Is there a hint of disappointment?

[rowech]

I'm wondering about this. I played the demo and there are some new features but the game just doesn't seem to have changed that much at all. I know it's a great game to begin with and you shouldn't tinker with it too much but isn't there some disappointment with this release and what was hoped for?

[Eaglesfan27]

Not one bit for me. So far, I'm happier with this release than any previous release.

SP immersion has been improved a great deal for me.

[Leonidas]

So far I I'm not dissappointed. I think because it's the same interface it has the feel of being the same game. Yes, it's similar, but it's much more indepth.

[Raiders Army]

The disappointment that I have is no change with the coaching (coaches don't "mentor" their coordinators helping them to become head coaches) and the fact that it's buggy. Other than that, I'm somewhat pleased. I'm sure Jim will iron out the bugs so it's still worthwhile.

[kcchief19]

None. My experience thus far, which definitely appears validated by some of the feedback I'm seeing from others, is that this is a significant improvement in the series. Again, much of the improvement is under the hood -- although there are significant improvements in the tools and reports of the game as well -- so the casual observer might not notice.

[MJ4H]

I'm not disappointed. This is the first FOF since the first version (not counting TCY which is what got me to FOFC) I've even been tempted to buy. After a good patching and the graphics are tweaked to my liking by the community I'm probably going to pull the trigger.

[Peregrine]

No disappointment here, I keep discovering small little things that went into this version, there are a ton of changes and all good.

[Swaggs]

I'm a little disappointed that it is not TCY2, because I felt the last release of FOF was outstanding and there was much more room for improvement with TCY. I still bought FOF2007 and I am sure that I will get into it when time allows, but so far I am not enthralled with it.

[Tekneek]

I will probably wait a few months before I buy it, but I am enjoying reading about it and looking at the screenshots. :)

[MizzouRah]

NO.

It's obvious Jim worked hard on this version and I'm quite happy. I'll really delve into the game once a first patch is out, but I'm estatic and it sounds like most everyone else is too. You can't please everyone no matter what game comes out.

[Young Drachma]

I'm not really interested in messing around with it too much based on what I've seen so far, but...maybe in a few months that'll change. We'll see. But I'm glad it's at least out and we finally have a new game to talk about in any case.

[Ben E Lou]

I think because it's the same interface it has the feel of being the same game. Yes, it's similar, but it's much more indepth.Agree 100%, on both counts. This is a significant upgrade, in a number of key areas.

[NoMyths]

No disappointment here. It's too early to make too much of a critical statement about it, but my early impressions are very favorable (bug issues aside, which I'm confident will be resolved).

[kingnebwsu]

Only disappointment is that it wasn't TCY 2, but hopefully that will be remedied with his next release :)

[Deattribution]

I know you can't do anything about it since that's all youre given, but the demo is absolutely worthless in terms of determining whether the game is worth purchasing because of the new features. What's a football sim without FA, drafting, hiring firing coaches and playoffs?

I never understood why you weren't given one full season. If somebody is really cheap enough just to sim one season over and over, I say let them because the amount of money cost the company not having a decent demo vs having one that someone would just play over and over has to be 5 to 1 atleast. I've never once seen anyone come to these boards and say the demo blew me away, I'd love to ask about some other things. It's always the demo kinda sucked, can you guys answer some questions?

When I just had the demo to mess around with, I wasn't overly enthusiastic, infact when it was released I waited a couple hours where normally if it's a game I really want I'm one of the first in line. After buying I can't say I'm disappointed at all because everything is highlighted once you delve into the game.

[lighthousekeeper]

I'm wondering about this. I played the demo and there are some new features but the game just doesn't seem to have changed that much at all. I know it's a great game to begin with and you shouldn't tinker with it too much but isn't there some disappointment with this release and what was hoped for?

Hmmm. I feel the same way as you.

But after hearing how everyone else loves it so much, (people at FOFC who's opinions I deeply respect), I feel that my dissappointment may be more because I am more of a casual gamer who is not really appreciating all of the 'under the hood' improvements, and less a case of me having higher standards/expectations than others. Me and other doodz like me probably would have been more satisfied with a GUI update, player-specific pics, improved html output options, but us doodz aren't the main target audience.

edit...but one improvement that is almost worth the price of admission alone is the improved play-by-play. really so much more imerrsive....even for us doodz

[Icy]

As Skydog and somebody else said, that could be the first impression because the interface looks more or less the same, too 80's looking for my taste but none of us buy FOF because how it looks but because the engine that runs it and i can say i'm not dissapointed at all with 2k7 and i haven't even reached the postseason yet.

[AlexB]

The demo isn't really much use tbh for the way I play - the nuts and bolts are in the offseason, which you don't get to see in the demo version. A season might take me half an hour to an hour to play, I can take 2-3 days per offseason!

I mentioned this because I had the same first impression from the demo, but after buying the game, it does seem a major upgrade - the draft appears to be 100% better, the AI approach to FA is much more aggressive, and the two areas seem to combine beautifully now: the draft is a complement to the FA period from the first two off seasons I have gone through.

Yes there's a couple of minor annoyances (the yellow FA screen colour, yu can add years to contracts, but it seems players won't budge on their demands if you stick to the same length as they are asking for, and Gridiron Greta isn't working properly) but I am sure that as he supports games for free for four years, that Jim will fix these bugs very quickly!

It is way, way more than the demo shows.

[cuervo72]

From everything I've seen (busy weekend so I haven't bought yet), not disappointed at all. I'm sure there are things that I might have liked to have seen done differently, but overall this looks like a great step in the game's evolution.

[jeff061]

No.

A lot more has changed than what you can see in the first 5 minutes or even reading the feature list.

[Tekneek]

edit...but one improvement that is almost worth the price of admission alone is the improved play-by-play. really so much more imerrsive....even for us doodz

That was the main thing I got out of firing up the demo. I really like that improvement.

[Shkspr]

I never understood why you weren't given one full season. If somebody is really cheap enough just to sim one season over and over, I say let them because the amount of money cost the company not having a decent demo vs having one that someone would just play over and over has to be 5 to 1 atleast.

If I'm not mistaken, Jim's demos physically don't HAVE the code necessary to perform offseason tasks as part of his strategy to combat potential piracy - if the entire codebase is available in the demo without getting through the elicense wrapper, it becomes more attractive to a warez dood. This way, the only way the game can be stolen is from a legitimately purchased copy, and it wouldn't surprise me if Jim/elicense could track those copies down to find out who stole it.

