations as possible.

I once had a little discussion with Marc Vaughan about AI coding, and we both agreed that most of the time you simply first think processes like a human, and then put it into programming language, which a lot of the time is basic 'if...then'... :)

[Buccaneer]

human being has the huge advantage that it may use logic and experience, where the computer AI only has it's logic that is statically coded.
That is a much simpler and better way of saying what I was getting at. This goes along with Jim's quote: "You cannot teach the computer common sense."

So the solution becomes you do the best you can and make the right degree of abstractness and compromises. For those that want much more of a hardcore simulation, there's always DMB.

[FBPro]

That is a much simpler and better way of saying what I was getting at. This goes along with Jim's quote: "You cannot teach the computer common sense."

So the solution becomes you do the best you can and make the right degree of abstractness and compromises. For those that want much more of a hardcore simulation, there's always DMB.

All that DMB deals with is "basically" reproducing stats, which it does fairly well but my guess is that it's nowhere near as tough to do that as it is to add in the player development, yada, yada, yada............

[Bubba Wheels]

How does DMB stack up against Strat-o-matic for computers?

[FBPro]

I've played more DMB than SOM and as far as I can tell there's not much. SOM goes into a bit more detail as far as having team specific pbp and stadium backdrops(all at an additional cost to you). DMB is more customizable whereas SOM limits your ability to edit or adjust or even create players, you can do all of the above to your hearts content in DMB. I think that the costs are fairly close and so are the results, the only real difference I've seen is that w/ SOM tech support is kinda limited and when you do get ahold of them I felt as though I was bothering them and that helping me was a chore(again this is just what I sensed). Also as a side note if you purchase any SOM products "used or second-hand" forget ANY customer service or tech support assistance.

One last thing, unless they have changed things in the past year or two with SOM you get the "wonderfully refreshing" 1970's disk copy protection to muddle through.

Take it for what it's worth......

[Lucky Jim]

All I'd have to add to some of this discussion though is that Markus does try to appease the "intuitive" types with the way he approaches the sim. Ratings like "clutch" from previous OOTP's and the "poise" rating that is being talked about for OOTP6 are inherently of the intuitive school of thought. These are non-statistical ratings and concepts that Markus has tried to work into the simulation to address the people that "know" these things to be a part of baseball.

I don't take issue with much of what Markus has done with OOTP and it is a great, and undoubtedly the best as far as baseball, sim on the market. I enjoy it for the most part, but find certain things frustrating. Most of these things involve an uncertainty with the way that some of these "intuitive" ideas are reverse engineered. Things like clutch and poise existing in the game make me uncomfortable precisely because they are impossible to quantify in real life, and impossible not to quantify in a computer program. I think that a lot of trouble comes from Markus trying to re-create the feel aspects of baseball that people make claim of without fully understanding the fragility of their realities. Markus's primary focus should be a sim that puts out consistently accurate statistics (which I think OOTP does a decent job of) and not attempting to incorporate the metaphysical crap. If "clutch" and "poise" appear in the game they should be things that come up on occasion in the scouting report description, and preferrably only for tenured veterans. Consistency should be the same way. Looking at an 18 yr old prospect with the information that he is a great clutch player and very consistent is pretty ridiculous.

I guess what I am saying is: Markus, you make a great sim. Focus on player development and GM options, and not the uncertain nuances of baseball that can't be modelled. I think the "gap power" idea is of the same vein as these other nuances. I was a player with "gap power" in college. I had gap power because I did not have homerun power. I was a linedrive hitter, not a singles or slap hitter, but a linedrive hitter. I took outside pitches the other way and tried to drive inner-half and hanging off-speed stuff over the shortstop's head. Sometimes I would hit homeruns because balls would carry, but I did not try to lift balls like a true power hitter does. The point is I didn't hit a lot of doubles because I had a "gap power." I had plate discipline and bat control enough, along with speed, to be that style of hitter. Plenty of true power hitters hit boatloads of doubles, especially if they use all fields, simply because they hit the ball hard most of the time, and not because they have any higher "tendency to hit the ball in the gaps." I think what the rating points to is that there are different styles of hitters, not that there are different skill sets. I think contact, power, eye/discipline, are about right. You do different things with what you have, if I'd had another thirty pounds I would've been a different hitter, regardless of my innate gap finding ability.

I think I got way off on a rant, it happens. I don't know where I stand on the whole Markus doesn't know baseball thing, but I think he should stay away from the sorts of ideas that imply knowledge of the shadow arts of the game. Even if he was Ted Williams I'd reccomend that. They add little to the game except frustration and uneasiness as to how much they should be valued.

[hukarez]

Wow. This thread has evolved into quite a debate of sorts. All I can ask is...

...Will 1B Defense actually matter this time around? :D

[Markus Heinsohn]

Well, by the way, I put Clutch in there because some buddies wanted it ;) Between us, it really has a tiny effect (very very very tiny).

