How important is Customization in the next version of FOF [Archive]

nilodor

05-21-2007, 11:22 AM

Jim has eluded to the fact that it would require a massive rewrite of the inner workings of the game to make leagues sizes and structure in FOF flexible . So time consuming would this rewrite be that it would be essentially be all of the changes the next version would see, bar a few minor tweaks. I've seen alot of posts around wanting for ootp level of customization in FOF but I'm curious just how important it is to everyone.

eg: Being able to:
- Change the number of teams
- Change the number of leagues and divisions
- Include Expansion
- Change schedule length
- Other things along those lines that I can't think of right now, basically a free form league structure.

Ben E Lou

05-21-2007, 11:38 AM

I don't really care that much about custom league sizes, although I did very much enjoy being able to run an expansion team in SP. For me personally, it's not a feature that I'd use all that much, but I can't help but wonder if it's the way to go whenever the next version is released.

st.cronin

05-21-2007, 11:41 AM

Its definitely something I value in a game, and one of the reasons I haven't bought '07.

wade moore

05-21-2007, 11:41 AM

I'm very curious to see how this poll pans out. My gut tells me that there is a very vocal minority kicking and screaming about being able to customize the size, etc. of the league. I think it would be nice, but I think it is a pretty low priority for me.. so, I voted option 3... There seem to be some that say they won't buy another FOF without it, and I just have to think that it is such a minority of the customers.

Ksyrup

05-21-2007, 11:48 AM

I will continue to buy the game without it, but I would pay full price if it was the only major enhancement made to the game. That said, it would need to be implemented on a full-scale basis. If not totally free-form, at least something with numerous options. And most importantly, the game should be able to create fictional players with an appropriate league-wide talent distribution, as well as allow for imported rosters.

twothree

05-21-2007, 11:53 AM

I would love to see it. However, in my opinion, league customization won't be included in any version of FOF in the near future based upon Jim's previous comments.

I didn't pick an option, since the next time I spend money on a text football game, it will be either for a new college game to go with FOF, or a new pro game to go with BBCF. Right now playing both FOF and BBCF separately has me wanting a complete college to pro experience from either publisher.

Izulde

05-21-2007, 11:57 AM

Customizable league size would be nifty, but I'd be much more interested in expansion personally.

Deattribution

05-21-2007, 11:58 AM

I voted the third option as well. I would be perfectly fine with just having expansion teams back (especially if there were some way to make them historically accurate for careers that start further back) but other than to run a new team some 20 years down the line, or mimic history it's a feature I'd never touch.

I can understand why others want it, especially for MP but as a player who strictly plays SP I'm content with the structure (although, as stated expansion teams would be nice again) that is NFL-esque style.

Ben E Lou

05-21-2007, 11:59 AM

...minority of the customers.

See, I wonder if it's a sticking point for non-customers, though. FOFC is a self-selecting group. Yeah, we talk about lots of other stuff, but the majority of us came here because of FOF, which means we value certain things in sims. Let me give you an example of what I mean...

Newbies ask lots of questions in the FOF2K7 forum, and generally get quick responses from veterans. However, when a newbie asks a question in the FOF2K7 forum about play calling, very few veterans ever respond. It's because most of the vets know little/nothing about play calling. The vets were drawn to FOF before there was play calling in it, which means it's a low-priority item to us. If Jim took play calling out of FOF, there's a sizeable contingent at FOFC that wouldn't even notice--myself included. (I can't even picture what that interface looks like. I'm pretty sure the last time I touched it was during the time between the FOF2K4 demo and release.) Point being, FOFC is a board full of people who, for the most part, don't really care much about that feature. As a result, there's vritually no body of knowledge about it.

I can't help but wonder if the same is true for customization. If custom league sizes are a high priority for someone, they checked out FOF1 or FOF2 or FOF2K1 or FOF4 or FOF2K4 or FOF2K7, and wrote it off. They had no reason to come to FOFC.

I just bumped a couple of old threads at OOTP where people were saying that they'd never touch FOF without custom league sizes, with a link to this one. But those are threads about FOF, a game that some of them believe will *never* have custom league sizes. I wonder if those people will even bother to look at the threads that I bumped.