It doesn't cost Solecismic anything to have someone choose not to buy the game because the demo sucks. People who would otherwise purchase the game who can get it from Usenet or eDonkey without paying, however...

[MrBug708]

Just in the timing. FM just came out and I'm enjoying that for the time

[Joe]

yes

[Deattribution]

It doesn't cost Solecismic anything to have someone choose not to buy the game because the demo sucks. People who would otherwise purchase the game who can get it from Usenet or eDonkey without paying, however...

It's basically the same thing, either way they're not purchasing the game and it's losing a customer.

And I understand wanting to avoid piracy but even just for people who player other text sims, most all give you a day or two trial so it has to look a little funny to the ones unfamiliar with FOF to not even get a season. I wouldn't imagine their market is so huge that they can take the risk, and Solecismic can't.

[Deattribution]

dola

Overall, it just adds to people's complaints that its the same game everytime when the demo basically highlights new screens and a few stats - the game's last three demos were identical in terms of limitations (FOF1 was also) and in terms of a cosmetic update, it looks virtually like the same game in alot of ways.

[-Mojo Jojo-]

So far I'm quite pleased with the game. But the real improvements I'm looking for, the behind the scenes stuff (AI, player generation and development, sim engine) will take quite a bit of playing to get a handle on (although Skydog's testing is quite helpful). I'm reserving judgment on all that. Having played through one season though, I'm liking the feel of it. Also the improved play-by-play and solevision have tempted me into watching my games, which I've never had any inclination to do in single player before. If I don't get bored with that it will be a major change in my play style, and one that I think makes it a more immersive game. So far so good.

[Raiders Army]

Also I forgot to add that I am disappointed with the quality of the game at release. From what I remember from every other edition of FOF, this is the buggiest by far version he's released.

[molson]

Also I forgot to add that I am disappointed with the quality of the game at release. From what I remember from every other edition of FOF, this is the buggiest by far version he's released.

I don't know how big a typical beta group is for a game like this, but it sure seems to be to small. I never understood how a game could be released after weeks or months of testing and then have 50+ bugs pop up in the first few hours.

[MizzouRah]

Also I forgot to add that I am disappointed with the quality of the game at release. From what I remember from every other edition of FOF, this is the buggiest by far version he's released.

He also said this version was the biggest feature set he's added into a FOF release... potential for more bugs.

Honestly, there isn't a game released today that doesn't need a patch or two as the mass market gets to dissect the game.

[Raiders Army]

He also said this version was the biggest feature set he's added into a FOF release... potential for more bugs.

Honestly, there isn't a game released today that doesn't need a patch or two as the mass market gets to dissect the game.

True, but when compared to his other releases (I think I downloaded a patch for FOF v1.0 when I received it in the mail so I can't really comment on that one) it's still somewhat of a disappointment. This isn't necessarily a slam on Jim; it's the fact that he's set the bar so high with his previous releases.

[CraigSca]

I remember FOF4 being almost on the verge of unplayable (though I admit that's because I'm an absolute stickler for realistic stats at the micro and macro level). From what I remember, passing yards per attempt were way off (however, this is a hazy memory). Though I do remember in the last version almost every quarterback was starting all 16 game and therefore a shoo-in for almost 4000 yards passing.

Frankly, I'm quite surprised at the low number of bugs in this version. The one's that are there seem to be of the "doh!" variety and are easily fixable.

[Hurst2112]

shhhh....im trying to pawn off my fof4 copy to some new guys here.

;) :D

[Schmidty]

Very.

1. I really wanted TCY2.

2. The demo just isn't grabbing me. Even though there have been some upgrades, most of them don't really make a difference to me, since I'm a strict quick-simmer. It just feels like the same-old, same-old. Also, the interface has always annoyed me, and that feeling gets worse with every new version.

The "wonder" that I felt when I first discovered sports sims (FOF particularly) has faded over the years, and this new version hasn't done anything to change that. It makes me sad. :(

Having said all that, I'll probably still buy it because of nostalgia and because I want to support small developers like Jim. I just hope my feelings about the game get more positive as I piddle around with it more.

[Sweed]

Not disappointed at all, just waiting for the first patch to start a serious career.

2004 was my first fof and I liked the game. I wanted to do my own gameplans but found it tedious so let the coach do it while I just built the team.

With v2007 I find the gameplanning to be much more streamlined and am back into trying my hand at it. This one improvement is getting me in the mood to finally try MP.

As others have stated there are tons of improvements under the hood that you don't see by only firing up the demo. Many more things you can't even see with the demo due to the time limit.

I do wish Jim could find a way around this as the first time I demoed v2004 I almost passed on buying the game. I only gave fof a chance because of reading the posts here by guys that played the game. When you find that kind of excitement about a game you have to believe there is something there.

[yabanci]

not disappointed at all.

I'm in the camp that would much rather see things already in the game improved, problems fixed, changes to make the game more challenging, some new additions to address existing weaknesses. This seems to direction in which Jim goes, and I'm happy about that.

Other people like the OOTP model, where the same known problems and weaknesses are there over and over, in every release, ignored and never fixed, but there's always a big long list of "new" features, no matter how minute, the biggest of which often don't even work, that makes some people think they are getting more for the money. Exhibit A is the mess of the latest OOTP version, all because of this obsession with making it "new" so they can strip you of your money one more time. I deplore this model, but I can see how people who like it might be a little disappointed with the new version of FOF.

[Dutch]

I'm not dissapointed at all. I think everybody has hit the nail on the head. You can't judge FOF2k7 by it's cover. It's what's been improved under the hood that really shows significant improvement.

[lighthousekeeper]

not disappointed at all.

I'm in the camp that would much rather see things already in the game improved, problems fixed, changes to make the game more challenging, some new additions to address existing weaknesses. This seems to direction in which Jim goes, and I'm happy about that.

Other people like the OOTP model, where the same known problems and weaknesses are there over and over, in every release, ignored and never fixed, but there's always a big long list of "new" features, no matter how minute, the biggest of which often don't even work, that makes some people think they are getting more for the money. Exhibit A is the mess of the latest OOTP version, all because of this obsession with making it "new" so they can strip you of your money one more time. I deplore this model, but I can see how people who like it might be a little disappointed with the new version of FOF.

Unfortunately I think my expectations are that both should be done - especially with a 2+ year development period that both ootp and fof2k07 enjoyed. Thus I'm disappointed by both FOF and OOTP releases. But I think I'm just growing into an old curmudgeon.

[Ben E Lou]

You can't judge a Solecismic release by it's cover.Fixed.