This pise stuff was thrown over board a while back, and it was probably not the right word for what I wanted to do. But this is history, poise is not part of OOTP 6.

[Crapshoot]

Thank you, kcchief. He said that much better than I did.

It's not that knowledge can't be gained at the conscious level that rivals similar knoledge gained at other times. Ten years learning the game as a child can be the equivalent to learning the game between the ages of 40-50. I'm just saying I believe there's another, subconscious level at which the game is understood and appreciated that is difficult to tap unless you are doing it with the impressionable mind of a child.

And that subconscious intuition can have an effect on your innate understanding of the game and what makes it tick.

CR

For what its worth, I believe I pointed out my disagreement with you quite politely. Secondly, I still no logic to your arguement beyond the "I have an intuition about it"- it sounds suspiciously like someone saying this veteran "knows how to win". If I were to extend the analogy, I think it might even take more, (initially at least) to become a baseball fan when a person has less access to it during the start of their love affair. And Im curious- what is this subconscious level- what is the understanding and the appreciation you're suggesting I and others here who didn't grow up with it lack ? Do we know less baseball than you ? I doubt that. Do we like it less ? I doubt that as well- the 2002 world series ranks up there as one of the most miserable moments in my life- I don't know if you can say that about any baseball event. Do we not get the nuances ? How can that be said as a general statement ?

In short, I still find nothing in your original arguement that seems to be logical - its almost as if you're trying to point out that I (and the others who have chimed in) am not a "real" baseball fan in the way you are- and that is condescending.

[Chief Rum]

For what its worth, I believe I pointed out my disagreement with you quite politely. Secondly, I still no logic to your arguement beyond the "I have an intuition about it"- it sounds suspiciously like someone saying this veteran "knows how to win". If I were to extend the analogy, I think it might even take more, (initially at least) to become a baseball fan when a person has less access to it during the start of their love affair. And Im curious- what is this subconscious level- what is the understanding and the appreciation you're suggesting I and others here who didn't grow up with it lack ? Do we know less baseball than you ? I doubt that. Do we like it less ? I doubt that as well- the 2002 world series ranks up there as one of the most miserable moments in my life- I don't know if you can say that about any baseball event. Do we not get the nuances ? How can that be said as a general statement ?

In short, I still find nothing in your original arguement that seems to be logical - its almost as if you're trying to point out that I (and the others who have chimed in) am not a "real" baseball fan in the way you are- and that is condescending.

Bro, why can't you figure this out? It ain't about you.

Here's what I am saying. Children who are raised loving a sport might naturally develop an intuitive, subconscious sense about the game that is difficult for those who come to the game later in life to develop. It's like language or computers. Haven't you ever seen older people who struggle with seemingly the simplest things on computers? And, yet, high school kids get hired by massive computer companies to six digit salaries because they have grown up with computers and taught themselves so much about computers that they know it like the back of their hand.

I think it's entirely reasonable to suggest that learning is easier in the mind of a child than it is int he rigidity of an adult's mind. This is why it can be more diffidult for an adult to develop this intuition we are talking about in a sport. I'm not sayign an adult can't or doesn't develop that--but it's a lot more difficult.

If you're reading condescension or personal insult in all this, you need to lighten up, Francis. This is a simple observation of one of life's little quirks. Obviously you disgaree. Fine, don't agree then. But don't tell me it's not logical when it does indeed happen on some level, and don't tell me I am insulting you when I could give a flying rat's ass about you, and never did one thought about you personalyl or anyone coming to a sport ever entered my head. Okay, now that's an insult.

I thought I was done with this thread. :rolleyes:

CR

[ISiddiqui]

Btw, have the first screenshots been posted yet? :D

[kcchief19]

Not to take this off topic, but John Galt and others have made a subtle reference to th world of "sabremetrics." While I find the theories of James and his disciples like Ira McCracken interesting, it drives me a litttle nutty when I see people takes these theories as gospel. I would dislike to see OOTP becoming a sabremetrics sim rather than a baseball sim.

I was glad to see Markus make a reference above about human managers benefitting from logic and experience, whereas the computer has only coded logic. What I see happen in OOTP at times (see Jon's list above for a good list), I see things my logic and experience tell me shouldn't happen. That tells me one of two things: (1) Markus doesn't have the same logic and experience that I have; or (2) Markus doesn't know how to code the game to make things happen logically. Since I think Markus is an excellent programmer, that leads me to favor (1), which is simply that Markus and I do not share the same logic and experience.

Much of my logic and experience comes from being involved in some way with baseball as a player or participant for 30 years. From a personal perspective, I feel that much of the understanding I have of the game comes from my earliest experiences, both good and bad. I have the same feelings about football and basket ball. I love golf, but I didn't start playing golf until I was almost 20. I feel some of my understanding of my golf game has been stunted by my late start. I'm never going to be Tiger Woods, but then again Tiger wouldn't have been Tiger Woods either if he hadn't picked up a golf club until he was 20.