I confess that I don't know much about the market. Maybe there aren't enough people that Jim can touch who would see custom league sizes as a "must-have" feature to justify it. However, I suspect that the desire for a football sim with such a feature is significantly larger than this poll would indicate. Like I said, it's not something I value very much at all, but I'm sure there are people out there who would, for example, LOVE to do a historical replay with the league size changing as it did through history.

Ben E Lou

05-21-2007, 12:01 PM

Dola:

Why $49.99??? Has FOF ever cost that? :confused:

st.cronin

05-21-2007, 12:07 PM

I'm sure there are people out there who would, for example, LOVE to do a historical replay with the league size changing as it did through history.

/raises hand

nilodor

05-21-2007, 12:09 PM

Dola:

Why $49.99??? Has FOF ever cost that? :confused:

I couldn't remember what FOF cost and it just seems that every new game costs that, I guess the options should have been more like 33.95 for new, 15.95 for expansion or something like that.

nilodor

05-21-2007, 12:10 PM

/raises hand

Me too.

DaddyTorgo

05-21-2007, 12:11 PM

Ben E Lou

05-21-2007, 12:12 PM

I couldn't remember what FOF cost and it just seems that every new game costs that, I guess the options should have been more like 33.95 for new, 15.95 for expansion or something like that.I edited the poll options. ;)

MizzouRah

05-21-2007, 12:15 PM

I could care less. There is so much more I want to see enhanced and added by the way of SP immersion.

A definite "no buy" for me with a new version were customization was the only add-on.

Antmeister

05-21-2007, 12:18 PM

I have more interest in developing and improving a team and don't care too much about having more league options. Since this is a professional football sim and most of the financial aspects closely resemble the NFL, it doesn't make sense to me to have people select crazy league sizes and still maintain some sort of balance in the league.

Expansions would be okay, but I even think that has to be capped. To me, I would love to see cities lose a team due to financial hardships just to see expansions in the future and not have the league size grow past some sort of cap.

Kodos

05-21-2007, 12:22 PM

I'd love to have more customization. Being able to recreate the NFL league structure from its heyday would be fantastic.

KWhit

05-21-2007, 12:28 PM

Option 3 for me.

nilodor

05-21-2007, 12:29 PM

i hear if you want to play CFL-style football there's this other great option for you...:D

But then you would need the option for massive expansion, followed by massive contraction and then have a team that exists 2 out of every 3 years.

MJ4H

05-21-2007, 12:30 PM

I've decided I'm not buying anymore games that don't at least have a 2d representation of the on-field action.

Swaggs

05-21-2007, 12:51 PM

I'd pay for the expansion portion alone.

I like the feeling that, if I play for 50-100 years, my league will evolve in a realistic manner. As population and finances (presumably) grow over a half century, it seems unrealistic for a league to not adjust to the changes.

st.cronin

05-21-2007, 12:53 PM

I know I'm not the only one, but to me the logical next step in this franchise is an SI-style universe game, with colleges and pros in the same game.

Maybe even high schools.

DaddyTorgo

05-21-2007, 01:05 PM

I know I'm not the only one, but to me the logical next step in this franchise is an SI-style universe game, with colleges and pros in the same game.

Maybe even high schools.

ssssh. that's secretly why MV moved to the US...to sign up JG!!! :eek:

Noop

05-21-2007, 01:12 PM

If it would anything like Football Manager (What is it called these days?) I would buy in a heartbeat. His game doesn't really need customization but it does need to increase the immersion factor a lot.

Things like newspaper, mock draft, season previews, rumor mill, scouting reports of this while being dynamic would be great.

I.E. I just won the superbowl but the rumor mill is going crazy about me being fired because of a dispute with the owner who wants to bring in the young hotshot coach from the college ranks. Things like that would be great and make the game very interesting especially being the GM for a cheap owner.

Alas this is nothing but a dream. We can't even get that out dated coaching hire system fixed or changed. :(

Antmeister

05-21-2007, 01:16 PM

I...Things like newspaper, mock draft, season previews, rumor mill, scouting reports of this while being dynamic would be great.