We really ought to have learned this by now. Jim Gindin is the king of the unhyped and undocumented feature set. For nearly 72 hours since the announcement and release of the demo, we've heard sporadic complaints about a lack of features for the SP quick simmer. One of the particular complaints was about the detail required in gameplanning. Apparently, no one noticed the newly-revamped AI gameplans that adjust to the opponents strengths. There's no mention of it in the feature set, and all the documentation says is "Select the Recommend button to have your coach set the values on the screen."

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Simply put, what I expect to be significant upgrades in contract negotiations/holdouts, AI gameplay/AI roster management, and the draft, to me this is a brand new game and big upgrade. And yes, if you are for flashy changes in UI or unimportant added features, you will be disappointed in FOF 2007.

[sachmo71]

Count me as disappointed for now, only because of the "issue" of contracts with players before exhibition. I tried to sign a minsal rookie to fill out my roster, and instead of 290k, I had to pay him 360. No big deal, until I found a vet that I liked, who was asking for vet minimum * (880k with 490 in year 1) in the first two years. Since he won't sign for two years, I was hoping he would still sign for 490. No such luck, so his salary for one year immediately goes to 880. This was adding up quickly, and pretty much killed the experience for me. For me, these guys are fodder and don't usually make the roster. The fact that it will cost me twice as much to sign them means I get less guys to mess around with, which hurts the experience for me.

[watravaler]

I know you can't do anything about it since that's all youre given, but the demo is absolutely worthless in terms of determining whether the game is worth purchasing because of the new features. What's a football sim without FA, drafting, hiring firing coaches and playoffs?

I never understood why you weren't given one full season. If somebody is really cheap enough just to sim one season over and over, I say let them because the amount of money cost the company not having a decent demo vs having one that someone would just play over and over has to be 5 to 1 atleast. I've never once seen anyone come to these boards and say the demo blew me away, I'd love to ask about some other things. It's always the demo kinda sucked, can you guys answer some questions?

When I just had the demo to mess around with, I wasn't overly enthusiastic, infact when it was released I waited a couple hours where normally if it's a game I really want I'm one of the first in line. After buying I can't say I'm disappointed at all because everything is highlighted once you delve into the game.

I agree with you, the demo doesn't give a potential buyer much info.

[Raiders Army]

Another thing for the immersion factor:

I expected a newspaper type thing to let me know when various players in the league achieved certain things...1,000 catches, 10,000 yards rushing, 1st in career passing TDs. I also would've liked the PBP to mention those record facts as well.

Andrew Walter passes deep to Randy Moss.
Champ Bailey is on the coverage.
Moss catches the pass for 34 yards and a touchdown!
Bailey got burnt on that play.

That was Randy Moss's 100th career touchdown!

[aran]

Eh. I'm half very pleased and half quite disappointed.

I'm very pleased with the core improvements to the game. All of those little features that you notice after a few years or more of gameplay are great. The improvements in AI and game planning are outstanding.

I'm quite disappointed that Jim didn't take any steps forward in terms of the interface. I was expecting to see a much more accessible game with a more natural interface. I got more of FOF2k4 with a few random tweaks that are meaningless and an even smaller few tweaks that I like.

I guess you can count me as "on the fence" so far.

[cougarfreak]

Count me as very happy. The improved PBP, the new record books, stats in the boxscores, etc. make this game more immersive for me. I only play solo.

[Groundhog]

Another thing for the immersion factor:

I expected a newspaper type thing to let me know when various players in the league achieved certain things...1,000 catches, 10,000 yards rushing, 1st in career passing TDs. I also would've liked the PBP to mention those record facts as well.

Andrew Walter passes deep to Randy Moss.
Champ Bailey is on the coverage.
Moss catches the pass for 34 yards and a touchdown!
Bailey got burnt on that play.

That was Randy Moss's 100th career touchdown!

Having Walter throw TD passes to Randy Moss certainly doesn't help with the immersion factor. :D

[RedKingGold]

That was Randy Moss's 100th career touchdown![/COLOR]

If the Eagles didn't do it, why should Jim?

;)

[Izulde]

Originally I wasn't certain just how much there was for the quick-simmer (I haven't bought it yet due to cash flow difficulties), but after reading about the improved FA AI and the CPU trading picks for picks, not to mention the apparent streamlined gameplanning and AI accounting for opponent (at least I think that's what's indicated earlier in this thread), I can say those are huge improvements.

Nothing made me more psychotic in 2K4 than seeing all those pick for player deals. The pick for pick thing is HUGE. And I couldn't help but feel disappointed in the minimal amount of competition for players in FA SP, one of the reasons why I haven't continued my Miami 1970 dynasty. Improved fights for talent is superb to hear.

[Deattribution]

Improved fights for talent is superb to hear.

I knew Dunta Robinson was the #1 rated unsigned free agent, butI felt like 37.8 million over 4 years was pushing as it was, I wanted to resign him so I offered him what he requested... I didn't stand a chance as KC signed him the first week 60 million over 5 years. I hated the huge hole it created for my secondary, but I liked the fact that it felt like I was actually competing for a change.

[gstelmack]

Also I forgot to add that I am disappointed with the quality of the game at release. From what I remember from every other edition of FOF, this is the buggiest by far version he's released.

I think if you go back and look at the bug list here and the bug list fixed in FOF2k4 over its lifetime (and the handful of bugs that still exist), I think you'll find its not really any buggier. I think the timing was right, the aniticipation was high, people now have a standard set of tests they run at release (look at SkyDog's career tests combined with his wife being away), and this release got the hell banged out of it very quickly by a lot of people. I think after patch #1, it's going to be a lot more solid than even 2k4 was by the release of 5.1, simply because I think we found the standard set of slip-throughs much quicker than we have in the past.

I think Jim's got a formula that works for his audience, he makes good money doing it, and he did a fantastic job of catering to that audience with the advancements in this release. Every other game that tries to "broaden its audience" usually loses more people than it picks up.

[rexallllsc]

Very.

1. I really wanted TCY2.

2. The demo just isn't grabbing me. Even though there have been some upgrades, most of them don't really make a difference to me, since I'm a strict quick-simmer. It just feels like the same-old, same-old. Also, the interface has always annoyed me, and that feeling gets worse with every new version.

The "wonder" that I felt when I first discovered sports sims (FOF particularly) has faded over the years, and this new version hasn't done anything to change that. It makes me sad. :(

Having said all that, I'll probably still buy it because of nostalgia and because I want to support small developers like Jim. I just hope my feelings about the game get more positive as I piddle around with it more.

My feelings exactly. Esp. about the interface.

I may or may not buy - I probably will on an impulse at some point - though 39.99 isn't exactly an impulse price point.