Poor Markus has been dragged into the middle of a border war on this. I think his understanding of baseball overall is strong. But when I see OOTP do things that don't make sense, I assume that they make sense to him. And that maybe that while Markus knows the average on-base percent for a secondbasemen, maybe he doesn't know when to put on a hit-and-run, how to execute a proper double-switch or manage a bullpen.

While I didn't learn those things when I was 8, the groundwork for my future development took place then. Like me becoming a great golfer, once I miss the oppotunity, it was pretty much gone. So maybe that's why to some of us OOTP doesn't always "feel like baseball," as Jon very aptly put it. As for people coming to the game late in life, anecdotal evidence suggests that while the statistics and trends may come easy, which would help you if you're looking for stats and trends or you're a fantasy player, but it might not help you understand anything Whitey Herzog ever did.

If it "feels like baseball" to you, great. That doesn't men that you aren't a baseball fan, it just means that you have probably had different experiences than others of us have. I think the next big mountain for OOTP to overcome is to "feel like baseball" to the hard-care audience who has been waiting a lifetime for the elusive "perfect" baseball game.

I wish Markus the best of luck. Of anyone developing a baseball sim right now, he's demonstated he's our best hope. No pressure. :)

[Easy Mac]

You didn't grasp the double-switch when you were 8? You must have been an American League fan :)

[Chief Rum]

You didn't grasp the double-switch when you were 8? You must have been an American League fan :)

lol, I happen to be an American League fan, and I'm not sure I truly grasped the double switch until I was 11 or 12. :)

Even now, I have to think about it hard to make the logic sift out of a given situation, although once I work it out, it's perfectly obvious (reminds me of the logic behind whether to go for one point or two after a touchdown in football).

CR

[Danny]

Even now, I have to think about it hard to make the logic sift out of a given situation, although once I work it out, it's perfectly obvious (reminds me of the logic behind whether to go for one point or two after a touchdown in football).

CR

Wow, I would have thought your baseball intuition would have made this second nature.

[Chief Rum]

dola,

kcchief makes an excellent point there about coming late to a game. It doesn't have to be a native or foreign thing. It could be simply you didn't come to it until later, even when it was around you.

For example, I have lived in Southern California all of my life, and we have had a hockey team here that entire time. But I never got into hockey until I saw my first hockey game as a junior in high school, and then later when Anaheimw as awarded with the Ducks.

Now, I think I have made tremendous progress in learning all the facets of hockey. I have followed it deeply for years now. But I would never think I could come close to the intuitive knowledge of the sport that Cards4Ever or Maple Leafs or bbor or primelord would have. They have been into hockey all of their lives and they have a true intuitive feel to it that I don't believe I will ever really have.

That's just to show that this can happen to anyone. It's not supposed to be an us against them thing, as some people in this thread are trying to label the others as doing so.

CR

[Chief Rum]

Wow, I would have thought your baseball intuition would have made this second nature.

You also have to consider the intelligence of the person in question. ;)

CR

[Easy Mac]

Do you think you have to play a game to actually have a deep knowledge of it?

I've never played organized football, but I think I have a pretty deep knowledge of the game and playcalling, especially when compared to someone who has never played. I think I know the game just about as well as I know baseball and soccer, which I've played my whole life.

I think in the real world, it does help growing up around a sport. My dad has watched me play soccer since I was was like 4, and I understand the nuances of the game much better than he does because I've always been playing. We know about the same about baseball, but he has more history to pull from. But in video games, I dont't think understanding the nuances are as important as they may seem. It helps some, but there is only so much you can do with a game. In the end it is all statistics driven, no matter how much you attempt to make it something else.

However, I've just got to say that sabrematics are overrated. Sure they're fun to look at, but they just tell us everything we already knew. Its just written in a way that is more factual than feeling. I've never really gotten into OOTP all that much, but if it follows the sabre model, its not going to feel like a baseball sim to me anymore (not that it does now, its more like a person holding sim, with stats assigned at random).

[CentralMassHokie]

As for people coming to the game late in life, anecdotal evidence suggests that while the statistics and trends may come easy, which would help you if you're looking for stats and trends or you're a fantasy player, but it might not help you understand anything Whitey Herzog ever did.

I'm not going to get in the pissing war that usually results between people who think sabermetrics are good for (and explain a lot about) baseball and those who don't believe statistics can ever explain the nuances of baseball.

However, Whitey Herzog is pretty much revered by sabermetricians. He and Earl Weaver, while managing in very different ways, pretty much built teams around players getting on base and scoring runs. Herzog, with the Royals and Cardinals, generally valued speed and defense as well, as his teams played in cavernous stadiums on turf.