I.E. I just won the superbowl but the rumor mill is going crazy about me being fired because of a despite with the owner who wants to bring in the young hotshot coach from the college ranks. Things like that would be great and make the game very interesting especially being the GM for a cheap owner...

Yes!

Eaglesfan27

05-21-2007, 01:19 PM

I've decided I'm not buying anymore games that don't at least have a 2d representation of the on-field action.

That I would gladly pay full price for if it was the only significant new feature. However, customizable league setups just don't interest me that much.

Flasch186

05-21-2007, 01:23 PM

are we talking customization or MAXIMUM customization? That's a MAXIMUM distinction that I think needs to be cleared up.

Atocep

05-21-2007, 01:30 PM

My problem with putting customization of league sizes, ect into FOF is it means we're missing out on other features that could be added that, IMO, would add a lot more to the game. If it was something that was simple to implement, fine, but Jim has stated it would take significant resources and I just don't think its worth it. Things like the 2D representation, coaching/gameplan overhaul, and an in-game newspaper would be things just about everyone would be happy seeing and would be a clear step forward for the series. I'd see customization as more of a lateral step.

If the next version of FOF is simply FOF2k7 with customization, it will be the first version I don't buy.

st.cronin

05-21-2007, 01:36 PM

One thing I'd like to see, and it may be that I'm the only one, is something like the sliders that the old EHM freeware had, for scoring, penalties, etc. DMB also had something like that. This would be for historical purposes, mainly, and I'm also thinking mainly of TCY2. What I envision is when starting up a game, selecting the overall "pass bias" of teams. I guess this would mostly manifest itself in player creation, with more smaller players, and mostly option style qbs.

JediKooter

05-21-2007, 01:45 PM

I'm all for the more customizable the game, the better, in my opinion and would be more than happy to pay for having that flexibility in the game and being able to start a league that only has 12 teams or 24 or 28 or...

As for expansion, have the team owners vote and perhaps you can influence their vote as a potential new owner by maybe greasing their palms or donating to their favorite charity or something like that. Of course, have the option to turn that off and be able to jump right into the league with your new team.

Just my 2 pennies.

Logan

05-21-2007, 01:53 PM

Customization just is not important to me. Expansion is something I'm interested in, but I don't really tie the two features together. Count me in with the others who would like the SP game improved significantly; Noop's suggestions hit it on the head. Immersion, immersion, immersion. I'm just not into text games like I was back in my high school/college days, due to not having the time to really devote myself to it. It's much easier to fire up the X-box and kill an hour than to maintain a career of FOF.

When I do play FOF now, I spend maybe 5 minutes per hour that I'm playing looking to see what's going on in the league. I'll check out who's leading the lead in rushing, passing, sacks, etc at the midway point and then again when the regular season is over. But that's it. I spend zero minutes during the offseason on analyzing what my division rivals have done...who they've signed, lost, drafted, and how these guys will impact their team. Maybe a newspaper-like feature where there is an "article" for each team would be a good idea.

I'm completely within my own universe when I play FOF...my team, my cap, my coaches. That's pretty much it. If I can learn about other things from around the league, learn more about draft prospects, etc EFFICIENTLY and QUICKLY, that would help tremendously.

larrymcg421

05-21-2007, 02:07 PM

Actually the new feature I would kill for is head to head playcalling in MP leagues. If it only had that feature, I'd probably pay up to $49.99 for the game.

Custom league sizes are nice, but I've noticed that highly customizable games generally seem to be the buggiest games, so I don't mind keeping it the way it is. If anything, I would much prefer the option to sim multiple seasons.

Abe Sargent

05-21-2007, 02:13 PM

/raises hand

The most fun I ever had playing FOF was FOF2k1 with expansion. Despite all of its flaws as a sim, that makes 2k1 a better sim that every single FOF that has come out since in my opinion. I barely bought the last one, and only did so because I was bored, and only played it for a week or so and never picked it up since. The next game would have to have somethingt that I would truly find new and exciting, like expansion or customable size leagues in order for me to pick it up. Otherwise, I won;t even bother.