[Noop]

I won't buy any time soon because of many of the reasons stated here. But then again me and Jim dont see eye to eye.

[MizzouRah]

I knew Dunta Robinson was the #1 rated unsigned free agent, butI felt like 37.8 million over 4 years was pushing as it was, I wanted to resign him so I offered him what he requested... I didn't stand a chance as KC signed him the first week 60 million over 5 years. I hated the huge hole it created for my secondary, but I liked the fact that it felt like I was actually competing for a change.

Love to read this stuff.

[Galaril]

Eh. I'm half very pleased and half quite disappointed.

I'm very pleased with the core improvements to the game. All of those little features that you notice after a few years or more of gameplay are great. The improvements in AI and game planning are outstanding.

I'm quite disappointed that Jim didn't take any steps forward in terms of the interface. I was expecting to see a much more accessible game with a more natural interface. I got more of FOF2k4 with a few random tweaks that are meaningless and an even smaller few tweaks that I like.

I guess you can count me as "on the fence" so far.

I am exactly here as well. I liked FOF 2004 and can see this as agreat improvment in the nuts and bolts of the core game. But, that being said I am Very turned off by the interface which was acceptable in 04 but much less so in 07(almost). For a price point of $40 and with the demo we have been presented with I can't ever see myself buying FOF 2K7. It isn't leveraging enough to warrant a purchase, and truly am sorry b/c Jim seems like a decent guy who trys to listen to his customers.

[Buccaneer]

It seems to me that Jim needs a fresh set of eyeballs. While his algorithms and interactions among of all of the functions are brilliant, his attempts at "looking" at the game outside of his code, as well as texts, colors and html presentations, have been clumsy at best.

It reminds of the great story of the inventor of Postscript from the 1960s. What he actually produced as an output was nearly unreadable but he claimed it to be brilliant because he saw not the results but the program behind it.

I wonder about his statement about taking this game to the mainstream via publisher (if I interpreted the comment correctly). He's going to have to get help to make the game far more presentable. I truly think, however, that most in the sports game developing world would kill to have this engine.

[Deattribution]

I don't know, I've never paid much attention to the 'grahpical' side of things.. I don't like how some buttons were moved, or not added but the overall look of the game doesn't matter to me...

GDS/.400 studio games look great to some people, but I find them so cumbersome that I lose interest. FBCB is pretty rough in terms of looks yet it doesn't detract for me at all.

When he went the flashy EA 2k1 version alot of people hated it, it grew on me but it still was about what was on the screen, not what color or how the screen looked.

There is only so much you can do and I prefer the quick response of a simple clean GUI (this version is a lil slower though) over flashy static pictures in the background that make the game sluggish ala OOTP or TPF.

[Izulde]

There is only so much you can do and I prefer the quick response of a simple clean GUI (this version is a lil slower though) over flashy static pictures in the background that make the game sluggish ala OOTP 2006 or TPF.

Fixed that for you. OOTP 6.5 sims beautifully and transistion from screen to screen is swift.

[Senator]

I try to think of it this way. If FOF never existed, what is there to fill this text sim need? Nothing.

This is the game I dreamed of as a kid, and I think some of us are a little spoiled by what this game has given us. I love each version, and the entertainment I get for the price is unmatched by anything I do or anywhere I go.

[yabanci]

I try to think of it this way. If FOF never existed, what is there to fill this text sim need? Nothing.

This is the game I dreamed of as a kid, and I think some of us are a little spoiled by what this game has given us. I love each version, and the entertainment I get for the price is unmatched by anything I do or anywhere I go.

Well said.

[TroyF]

I try to think of it this way. If FOF never existed, what is there to fill this text sim need? Nothing.

This is the game I dreamed of as a kid, and I think some of us are a little spoiled by what this game has given us. I love each version, and the entertainment I get for the price is unmatched by anything I do or anywhere I go.

Yup. Thing is, I don't think there has been a version after FOF2 that people haven't done this with. Lets see if I can get most of em

***The interface sucks, it's too deep, it's not deep enough, there aren't enough improvements to justify another 40 bucks, Jim only helped one group out (first it was quick simmers and then it was MPers), Jim needs to get with the times, I'm sick of playing HIS game. . . Why won't he listen to MY suggestions, the game feels stale, I was hoping for more, I was hoping for a different game***

It hasn't changed a bit really. Even though there have been major improvements with every version of the game, some people insist FOF2 was the better game and the series was maxed out there.

While I understand it, I don't agree with it at all. If you think each version of the game is the same, with no improvements or minor improvements because all you look at is the UI, then I don't think FOF is the game for you. I really like Gary Gorski's new college game. It's pretty as hell and I think the UI is light years ahead of FBCB. Now ask me which game is the better one to play. It's FBCB.

I guess where I'm really confused is what people expected. The FOF UI has been the same for a long time. Did anyone here really think that any game Jim released was going to have a wildly different look? Oh well. This type of thread is really like the directions on a shampoo bottle. We'll be doing the rinse, lather, repeat of these same comments the next time Jim releases a game.

What Senator said above goes x10 for me. The game is the game I dreamed of as a kid. I'll purchase every version of it and play that version until the series takes a step backwards. So long as it continues to improve, I'll be forking over my 40 bucks each time. (and my guess is getting well over a $40 value out of each game) I only wish I could keep blowing my 40 bucks every year. I'd gladly pay for "slight" updates like this on a yearly basis.

[aran]

While I understand it, I don't agree with it at all. If you think each version of the game is the same, with no improvements or minor improvements because all you look at is the UI, then I don't think FOF is the game for you. I really like Gary Gorski's new college game. It's pretty as hell and I think the UI is light years ahead of FBCB. Now ask me which game is the better one to play. It's FBCB.

You're building a straw man.


I guess where I'm really confused is what people expected. The FOF UI has been the same for a long time. Did anyone here really think that any game Jim released was going to have a wildly different look? Oh well. This type of thread is really like the directions on a shampoo bottle. We'll be doing the rinse, lather, repeat of these same comments the next time Jim releases a game.

If most of Jim's interface changing decisions made sense from a useability stand-point, I wouldn't complain.

1.) Why does the HTML output still look like it was made in 1998?
2.) Why does Jim decide to only use half a native windows UI and just make up the rest?
3.) Why are there no mouse-overs?
4.) Why aren't most of his UI elements universally the same? I expect to be able to click on a player's name and bring up his card no matter where his name appears, for example. I don't see why this can't be done. Why is there no "team overview" screen where I can see all the vital information about a team when clicking a link whose anchor is the team's name?