So, this is a case where understanding stats and trends would actually help you make sense of why Herzog made the moves he did.

Grady Little might have been a better example. Or even Joe Torre. Two managers who, when you break it down, really don't seem to bring (or have brought, in Little's case) much to the table other than clubhouse "chemistry".

[yabanci]

if it follows the sabre model, its not going to feel like a baseball sim to me anymore (not that it does now, its more like a person holding sim, with stats assigned at random).


what does "a person holding sim" mean?

[JonInMiddleGA]

what does "a person holding sim" mean?
Oh good, I'm not the only one who was very curious about this phrase.

[Easy Mac]

You pick a name that doesn't really mean anything, but stats seem to randomly be assigned to the player. You're just holding the player on your team, but you could pick almost any name and you could get similar results.

[CentralMassHokie]

However, I've just got to say that sabrematics are overrated. Sure they're fun to look at, but they just tell us everything we already knew. Its just written in a way that is more factual than feeling.

Ok, I said I wasn't going to get involved in a saber/non-saber war, but I just can't leave a comment like that hanging :)

Sabermetrics aren't purely about stating the past - they're really about looking at baseball from a scientific standpoint. A large portion of it is in breaking down a baseball win to it's components. And also figuring out how much each component of a win is worth. Or breaking down players to be able to compare them on a 1-to-1 or apples-to-apples basis.

The easiest way to do this is to look at the ARod-Jeter-Nomar triumverate. Pretty much since 2000, Jeter has lagged well behind the other two big time SS in defensive ability, and trailed both offensively as well. But because Jeter does well in the normal counting stats, has been on championship teams, and because defense is such a subjective thing for most people, there were (and still are) a whole batch of people who consider Jeter an elite SS.

He's not - and sabermetrics helped to identify that. Whether it's OPS or defensive runs above average, or zone rating, or whichever poision you choose, it's easy to point out to people that Jeter has degraded greatly at SS and likely has been passed by not only Nomar and ARod, but also Tejada and Renteria.

Now, that's not to say Jeter's a bad player. He's still a great player. But sabermetrics helps to identify that he's not as elite as many people think, and that he's not as valuable to his team when you consider his contract.

This is the stuff that makes sabermetrics fun to a lot of people, and valuable to teams. If OOTP can properly model the portions of baseball that are as close to "scientifically proven" as they can be (stuff like pythagorean record and what not), then OOTP players can more easily put themselves in the shoes of a small market GM.

Don't you think there would be joy in signing a cheap free agent like Bill Mueller, because you think his game fits your home park and your lineup, and watching him excel? Rather than simply trading for or signing Scott Rolen?

[Vince]

Don't you think there would be joy in signing a cheap free agent like Bill Mueller, because you think his game fits your home park and your lineup, and watching him excel? Rather than simply trading for or signing Scott Rolen?
I was so sad when he left the Giants :(

[CraigSca]

You pick a name that doesn't really mean anything, but stats seem to randomly be assigned to the player. You're just holding the player on your team, but you could pick almost any name and you could get similar results.

Are you saying that OOTP players don't seem to have the proper variance in skills? Or, are you saying "my team won 81 games last year and would do so whether my starting shortstop was on the team or had been replaced with someone else"?

-Craig

[CentralMassHokie]

Are you saying that OOTP players don't seem to have the proper variance in skills? Or, are you saying "my team won 81 games last year and would do so whether my starting shortstop was on the team or had been replaced with someone else"?

-Craig

My read on that was it's the same complaint a lot of us have had - there's very little variance in the type of players produced by the developmental algorithms in OOTP.

There are not a whole lot of players in the Tony Gwynn model, or the Matt Stairs model, etc.

Top that off with the gross overvaluation of IF/OF defense, and it becomes very simple to identify cheap players who'll be successful anywhere, but are undervalued by the AI, and overvalued by the game's mechanics.

Does that make sense? I almost never feel a sense of attachment to random players in OOTP the way I do in FOF.

In FOF, you find that RB who's been mediocre for somebody else's team because of their offense. You realize his valuable skills fit your offense to a T. You sign him, he becomes a superstar, and then two years later you have to decide whether he's worth the money. Jim's nailed that part of the game. Yes, it still does become a bit too easy to piece together good teams, but the small sample size of a football season (16 games + playoffs) means that you don't always win. Look at Quiksand's Browns dynasty for a great example. You develop an attachment to players based on how you get them (moving up in the draft, signing a FA, etc.) The mentor and cohesion aspects of the game add to that.