Honolulu Blue

05-21-2007, 02:32 PM

rkmsuf

05-21-2007, 02:33 PM

are we talking customization or MAXIMUM customization? That's a MAXIMUM distinction that I think needs to be cleared up.

what he said

wade moore

05-21-2007, 03:14 PM

See, I wonder if it's a sticking point for non-customers, though. FOFC is a self-selecting group. Yeah, we talk about lots of other stuff, but the majority of us came here because of FOF, which means we value certain things in sims.A lot of good stuff in your post, but I trimmed it down so my message wasn't a mile long ;)...I think you may have a point. My gut feeling is that the effort probably wouldn't increase his sales enough to make it worth it, but this poll isn't going to give a true indication. Those that won't buy FOF without the customization aren't going to be reading this thread.Part of my problem grasping this being a worthwild effort is I just can't understand how that feature could be so all-fire important to someone - but then again, they would probably think I'm absolutely insane for making a fake MP league radio show, so Idano... I do truely wonder how Jim could get a gauge on it. Despite me voting for option 3, odds are (if it was required for MP play) I'd probably get a new version if this was all that was offered, but I personally feel like there is so much more that his time would be better spent on.I was one of the ones that had previously bought all the Jim-approved versions (i.e., not 2002) of FOF, but skipped this one. I was - and remain - underwhelmed by the improved feature set, especially considering it was three years coming. Perhaps when a new version comes along, there will be enough changes, along with the changes I missed, to make it worth a buy. Customization in all its forms would help, but I don't think it would be enough by itself.

I know this is going to sound heretical, but I think Jim would be making a good move in blowing up FOF and starting over. I think the current version of the engine has gone about as far as it can go, and if the new game is more versatile, accurate, immersive, and challenging, who can complain about that?I strongly believe that people who make statements like the above do not truely understand FOF 2k7 and how much is added/improved. New Features/Improvements are not all about what "major" feature can be touted on the back of the box. Thoughts like the above, imo, are what have turned games like Madden into what they are now.

Dutch

05-21-2007, 03:31 PM

I was one of the ones that had previously bought all the Jim-approved versions (i.e., not 2002) of FOF, but skipped this one. I was - and remain - underwhelmed by the improved feature set, especially considering it was three years coming. Perhaps when a new version comes along, there will be enough changes, along with the changes I missed, to make it worth a buy. Customization in all its forms would help, but I don't think it would be enough by itself.

I know this is going to sound heretical, but I think Jim would be making a good move in blowing up FOF and starting over. I think the current version of the engine has gone about as far as it can go, and if the new game is more versatile, accurate, immersive, and challenging, who can complain about that?

The game engine is just about finalized. I think the next version should focus on improved MP usage, adding (and enhancing) almost all of the off-season stuff, continue to revamp/improve player development and taking a good long serious look at long-career AI roster management.

Having said that, I'll live with FOF2k7 just fine...TCY is collecting dust and I'm all about jumping back into some TCY if it's TCY2.

King of New York

05-21-2007, 03:49 PM

I'd like to see it--I just cannot get into historical replays without it--but as much as it pains me to say this, I do not see its inclusion as boosting sales more than marginally--certainly not as much as a) 2d graphical representation of the games, b) head-to-head multiplayer playcalling, or even c) a good new edition of TCY to provide draft classes for FOF would boost sales and broaden the game's audience.

Ksyrup

05-21-2007, 03:55 PM

I have no interest in a graphical representation of the game. I watched one game in Solevision when I first bought it and that's it. I haven't even seen what OOTP's in-game interface looks like. Just sim the game and let me see the boxscore.

Logan

05-21-2007, 04:03 PM

I strongly believe that people who make statements like the above do not truely understand FOF 2k7 and how much is added/improved. New Features/Improvements are not all about what "major" feature can be touted on the back of the box. Thoughts like the above, imo, are what have turned games like Madden into what they are now.