His engine's amazing. I just wish he would address these interface issues.I would happily volunteer hundreds of hours of my time to Jim to improve the interface. I love this game and would be absolutely elated to help Jim make it better.

[rowech]

I'm definitely glad to know I'm not the only one who feels the way I do about it. In fact, my same concerns are the same concerns others have listed.

[Peregrine]

I try to think of it this way. If FOF never existed, what is there to fill this text sim need? Nothing.

This is the game I dreamed of as a kid, and I think some of us are a little spoiled by what this game has given us. I love each version, and the entertainment I get for the price is unmatched by anything I do or anywhere I go.

Amen.

[Bee]

At this point, I'm a little disappointed. I still think it's the best football sim available and it's an improvement over FOF2k4. I also think it's worth the money I spent to buy it. That being said, I think a lot of the improvements were things that are meaningless to me (gameplanning changes, pbp, MP stuff, etc). The things that do matter to me that were improved, just weren't taken far enough IMO. For example, the trade AI was improved so there's more pick for pick trades...but you still don't receive trade offers during the draft. I think it's a step forward, but for the way I play it's more of a baby step. I am glad though that everyone else seems to love it because I hope Jim is successful and continues the franchise because it's the best option out there right now.

[CraigSca]

I'm definitely glad to know I'm not the only one who feels the way I do about it. In fact, my same concerns are the same concerns others have listed.

Chris, what kind of computer sports games do you like? I know you like simulations, but I saw you step (almost) through the same process with Diamond Mind Baseball. In my eyes, FOF is light-years ahead of DMB in terms of presentation. DMB is the ultimate baseball replay engine and FOF is the ultimate football career simulation.

I know I've said this ad nauseum, but for me, it's the engine behind the game. While I can agree with Aran's interface complaints, I can live with them.

The funny thing is, everyone seems surprised he hasn't gone to an OOTP or FM-style interface. I (and I guess I'm the only one) am glad he hasn't. Buy why are you surprised, he says it right on his website: "My goal is to provide cutting-edge sports simulations with clean, simple interfaces. I'm not going to waste valuable development time with expensive graphics. I will continue to work on presenting as much information as humanly possible on each game screen, in ways that are clear and easy to understand. "

As a postscript, I'd much rather require 1GB of memory because of the large amount of data a simulation creates, not because my DirectX 9.0c splash screen requires it.

[Peregrine]

The funny thing is, everyone seems surprised he hasn't gone to an OOTP or FM-style interface. I (and I guess I'm the only one) am glad he hasn't. Buy why are you surprised, he says it right on his website: "My goal is to provide cutting-edge sports simulations with clean, simple interfaces. I'm not going to waste valuable development time with expensive graphics. I will continue to work on presenting as much information as humanly possible on each game screen, in ways that are clear and easy to understand. "



I'm with you on liking the current interface. Of course I like some changes, like the bigger player cards, and I'd love for it to be easier to print and compare data, but overall I like this interface, if he went for one of the heavy GUI ones I think it would lose a lot of the feel of the game, and honestly I don't like those much, they seem to slow the game down.

[Tekneek]

I couldn't really care any less what the interface looks like. Less is more, in my opinion. I certainly don't want my machine spending more ram and processing power than absolutely necessary to simply show me information.

If there is going to be a fancy frilly version of UI, I'd really appreciate an option for a simple one so I don't get stuck paying a price to keep the UI snobs happy. ;)

[TroyF]

You're building a straw man.



If most of Jim's interface changing decisions made sense from a useability stand-point, I wouldn't complain.

1.) Why does the HTML output still look like it was made in 1998?
2.) Why does Jim decide to only use half a native windows UI and just make up the rest?
3.) Why are there no mouse-overs?
4.) Why aren't most of his UI elements universally the same? I expect to be able to click on a player's name and bring up his card no matter where his name appears, for example. I don't see why this can't be done. Why is there no "team overview" screen where I can see all the vital information about a team when clicking a link whose anchor is the team's name?

His engine's amazing. I just wish he would address these interface issues.I would happily volunteer hundreds of hours of my time to Jim to improve the interface. I love this game and would be absolutely elated to help Jim make it better.

If saying a game with a less fancy interface is better than one with what is a better UI is building a strawman, I'm good with it. Then my intent was to build a strawman.

1) Don't know, don't care. The HTML output is fine by me. It simply doesn't impact the game in any meaningful way IMO.

2) Again, I don't really care. The UI is understandable to me and works. It's worked from the first game on.

3) Wish there were, but on the list of priorities for me on judging a game, it's somewhere around 2,897. Once the other 2,986 things are perfect, I'll start nitpicking over things like this.

4) Again, don't know, don't really care.

All things being equal, if this is the set of gripes people have and they are using it as a reason to not purchase the game, their loss. Looking back at all of the games I've wasted my money on over the years, I wish to God your list above was the only thing wrong with them.

[st.cronin]

I'm a little bit surprised there aren't more people "disappointed" that the game is yet another FOF, and not TCY.

[Sweed]

If saying a game with a less fancy interface is better than one with what is a better UI is building a strawman, I'm good with it. Then my intent was to build a strawman.

1) Don't know, don't care. The HTML output is fine by me. It simply doesn't impact the game in any meaningful way IMO.

2) Again, I don't really care. The UI is understandable to me and works. It's worked from the first game on.

3) Wish there were, but on the list of priorities for me on judging a game, it's somewhere around 2,897. Once the other 2,986 things are perfect, I'll start nitpicking over things like this.

4) Again, don't know, don't really care.

All things being equal, if this is the set of gripes people have and they are using it as a reason to not purchase the game, their loss. Looking back at all of the games I've wasted my money on over the years, I wish to God your list above was the only thing wrong with them.

^^^^
Gets it.

[rkmsuf]

I'm disappointed you can't have indoor or Canadian leagues.

[Buccaneer]

There is only so much you can do and I prefer the quick response of a simple clean GUI (this version is a lil slower though) over flashy static pictures in the background that make the game sluggish ala OOTP or TPF.

I agree with this. GDS games are messy in there own way as well. Years ago I had thought I wanted a beautiful interface to help with immersion but ever since FBCB (and to a lesser extent, the Civ series), I have come to appreciate what a clean, simple interface can do to make a game flow through the tasks.

[Peregrine]

I'm a little bit surprised there aren't more people "disappointed" that the game is yet another FOF, and not TCY.

Well I would have preferred another TCY, but that doesn't really have anything to do with how much I like or dislike this game. I mean if I want ice cream and someone hands me chocolate cake, it's still good.