In OOTP, you draft someone who projects to be a stud. You overpay for the best coaches. He develops into a stud. You trade him for a younger player who looks just like him when he becomes too expensive. Rinse, repeat. Top that off with the grossly out of place "down" seasons where good players inexplicably become bad. Which isn't enjoyable in a game sense because there's never rhyme or reason to it. A good player with an established level of success degrades horribly without any explanation. I mentioned something like this in Radii's ITP dynasty report (http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/~fof/forums/showthread.php?t=19360):

Here's the two seasons:


2010 162 631 174 46 6 59 154 144 71 143 30 6 .276 .348 .648 .997 SLN,NL
2011 160 607 146 42 4 40 123 105 77 137 31 8 .241 .326 .521 .847 SLN


And here's my response:

You drop to a .241 batting average, nearly 30 points off of your career average - yet it's nearly all from a loss of homers. Apparently the 19 homers you dropped from the previous season *all* became long flyouts - as your single, double, and triple numbers stayed pretty much static. Your walk numbers stay static. Your strikeout numbers stay static.

Literally, the difference between your two seasons was that 19 homers all turned into outs.

I mean, yes, I'm sure there are some players who have seasons like this. But how often do you see a healthy player fluctuate like that in MLB? Certainly not with the frequency as in OOTP

[Alan T]

I still long for the Rule V draft, 40 man rosters, Waiver wires, waiver trading, compensational picks, etc... I also long for the engine to be a bit more realistic to real life baseball, so you don't have to learn a brand new game so to speak to find the secret to success.

With that said, I can't think of any game I have played more than OOTP over the last 5? years (however long its been)..


Ok After looking at the screenshots, I guess alot of this is being addressed.. Really was nice to hear :)

[JonInMiddleGA]

In FOF, you find that RB who's been mediocre for somebody else's team because of their offense. You realize his valuable skills fit your offense to a T. You sign him, he becomes a superstar, and then two years later you have to decide whether he's worth the money. Jim's nailed that part of the game.
Interesting observation.

Or at least it is to me, because I don't believe I've ever seen one player who fits what you describe in some, let's see, 60-70 FOF seasons between two primary careers.

And of all the positions you name, I've found RB to be the easiest one to simply "plug-and-play" a body into & get similar results, pretty much regardless of their abilities/ratings. If I've got the right o-line, it doesn't seem to matter very much who is carrying the ball, they'll get the yardage. If I don't have the right o-line, it doesn't matter who I put back there, they'll fairly well stink.

Not saying you're right or wrong, just thought it was interesting to see such a dramatically different opinion of this aspect of FOF.

[CentralMassHokie]

I've found RB to be the easiest one to simply "plug-and-play" a body into & get similar results, pretty much regardless of their abilities/ratings.

RB can definitely be a plug-and-play position if you've got a phenomenal O-Line (which seems to be the ticket to success in FOF, for the most part). I think a good example from a recent team I've had was that, because I've got a bunch of money tied up in a QB, I've had to build a running back by committee. I drafted a late round RB and wanted to pick up a mentor to work with him. I found a back who a few years ago had been a perennial 1000 yard rusher, but had deteriorated pretty badly to where he had just a few bars containing *any* red. During the preseason I noticed he was running pretty well. So, I gave him a shot splitting time. By game 3 or 4, I was giving him 20 carries a game. He rushed for 1200 yards for me behind a makeshift line that had been wrecked by injury. That was my first team to win a Super Bowl.

I've just defintely grown attached to players in FOF more than I ever have in OOTP purely because I feel like you can look for players to fit your system (RBs with high elusiveness, QBs who throw the short ball, LBs with no run stopping but high blitzing capabilities, etc.).

I don't find that to be the case in OOTP. Let's say I want to tinker with using a Jeremy Giambi/Matt Stairs/Mark Bellhorn type at leadoff. High OBP guy, little bit of power, but no speed. It rarely works in any meaningful way - speed has been grossly overvalued in OOTP (alongside defense). So I find myself migrating back to that "medicore OBP/high speed" guy to bat leadoff.

Or, I identify a perfect FA to fit in the middle of my lineup - a perennial 950 OPS guy with loads of power, good plate patience, etc. Except when he shows up on my team he turns into Jeremy Burnitz. Apparently park effects greatly affect plate patience. Must be the hitting background in my park.

I could be off my gourd, but that's the way I see it :)

All that being said, if what Craig and Markus have been saying about OOTP turns out to be true, I'll be the biggest fanboy around.

[CraigSca]

There are not a whole lot of players in the Tony Gwynn model, or the Matt Stairs model, etc.

Top that off with the gross overvaluation of IF/OF defense, and it becomes very simple to identify cheap players who'll be successful anywhere, but are undervalued by the AI, and overvalued by the game's mechanics.