Here's the thing though...a lot of the people who don't get too deep into FOF, like myself, do so because we don't want to spend all that time developing gameplans, selecting plays, analyzing game logs, box scores, etc. Those are the areas where all the improvements you're referring to are happening. And that's fine...actually, it's better than fine since Jim is intending to make a realistic text sim, and by putting his resources into those areas, he's accomplishing that goal.

For us quick-simmers (and if you're one and you disagree with what I see, please chime in), we're generally fine with seeing the best team end the season with a 12-4 record and the league's highest rusher getting 1800 yards. How he got there isn't a huge deal to me. I'd rather blindly trust the engine to produce the desired results than spend the time trying to find out why things aren't working properly.

I'm not saying Jim should cater to me as a fast-sim, SP guy, but that's where my interest in the series lies.

Kodos

05-21-2007, 04:04 PM

I should add, as a guy who would like to see a high degree of customizability, I still don't think it would be worth Jim's time. But I would certainly be happy if he did it. :)

molson

05-21-2007, 04:25 PM

I'd love customization and expansion, but I'd be worried that all the advances in SP AI would be lost when the game is re-structured.

Honestly, if Jim just tweaked the game once a year, making the AI cap management better and better, and adding more subtle new immersion features every year, I'd gladly shell out whatever he wants.

RendeR

05-21-2007, 04:36 PM

I'm at the point where something big has to change before I buy another version. I am still using 2k4 and didn't bother getting 2k7 because it really didn't change much.

Things that will get my to buy a new updated version:

custom league/conference/division sizes and names : Needs to be able to scale up from a 4 team league to a 10 division 60 max team design

Along with the above, the ability to have expansion happen as I the player see fit or even add an option to randomly expand.

Head to head playcalling games online

Coaching STAFF, not just the HC and coordinators. With meaningful stats we can really compare.

and lastly (for now) an editable HTML creator, so you can create the output to fit whatever page design you have. Editing the pages that come out of 2k4 while not overly difficult, is tedious and must be done after every dump.

Give me some of THOSE items and I'll buy another copy. update the game otehrwise and I might as well keep 2k4 and save my lone PCgame purchase for something that will entertain me more fully.

I love FOF, I keep starting and restarting careers, but until I can do some of the things above, I won't upgrade.

Desmond

05-21-2007, 04:54 PM

It is of the utmost importance to me. If I wasn't in a MP league I would not have bought 2k7.

Vinatieri for Prez

05-21-2007, 04:59 PM

zero interest in league customization. I want to see 2 more other things that are more worthwhile:

- complete overhaul of coaching staff (as has been discussed exhaustively in other threads)

- interactive college universe (essentially combining TCY/FOF into one game) either as one game or by add-on expansion.

Chubby

05-21-2007, 05:06 PM

shouldn't this be moved to the appropriate forum? I mean, what point is there in having separate forums? FOF topics are ON topic.... sheesh

nilodor

05-21-2007, 05:24 PM

shouldn't this be moved to the appropriate forum? I mean, what point is there in having separate forums? FOF topics are ON topic.... sheesh

It was in the other forum to begin with, the big man felt that it would get more views in this forum, since it pertains to people who may not be interested in FOF 2007. I would agree with his reasons.

Joe

05-21-2007, 05:32 PM

no, $39.99 was too much for the current game.

Celeval

05-21-2007, 07:40 PM

Meh, I'd buy it to get the latest version, but it's not a big deal to me.

henry296

05-21-2007, 07:47 PM

I've seen some people try to separate expansion and customization. However, with the current size of the NFL they almost need to be tied together since expansion requires a 33 team league schedule which will help build the required customization.

I voted no because I want an NFL sim not a football sim.

Buccaneer

05-21-2007, 08:04 PM

I believe I used to be in the customizability camp but not any more. What I prefer to see, if I were to ever buy FOF again, is a much more-in-depth GM/Front Office sim - even at the expense of a Coaching sim. I really like some of the ideas noop brought up. However, if I were to get a football game like that, I would want to play historical seasons, thus the ability to choose a 1970 league, for example. I wouldn't need to see it customizable to the point where I could choose any league size or structure - just hardcode the five or six static league formats since 1970.