[Subby]

I am really happy with the game engine upgrades. My only disappointments are from a MP perspective and they include:

1) Lack of player page HTML (trade blocking players and having to cut and paste their player card image into a forum post is the teh suk).
2) No in game ftp mechanism (a la ootp)
3) Complications for multi-league GMs (multiple batch files to get cities and nicknames right)

I appreciate the addition of passwords and log/box html, but was hoping for a more expanded MP feature set.

I'll reiterate though, that I am ecstatic with the game engine. Fantastic stuff.

[Galaril]

You're building a straw man.



If most of Jim's interface changing decisions made sense from a useability stand-point, I wouldn't complain.

1.) Why does the HTML output still look like it was made in 1998?
2.) Why does Jim decide to only use half a native windows UI and just make up the rest?
3.) Why are there no mouse-overs?
4.) Why aren't most of his UI elements universally the same? I expect to be able to click on a player's name and bring up his card no matter where his name appears, for example. I don't see why this can't be done. Why is there no "team overview" screen where I can see all the vital information about a team when clicking a link whose anchor is the team's name?

His engine's amazing. I just wish he would address these interface issues.I would happily volunteer hundreds of hours of my time to Jim to improve the interface. I love this game and would be absolutely elated to help Jim make it better.

Those two 3 and 4 are big ones for me along with player photo. It would have been nice to at least have a place to put player photos if modders wanted to add them. I know I sound liek a broken record on this but why is FOF the only text-sim that doesn't have the option to add player photos. It would of added some much needed immersion. Since I never play MP I could care less about the MP features and 3,000 types of stats and HTMLs.

[Deattribution]

Those two 3 and 4 are big ones for me along with player photo. It would have been nice to at least have a place to put player photos if modders wanted to add them. I know I sound liek a broken record on this but why is FOF the only text-sim that doesn't have the option to add player photos. It would of added some much needed immersion. Since I never play MP I could care less about the MP features and 3,000 types of stats and HTMLs.

I like the idea of player photos, but then I think in about 20 years every player that could use a player photo is gone so I rather have the effort put elsewhere. Plus it's virtually useless for people who use fictional rosters, unless you make up some random picture database which you would then have to go and designate each player with a picture individually defeating the purpose. The only work around to this is the poser-style 3d photos, and some of those in other games look just creepy plus it takes a bit of work.

[Glengoyne]

I'm not dissapointed at all. I think everybody has hit the nail on the head. You can't judge FOF2k7 by it's cover. It's what's been improved under the hood that really shows significant improvement.

Too bad the Demo model still doesn't allow folks to really see "under the hood" in a meaningful way.

[Bee]

I don't have any major issues with the interface, but I do think it could be improved in some areas like accessing information from multiple locations, having multiple windows open at once and having the entire thing organized better for more logical access. To grow the customer base beyond what's there now though I think a major revision to the UI would be required based on reactions I've seen outside of this community. Of course, from what I understand expanding the base is not really something Jim wants to do at this point. He's said in the past that he's happy with the size of the game right now and isn't looking at becoming the "next big thing". So from that point of view, I think he's doing the right thing in concentrating on other parts of the game.

[Izulde]

Well I would have preferred another TCY, but that doesn't really have anything to do with how much I like or dislike this game. I mean if I want ice cream and someone hands me chocolate cake, it's still good.

I concur. That being said I will be disappointed if his next game isn't TCY2, unless it's FOF 2K9 with expansion. ;)

[Glengoyne]

Oh I should add that the demo bit is just my pet peeve. It always has been.

I'm a fan of Solecismic. I do agree that the UI, ain't the most intuitive thing I've ever see, but I think it gets the basic job done, but In terms of the product I don't think a pretty interface should be a top priority. I'd rather have the gameplay improved than have Jim devote a chunk of time into rebuilding his UI. Beyond gameplay and the "engine", I'd rather see Jim focus on immersion, which can be done through additions(I guess) rather than completely revamping the UI. I, and I'd think a lot of text simmers, value gameplay over graphics.

[Galaxy]

For example, the trade AI was improved so there's more pick for pick trades...but you still don't receive trade offers during the draft. I think it's a step forward, but for the way I play it's more of a baby step.

I asked about this, and someone said they think it occurs.

[Bee]

I asked about this, and someone said they think it occurs.


I played 15 seasons over the weekend and never happened once for me.

[Cringer]

Before I got the game yesterday I was disappointed with what I had read. I didn't think the new stuff in the game was enough to get me into solo play again.

I was wrong so far. Solevision is something I am liking more then I would have thought. The UI upgrades (and there are upgrades to me) have made looking at stats and other info easier and more enjoyable. The new stats added in are something I am enjoying more then I thought I would.

It definetly has a different feel to it to me, where as I thought before I got it it would be the same old 2004 just slightly upgraded.

WHat this has actually done is make me excited for the next version of FOF already. As much as I want an updated TCY, I want that to hurry up so we can get another FOF ASAP (and I mean I would prefer a new FOF next year but guess I will wait two years to get in TCY, though I want both next year).

[MizzouRah]

I can't wait until a patch is out and I can really delve into a FOF 2007 world. :)

Now, do I start with the Rams, Bills, or the Cardinals?

[Cringer]

I can't wait until a patch is out and I can really delve into a FOF 2007 world. :)

Now, do I start with the Rams, Bills, or the Cardinals?

None of the above.

[MizzouRah]

None of the above.

:D

[SFL Cat]

A little, but only from a graphics stand point. I've always felt the interface has been a little clunky, and it has seemed to get more so with each release.

I'm also a little disappointed that there still is no flexibility in setting up league structure.

That said, I'll definitely be buying the full version in the next few weeks after the patches start coming out.

[TazFTW]

I'm a little bit surprised there aren't more people "disappointed" that the game is yet another FOF, and not TCY.

I'm disappointed that it is not TCY but TCY fans are in the minority so it is what it is.

[Galaxy]

I played 15 seasons over the weekend and never happened once for me.

Hmmm...Hopefully someone can chime in.

[rowech]

Chris, what kind of computer sports games do you like? I know you like simulations, but I saw you step (almost) through the same process with Diamond Mind Baseball. In my eyes, FOF is light-years ahead of DMB in terms of presentation. DMB is the ultimate baseball replay engine and FOF is the ultimate football career simulation.

I know I've said this ad nauseum, but for me, it's the engine behind the game. While I can agree with Aran's interface complaints, I can live with them.