In OOTP, you draft someone who projects to be a stud. You overpay for the best coaches. He develops into a stud. You trade him for a younger player who looks just like him when he becomes too expensive. Rinse, repeat. Top that off with the grossly out of place "down" seasons where good players inexplicably become bad. Which isn't enjoyable in a game sense because there's never rhyme or reason to it. A good player with an established level of success degrades horribly without any explanation. I mentioned something like this in Radii's ITP dynasty report (http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/~fof/forums/showthread.php?t=19360):

Here's the two seasons:


2010 162 631 174 46 6 59 154 144 71 143 30 6 .276 .348 .648 .997 SLN,NL
2011 160 607 146 42 4 40 123 105 77 137 31 8 .241 .326 .521 .847 SLN




Understood. I haven't had a chance to talk to Markus about how the game actually creates fictional players and how they are modeled. I know the way I came up with the process, but as Markus and I talk more and more, the similarities and differences the way we each went about things is scattered all over the board.

Regarding the stats you posted above -- I can't really speak to a single posting like this. If, however, this is the way players begin the downside of their career all the time (and not an anomaly), then I can see there being a problem.

Oh - one other thing you brought up - the overvaluation of defense has been negated a great deal while the AI will be taking defense into account more often when making his decisions. Both of these implementations are based on study and not conjecture.

-Craig

[CraigSca]

It rarely works in any meaningful way - speed has been grossly overvalued in OOTP (alongside defense). So I find myself migrating back to that "medicore OBP/high speed" guy to bat leadoff.

Or, I identify a perfect FA to fit in the middle of my lineup - a perennial 950 OPS guy with loads of power, good plate patience, etc. Except when he shows up on my team he turns into Jeremy Burnitz. Apparently park effects greatly affect plate patience. Must be the hitting background in my park.

I could be off my gourd, but that's the way I see it :)


When you say speed is grossly overvalued in OOTP - how do you mean? By the AI, or by the game engine itself?

Regarding your FA signing - I'm not sure how that relates to OOTP5. I know Markus has tried in the past to have a single rating determine hitter strikeouts and walks - something that has proven futile. So...in OOTP6 that's no longer the case. Thinking of OOTP5, was your park a poor-hitting park? If so, the player would suffer more outs, and since strikeouts were determined AFTER an out was made in the old version, yes - the player's strikeouts could be increased. This won't happen in V6 as the model has changed.

-Craig

[ISiddiqui]

Btw... any chance Win Shares can be added as a stat to OOTP6? ;)

[Huckleberry]

Growing up with and learning the sport at a young age is helpful in playing the game. It allows you to immediately recognize the difference between a fastball and a slider when it comes out of the pitcher's hand. It gives you the instinct to shift your body weight toward left field when you're playing CF and you recognize an off-speed pitch on the way to the plate to a RH batter on the inner half of the plate.

As far as the knowledge/"instincts" needed to manage a game, that can be learned at an older age, IMO. It's just like with the earlier golf analogy. I might be able to learn how to manage my golf game around a given course, but my instincts on how a shot will fly out of a certain lie or my instinctive ability to adjust my downswing after an almost imperceptible hitch in my backswing that's never happened before won't be there like it is for someone who grew up playing (I picked up golf for real at the age of 25 last year).

However, I do have to disagree with Aadik on one thing he said above:

Do we like it less ? I doubt that as well- the 2002 world series ranks up there as one of the most miserable moments in my life- I don't know if you can say that about any baseball event.

Be serious. I, along with millions of baseball fans who have loved the game since we were children, have multiple disappointments associated with the game that rank that high as "one of the most miserable moments of my life." Chief Rum was dead-on with one thing, and that's that the deep love for the game is different for someone that grew up with it. I have learned to appreciate soccer and even enjoy watching it and consider myself a fan after the past 6 years of following it. But to pretend that my attachment to that sport even compares to my attachment to baseball would be totally ridiculous. It's not a stretch to say that I would be a completely different person today if baseball had never existed. Not so for you, I'd imagine.

I'm glad when I hear that baseball has picked up fans, and arguments about who can be the "better" fan of a sport are fruitless. I just wanted to share my opinion that one's ability to understand the game from an analytical standpoint isn't adversely affected by a later start to my way of thinking.

[HornedFrog Purple]

Ah crud. I have been reading this thread and some in the OOTP forum and I am getting the fever again.

This will inevitably end up with me getting the MLB package on TV along with OOTP6 and coming up with more colorful metaphors for Tom Hicks, John Hart and Chan Ho Park.

[CentralMassHokie]

When you say speed is grossly overvalued in OOTP - how do you mean? By the AI, or by the game engine itself?

I personally think speed was overvalued by the engine myself, but honestly, that was just because I saw so many 60+ SB guys, and so few catchers good throwing catchers. OOTP baseball feels like mid-80s baseball crossed with late-90s baseball. So that's probably much less of an issue than a personal preference.


Regarding your FA signing - I'm not sure how that relates to OOTP5. I know Markus has tried in the past to have a single rating determine hitter strikeouts and walks - something that has proven futile. So...in OOTP6 that's no longer the case. Thinking of OOTP5, was your park a poor-hitting park? If so, the player would suffer more outs, and since strikeouts were determined AFTER an out was made in the old version, yes - the player's strikeouts could be increased. This won't happen in V6 as the model has changed.