Buccaneer

05-21-2007, 08:06 PM

Now in looking at the poll, once again we get a poll with limited choices. Why does it have to be all or nothing?

SteveMax58

05-21-2007, 08:16 PM

I'd buy it. I havent owned every version (FOF2 I think, 2k4, & now 2k7), but I'd love to have custom league sizes.

Even if it were restricted to certain league sizes & divisional setups...so long as I could AT LEAST replay historical-moddled setups I'd be quite pleased. Of course...I'd also pay full price for a 2d graphical game playout as well, so perhaps I'm not overly demanding.

SFL Cat

05-21-2007, 08:35 PM

i hear if you want to play CFL-style football there's this other great option for you...:D

I also hear it's customizable out the wahzoo!

laser

05-21-2007, 08:39 PM

I love FOF but have a hard time keeping interested in a solo league because there are just too many teams. I like to be interested in the entire league - not just my team. If I could run an 8-12 team league that would be fantastic.

Although I love FOF, I will purchase Bowl Bound Pro Football when it comes out just because of this feature and will probably spend most of my time with that game if it is any good at all. If FOF did have this customization that would be even better because I really do enjoy this game!

stevew

05-21-2007, 08:45 PM

2007 is a much more complex game than 2004, and it takes a lot more factors to be successful than the limited ones you needed in 2004. If you may have thought that it wasn't a major upgrade, I would definitely re-think that as it's a whole new ballgame in many ways.

I'd like to have customized league sizes, but mainly just for historical replay. I wish their was some sort of reference database for FootBall like there is for baseball. So you could just import a year, and fire up the season. Expansion was pretty fun, but at some point it still turns into a situation where you're just a regular squad.

Young Drachma

05-21-2007, 09:00 PM

Here's the thing though...a lot of the people who don't get too deep into FOF, like myself, do so because we don't want to spend all that time developing gameplans, selecting plays, analyzing game logs, box scores, etc. Those are the areas where all the improvements you're referring to are happening. And that's fine...actually, it's better than fine since Jim is intending to make a realistic text sim, and by putting his resources into those areas, he's accomplishing that goal.

For us quick-simmers (and if you're one and you disagree with what I see, please chime in), we're generally fine with seeing the best team end the season with a 12-4 record and the league's highest rusher getting 1800 yards. How he got there isn't a huge deal to me. I'd rather blindly trust the engine to produce the desired results than spend the time trying to find out why things aren't working properly.

I'm not saying Jim should cater to me as a fast-sim, SP guy, but that's where my interest in the series lies.

This is me too. I don't care about all of the mundane stuff. I'm a skyboxes kind of guy. I want to GM the team, I want to hire the folks to run the team and if the team sucks, I want to fire them and go from there.

Young Drachma

05-21-2007, 09:01 PM

But I did buy 2K7 the other day. Probably half to support Jim and half because it was during the draft and I was having one of those weekends where I wanted to import college players in and play out a career.

I haven't touched it since that weekend, but...I probably will later in the year.

RedKingGold

05-21-2007, 09:34 PM

I think I pretty much fit in with the majority of this one. While I'd really like expansion to get back into the FOF series, it's not exactly a gamebreaker for me to not have it.

It's weird how much my game-emphasis has shifted due to MP. I've been very fortunate to be invited into three great leagues, (two of which I am currently still a member), and no AI can ever matchup to the relationships and rivalries formed in an all-human MP league. Other than testing, I have not touched a serious SP career in FOF in a long time. Further, the most recent other text sim I've purchased and spent time with was OOTP 6.5. So, I'm pretty devoted to the FOF series (a proud owner since FOF 2) and Jim would likely have to sell the brand to someone else before I stopped buying.