The funny thing is, everyone seems surprised he hasn't gone to an OOTP or FM-style interface. I (and I guess I'm the only one) am glad he hasn't. Buy why are you surprised, he says it right on his website: "My goal is to provide cutting-edge sports simulations with clean, simple interfaces. I'm not going to waste valuable development time with expensive graphics. I will continue to work on presenting as much information as humanly possible on each game screen, in ways that are clear and easy to understand. "

As a postscript, I'd much rather require 1GB of memory because of the large amount of data a simulation creates, not because my DirectX 9.0c splash screen requires it.


Craig,

My major concern is I simply don't see enough improvement over the last version to charge me $39.95. As some have mentioned, perhaps it's under the hood and I simply can't see it. Front Office Football is probably my favorite computer game of all-time. I played it so much when I first got it. (not even sure which version I first had) It seemed the last version there was a massive upgrade to in-game coaching, etc. or that is just when I started paying attention to it again. I really thought this new version was going to bring something bigger to the table is all. DMB I simply just couldn't get into because of how some of the things were setup in menus, etc. That's definitely not my problem with FOF. I guess I've been waiting for a while for this game and am just a little saddened that there really doesn't seem to be a huge amount of new stuff...or at least new stuff that I care about perhaps.

[CraigSca]

As with all things Solecismic, a lot of the changes are subtle, but up the scale geometrically when it comes to realism. It's an entirely different game.

[jaygr]

I love the game but I am in the camp that really really really wanted a better interface. It seems the extremes are getting argued here- its either 1980's look or messy ram-hogging eye candy. What I am saying is- can't there be something in between? I was not looking for Jim to make the game look like the GDS games, but surely there is room for at least some improvement, no?

That said I am really enjoying the game. Though I felt like for what it is, the $40 was a bit steep, I stress "a bit". However, I do look at it also as supporting Jim and what he has done and if that means paying a little extra then I wanted, so be it- it is worth putting money to the cause.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Yes, the main changes are under the hood and you can't see it.

[Eaglesfan27]

I'm disappointed that I can't find a safe way to play it at work that won't potentially get me fired.. especially since it is a slow day today.


Oh yeah, count me in among those that are happy with the UI and appreciate the upgrades that are there and that it is not becoming graphically cluttered just to look "pretty."

[Icy]

I'm disappointed that I can't find a safe way to play it at work that won't potentially get me fired.. especially since it is a slow day today.

It's easy:

1st - create a screen capture of an Excel document
2nd - set it as game background replacing the default office one.
3rd - select the Raiders color scheme (black and white)

Do you think anybody will really think that this is a game? :D

http://www.prodeportes.com/fof2k7/excellook.jpg

That is the best advantage of a non graphic game.

[wade moore]

I must say, if I was walking by one of my workers' office, I wouldn't think twice unless I was staring at that for awhile!

[Eaglesfan27]

Brilliant :)






If only I had a legitimate reason to work on a spreadsheet, this would probably work :)

[Dutch]

perfect!

[wade moore]

Brilliant :)






If only I had a legitimate reason to work on a spreadsheet, this would probably work :)

Outlook Screenshot maybe?

Working from home, i don't have these problems ;)..

My problem is my growing sense that I really just don't like SP games. I really don't think there is anything Jim could do to make me LIKE this game as SP beyond trying to test things for MP.

Nothing Jim has done wrong, just what I want out of gameplay.

[Hurst2112]

till the boss comes over and says...

'since you have xcel up, can you bring up that report i sent everybody?'

:D

[McSweeny]

i'm thrilled with this new version. For some reason i've always had a tough time getting into the various version of FOF. I've played them all a good amount, but never logged the millions of hours that some of you have. I did play a good deal of TCY for what it's worth.

So i saw all the changes that the 07 had and i was kinda like "big deal". So i downloaded the demo out of loyalty and i saw all the changes put into action as well as a bunch of the under the hood stuff and i was blown away. I think this is going to be the best version of FOF by a wide margin. I cannot wait until i have some free time to dive into this head first.

And it's the little things that add to the immersion factor that make this for me. I've always been a bit of a quick simmer, but alot of the changes will give me a good reason to slow down and take the whole league into consideration and to tell you the truth that really excites me. I think FOF is moving in the right direction and each successive version has gotten me more and more involved. It looks like this is the version to really hit it for me and get me to start logging those millions of hours

and for the record, i don't even want to think about what a version of TCY on par with FOF07 would do for me.

[Desnudo]

I love the game but I am in the camp that really really really wanted a better interface. It seems the extremes are getting argued here- its either 1980's look or messy ram-hogging eye candy. What I am saying is- can't there be something in between? I was not looking for Jim to make the game look like the GDS games, but surely there is room for at least some improvement, no?

That said I am really enjoying the game. Though I felt like for what it is, the $40 was a bit steep, I stress "a bit". However, I do look at it also as supporting Jim and what he has done and if that means paying a little extra then I wanted, so be it- it is worth putting money to the cause.

I agree with your feelings. The suck-it-up camp seems to feel that UI experience doesn't contribute meaningfully to the enjoyment of a game. It absolutely does. When it takes 5 clicks to do something that should take 1 or 2, or you can't get information to format, or access the way you want it, it absolutely has a negative impact on your enjoyment level. Google's products, maps, search engine, etc., are an excellent example of how a great UI experience makes a product so much more enjoyable to use.

I have to say I felt a surge of disapointment when I saw screenshots of the new game. I always liked the basic gameplay of the series and the speed of the simming available, but really was hoping for improvements in usability.

[cartman]

I've been thinking about the thoughts that the UI has been ignored, while the "under the hood" stuff has been improved greatly.

I think one part of this, is that people have been slamming the hell out of the sim engine. Case in point are the numerous threads SkyDog has done to gather data and point out statistical anomalies. There are other instances of people pointing out specific problems, and supporting their assertions with concrete examples.

The UI complaints appear to be a lot fuzzier. The comments of "too old fashioned" or "it takes too many clicks" are very general, and hard to act on. If someone has specific ideas on how to improve the interface, and can provide examples similar to the stat engine analysis, then that can definitely only help improve the game, in the same way the "under the covers" pieces have been helped by the community.

[Desnudo]

Ugh, how about if I just contribute some $ to hire a usability consultant? When I get into 2007, I'll try and write some stuff down.

[SunDevil]

I've been thinking about the thoughts that the UI has been ignored, while the "under the hood" stuff has been improved greatly.

I think one part of this, is that people have been slamming the hell out of the sim engine. Case in point are the numerous threads SkyDog has done to gather data and point out statistical anomalies. There are other instances of people pointing out specific problems, and supporting their assertions with concrete examples.