-Craig

Eureka! I'm a moron. I've known everything you said in that block of text for a good long while, yet never bothered to put 2 and 2 together.

Wow. That makes a lot of sense now. And makes it even more evident that it was broken. Really really broken.

Thanks Craig!

[Ksyrup]

I personally think speed was overvalued by the engine myself, but honestly, that was just because I saw so many 60+ SB guys, and so few catchers good throwing catchers. OOTP baseball feels like mid-80s baseball crossed with late-90s baseball. So that's probably much less of an issue than a personal preference.
Really? My main gripe with OOTP5, which was fixed somewhat by the last couple of patches, was that there were not enough SBs. I rarely had anyone steal as many as 60 bases, and this was especially a problem when trying to recreate early-1900s baseball. Again, this was remedied somewhat by the patches, but early on, having a guy with speed was utterly useless, since he'd be lucky to get 30 SBs a year.

[Huckleberry]

Really? My main gripe with OOTP5, which was fixed somewhat by the last couple of patches, was that there were not enough SBs. I rarely had anyone steal as many as 60 bases, and this was especially a problem when trying to recreate early-1900s baseball. Again, this was remedied somewhat by the patches, but early on, having a guy with speed was utterly useless, since he'd be lucky to get 30 SBs a year.

Hmm. This was and is easily remedied for me by going into the Team Strategies menu and modifying the player-specific instructions for your fast guy. Joe Morgan stole 90 and 72 bases for me in two years with Houston in a league I just started that begins in 1968. My second place base-stealer had 4 and 3 SBs respectively in those seasons.

As an aside, I really like starting historical leagues the year before an expansion. That way you have enough players to get good numbers in the minors after a few years. I started in 1968 so the first draft would be based on players that debuted in 1969. So my first draft had 9 rounds plus 3 picks in it because of the expansion. From that point forward, 20 teams will divy up 24 teams worth of rookies each year.

[Crapshoot]

Not to take this off topic, but John Galt and others have made a subtle reference to th world of "sabremetrics." While I find the theories of James and his disciples like Ira McCracken interesting, it drives me a litttle nutty when I see people takes these theories as gospel. I would dislike to see OOTP becoming a sabremetrics sim rather than a baseball sim.

...



Poor Markus has been dragged into the middle of a border war on this. I think his understanding of baseball overall is strong. But when I see OOTP do things that don't make sense, I assume that they make sense to him. And that maybe that while Markus knows the average on-base percent for a secondbasemen, maybe he doesn't know when to put on a hit-and-run, how to execute a proper double-switch or manage a bullpen.

While I didn't learn those things when I was 8, the groundwork for my future development took place then. Like me becoming a great golfer, once I miss the oppotunity, it was pretty much gone. So maybe that's why to some of us OOTP doesn't always "feel like baseball," as Jon very aptly put it. As for people coming to the game late in life, anecdotal evidence suggests that while the statistics and trends may come easy, which would help you if you're looking for stats and trends or you're a fantasy player, but it might not help you understand anything Whitey Herzog ever did.

If it "feels like baseball" to you, great. That doesn't men that you aren't a baseball fan, it just means that you have probably had different experiences than others of us have. I think the next big mountain for OOTP to overcome is to "feel like baseball" to the hard-care audience who has been waiting a lifetime for the elusive "perfect" baseball game.

I wish Markus the best of luck. Of anyone developing a baseball sim right now, he's demonstated he's our best hope. No pressure. :)

Firstly- its Voros McCracken, who now works for the Sox. Secondly, IM not sure what you're trying to argue here- on the one hand , you're saying that experience and clutch and so make it "Feel like baseball"- yet if these things are intangibles, as implied, how would one code them ?. Fundementally, I think anyone who believes in a clutch hitter is letting their heart lead their brain, given the mountain of studies on that subject. On a similar note, there was a fairly extended discussion over at the OOTP boards about a "Catcher's ability to handle pitchers"- this is something people hold onto dearly, even when the last significant study by Woolner failed to find any real "Skill." In essence, I think some of what is percieved as real baseball isn't really- and I know it was strange for me the first time when someone told me that Will Clark wasn't a clutch hitter...

Continuing with sabremetrics. For some reason, people tend to have a negative reaction at the idea of numbers dismissing their intuitions- its true in baseball, its true in life. Have a look at the yearly run-expectancy table- bunting a runner over or twhatever usually reduces the run expectancy of an inning- the major justification for it is if you;re playing for one run, late in the game. Other than that, unless its the pitcher or Neifi "hacktastic" Perez, its not really a great idea. I don't ever want a gave developer to end up having to cripple his AI to reflect the bad decisions made by managers in real life- such as the undue fascination with LOOGY's, over and above a good right-handed pitcher, or the idea that strikeouts by a hitter are inherently a bad thing (they're not).

[Crapshoot]

However, I've just got to say that sabrematics are overrated. Sure they're fun to look at, but they just tell us everything we already knew. Its just written in a way that is more factual than feeling. I've never really gotten into OOTP all that much, but if it follows the sabre model, its not going to feel like a baseball sim to me anymore (not that it does now, its more like a person holding sim, with stats assigned at random).

Explain this to me. Do they really tell us everything we knew previously, or do they in fact challenge our perceptions ? Take for example the idea that your ace-reliever is best saved for a 9th inning, 3 run lead, instead of a 7th innning tie game- most baseball men would argue that, but sabremetrics tells us they're wrong. The idea of valuing OBP and RC because of its high correlation with runs scored- its a sabremetric thing. I don't understand the statement that its overrated- all I see iis that it answers questions and reveals answers that weren't always apparent. Its a text-based sim, like FOF- If I were to call FOF a giant spreadsheet, I'd be right, but its a spreadsheet that one has fun manipulating. Fundementally, baseball boils down to numbers, and Im not sure why you want to a game to not reflect that.

[Crapshoot]

Btw... any chance Win Shares can be added as a stat to OOTP6? ;)

It would be interesting - Im curious if it would be a copyright violation, or anything of the sort.

[Crapshoot]

Growing up with and learning the sport at a young age is helpful in playing the game. It allows you to immediately recognize the difference between a fastball and a slider when it comes out of the pitcher's hand. It gives you the instinct to shift your body weight toward left field when you're playing CF and you recognize an off-speed pitch on the way to the plate to a RH batter on the inner half of the plate.

As far as the knowledge/"instincts" needed to manage a game, that can be learned at an older age, IMO. It's just like with the earlier golf analogy. I might be able to learn how to manage my golf game around a given course, but my instincts on how a shot will fly out of a certain lie or my instinctive ability to adjust my downswing after an almost imperceptible hitch in my backswing that's never happened before won't be there like it is for someone who grew up playing (I picked up golf for real at the age of 25 last year).

However, I do have to disagree with Aadik on one thing he said above:



Be serious. I, along with millions of baseball fans who have loved the game since we were children, have multiple disappointments associated with the game that rank that high as "one of the most miserable moments of my life." Chief Rum was dead-on with one thing, and that's that the deep love for the game is different for someone that grew up with it. I have learned to appreciate soccer and even enjoy watching it and consider myself a fan after the past 6 years of following it. But to pretend that my attachment to that sport even compares to my attachment to baseball would be totally ridiculous. It's not a stretch to say that I would be a completely different person today if baseball had never existed. Not so for you, I'd imagine.



I beg to differ. you may disagree with me on the first point, and that's absolutely legitimate, but I don't agree that baseball hasn't affected my life significantly- there's a lot of time/energy/interest that I've directed towards it that I could spent doing somthing productive.. :D I have two great attachments in sports- baseball and cricket, with football(real football , not American football ) being a fair back way as the third. All of them have changed me in many, many ways.

[Ksyrup]

Hmm. This was and is easily remedied for me by going into the Team Strategies menu and modifying the player-specific instructions for your fast guy. Joe Morgan stole 90 and 72 bases for me in two years with Houston in a league I just started that begins in 1968. My second place base-stealer had 4 and 3 SBs respectively in those seasons.
Oh no, I'm not talking about individual settings. That shouldn't matter. I'm talking about setting up a league and letting it run. The fastest/best base stealers should get more than 40-50 a year during some of the old eras, and that never happened. Again, it improved by the time of the last couple of patches. But if I have to go in and manually alter each player, then it's broken.

I play at a macro level, and rarely if ever use the individual settings.

[JasonC23]

Oh no, I'm not talking about individual settings. That shouldn't matter. I'm talking about setting up a league and letting it run. The fastest/best base stealers should get more than 40-50 a year during some of the old eras, and that never happened. Again, it improved by the time of the last couple of patches. But if I have to go in and manually alter each player, then it's broken.

I play at a macro level, and rarely if ever use the individual settings.
I think this is what SkyDog was getting at (was it earlier in this thread or the "OOTP6 Screen Shots" thread, I forget). I love that OOTP6 will have all of these things in the game, and that we can customize them to our heart's content...but if we HAVE to customize things so they work, that sucks. As with Ksyrup, I don't mess with the individual settings because I'm afraid of breaking something, so I don't want to be forced to mess with them because something is already broken.

[Ben E Lou]

I think this is what SkyDog was getting at (was it earlier in this thread or the "OOTP6 Screen Shots" thread, I forget). I love that OOTP6 will have all of these things in the game, and that we can customize them to our heart's content...but if we HAVE to customize things so they work, that sucks. As with Ksyrup, I don't mess with the individual settings because I'm afraid of breaking something, so I don't want to be forced to mess with them because something is already broken.Ding, ding, ding!