The UI complaints appear to be a lot fuzzier. The comments of "too old fashioned" or "it takes too many clicks" are very general, and hard to act on. If someone has specific ideas on how to improve the interface, and can provide examples similar to the stat engine analysis, then that can definitely only help improve the game, in the same way the "under the covers" pieces have been helped by the community.

I would say the very first thing that came to mind, was the work that Icy and others have done on the icons in the game. I mean the game has been out since Friday, and the work they have done, has already made my experience with this game better. The fact that you have to edit the .exe file in order to change images in the game is in fact pretty fucking sad. And Cartman, there are plenty of other UI suggestions in the FOF Suggestion thread, if you want more examples.

[TroyF]

Ugh, how about if I just contribute some $ to hire a usability consultant? When I get into 2007, I'll try and write some stuff down.


I guess this is where the problems are. I'm not in the "suck it up" category. I'm in the "I don't really think there is a lot wrong with it" area.

Is there a tweak here and there that I would like? Yeah, there is. I'd love the mouse overs for instance. But I can come up with UI problems in every game I've ever played. OOTP had some major weaknesses this year. I think FM still has a handfull. If I sat around for hours dissecting all the UI problems in every game, I wouldn't have time to enjoy ANY game I've ever purchased. There is always something a little off kilter.

Maybe I'm so used to the FOF interface, that I just don't notice the gripes anymore. After all of these hours in it, I move from screen to screen without a problem. I know where I want to go and what screens I want to see before I get into them. I know what I can and can't do in each place and move through them seemlessly.

Maybe if things were changed I'd slap my hand on my forehead and scream "Damn, that was easier" and I'll be enlightened. Or maybe I'd be as frustrated as you guys seem to be and throw a fit because the screens aren't the way I want them. I don't know. All I do know is that the current setup doesn't bother me or hinder my enjoyment of the game in anyway. YMMV.

[cartman]

And Cartman, there are plenty of other UI suggestions in the FOF Suggestion thread, if you want more examples.

I know that they are there, but only a couple of them are detailed. I was trying to make the point that it is not a lack of suggestions, it was the lack of detail on how to possibly correct the situation.

For example, it is one thing to say that in FOF2K4 that FA handling was out out whack, and needed to be addressed. It is another thing altogether to gather the amount of data that SkyDog did to address the issue and have it looked and and quantified.

There are numerous examples of this kind of deep diving into the issues on the "under the hood" side of the game as opposed to the UI side.

[yabanci]

One thing I can tell you, if Jim were to completely change the interface, you would have, upon release, a thread like this with 10x as many people hysterically pissed off that the look and feel of the game had been changed.

I think interfaces are like women. Eveyrbody has their own opinion. What you might see as a dream girl, I might find ugly and boring. At least with FOF we know well the girl we're sleeping with. She might not be the best looking one out there and imrovement is always possible, but she gets the job done where it counts, and that's what is most important.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

she gets the job done where it counts

I like those kinds of girls.:cool:

[SlapBone]

Am I the only one that thinks those new rollover buttons are fucking ugly? If Jim couldn't do anything but half-ass change the interface, he could have at least left it like it was. Oooh... he moved all the buttons to the right. Oooh...he put an ugly yellow print on the window. What the fuck is up with those funky city names? Why doesn't the game remember my color scheme and my window positions?

[RedKingGold]

Am I the only one that thinks those new rollover buttons are fucking ugly? If Jim couldn't do anything but half-ass change the interface, he could have at least left it like it was. Oooh... he moved all the buttons to the right. Oooh...he put an ugly yellow print on the window. What the fuck is up with those funky city names? Why doesn't the game remember my color scheme and my window positions?

People like you are the reason that other members at FOFC do not help newer members (with less than 1,000 posts) with their problems with the game.

If you don't like it, don't play it. If you don't like it and want to say something constructive; please do better than "oooo, deez buttons suck and make me wanna use poopy talk".

Thank you for contributing nothing to the discussion.

[Peregrine]

About the AI making trade offers during the draft, I've read before where Jim said that he didn't want them interrupting the players like that during the draft, so I doubt we'll ever see that feature.

[SlapBone]

Thank you for contributing nothing to the discussion.

Yea, thanks!

[SlapBone]

Anyway, I forgot to say that I really like the core game and the sim engine, it's just that the new buttons bug the crap out of me. I kind of like the old Windows interface. It was unapologetic in it's simplicity and never pretended to be anything else. The new interface, however, seems like and amateur attempt to "spruce" things up a bit, and it just doesn't do anything for the game.

I figured out my problem with the color scheme, but it still doesn't remember the position of the windows.

[Ben E Lou]

it still doesn't remember the position of the windows.There's a post from Jim in one of the long threads about this.

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showpost.php?p=1286786&postcount=74

[SlapBone]

There's a post from Jim in one of the long threads about this.

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showpost.php?p=1286786&postcount=74

Thanks, that splains it.

[Subby]

sweet maybe druez will show up next and give us a paid review!

[Cringer]

The new interface, however, seems like and amateur attempt to "spruce" things up a bit, and it just doesn't do anything for the game.


If I remember correctly, Jim says he is not exactly a graphics guy so that probably isn't too far off to say that. I really don't expect Jim to make big graphic jumps because of this, and have no problem with it.

He is trying to maybe make things a little nicer, a little different looking, and that is atleast encouraging to me. The only real problem I have is I wish he used a full fledge, dark black for the text on the roster screen for positions and numbers and the such to make them standout more.

Now, maybe if everyone runs out and buys 3 or 4 copies of the game and Jim is able to make a small fortune on the game then the next version he could afford to hire a graphics guy. Until then I won't bitch too much. Hell I don't want many changes in that direction anyways.

[SlapBone]

sweet maybe druez will show up next and give us a paid review!

Admit it. You miss him! I can't get him to play FOF (for his review), but I may be able to get him to write you an ode.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Admit it. You miss him! I can't get him to play FOF (for his review), but I may be able to get him to write you an ode.
Is he your brother or something?

[SlapBone]

Is he your brother or something?

My brother from another mother. We are just good friends.

[Pumpy Tudors]

My brother from another mother. We are just good friends.
You say that with such pride.

[Gallifrey]

I truly think, however, that most in the sports game developing world would kill to have this engine.

No kidding. Like EA. But they would screw it up with flash.

I like the game and am happy. I like what it means TCY2 could be if we are luck enough to get it.

This is the classic debate of do you want an EA fun to look at game with the worst engine in the world, or an engine like this one without all the GUI.

As for me I buy from Jim, not the other place.