That being said, I'm really, really hoping that an updated TCY with multiplayer functions is the next product to be put out by Solecismic for several reasons:

1. TCY has become pretty dated, and an updated version w/ newer engine and replacing some of the gimmies (ex: building up academics to get a recruiting edge) would whet my appetite for SP.
2. I bought Bowl Bound with the hopes of joining the FOFC league, but I just could not get into it at all. I'd really like the chance to run a team in an MP college universe.
3. The ideas for the making of a TCY-FOF MP universe are simply incredible. The rookie draft is already the most exciting time of the year for me in FOF MP, and having rookie backstories would make it even more immersive.
4. The transition from FOF2K4 to FOF2K7 was somewhat tricky because of unforeseen bugs that were not found until the masses put the product to some serious testing. In one of the MP leagues I'm in, some owners even suggested placing an asterisk on that season while running 6.0d because of the unweildly statistics created exploiting some very small holes in the simulation engine. It was hard on the owners and I'd hate to have to convert again in the near future.

I guess I kind of went of on a tangent, but that's how I roll.

yabanci

05-21-2007, 10:50 PM

I think the problem with this type of poll question is the implied assumption that the addition actually would work well and not be torpedoed by the law of unintended consequences, an assumption I'm not sure can be made.

Adding league customization runs the risk of OOTP syndrome, where existing weaknesses in a game go unaddressed and instead valuable development time is diverted to making possible crazy league structures that create a host of new and unacceptable problems. The unhappy result is the people who don't care about customizable league structures are pissed off because the game hasn't been improved for them while the people who really wanted customizable league structures are pissed off because the customized leagues don't function as they had envisioned (e.g., crazy stats, roster moves, talent distribution, schedules, bugs, etc.). Everybody is then disappointed with the new product and the developer loses one of his most valuable assets, his goodwill (favorable reputation of an established and well-run business).

I'm not saying this would happen, but to varying degrees it very well might. So my vote would be to stick with simulating professional or college football.

Some kind of simple expansion, however, might be a different story. For instance, an option to start out a new career as an expansion team. The game could populate 31 teams with players and then let the user populate his team through an expansion draft off other teams' rosters. Sort of a combination of the existing options to start out with either a fully populated league or an allocation draft. The league would then proceed as usual after the expansion draft. Not a perfect solution, but a baby step.

Noop

05-22-2007, 12:31 AM

I am not sure I understand the expansion camp. If you want to rebuild a team why don't you take the worst team in the league and cut every single player off the team and start empty cupboard. I like expansion but not to the point of some of posters here it seems. I honestly think immersion is key...

I was playing earlier tonight and my team cannot get a new stadium approved. Instead of me having to try to leave my city at the risk of losing fans how about cities offer me different relocation packages (I.E. Portland offers me a 12 year lease, 80% funding and a local stadium to play in rent free while the new stadium is being built.)

That kind of stuff makes things interesting because Portland is not a football town so it may not be the best business move. Or my team can try to move to somewhere in the northeast, which could infringe on another teams market so that team blocks the move or the commissioner steps in to block the move. This would change the entire dynamic of moving your team because you must find the ideal place and have your owner sign off on it.

Another thing that would help make the game fun and more interesting is surgery. It can be as simple as an email from the team doctor telling me that my starting RB has bone chips in his knee, which will affect his play. I can either decide to request my RB have surgery so he can be back for our playoff run or let him play on it until the wheel fall off. The flip side of that my player can request surgery and I can threaten breach of contract or suspension without pay if he decides to get the procedure done.

Along with what I stated earlier I think the addition of these "features" will greatly increase the immersion factor.

Izulde

05-22-2007, 12:44 AM

Noop

05-22-2007, 08:15 AM

Expansion is nowhere close to the same as taking over the worst team in the league.

It's about being there at the beginning of the story, having control over the whole of the franchise's existence from birth to whatever conclusion point your career ends at.

Taking over the worst team or empty cupboard team, while comparable in challenge, still has that medias res quality about it.

I see your point. However I am not sure you can have expansion with the league now locked in to four divisions of four teams a piece. If you add two teams(One for each conference) one division with have five teams while the others will have four.

I am no expert at this but I am sure it will lead to an unbalanced schedule somewhere with some teams having to take a bye later in the season. Again i am not expert at this but this is what I assume would happen.

I am not against expansion I just would rather see time invested in things that will actually make the game fun.

:)

Noop

OldGiants

05-22-2007, 09:03 AM

I haven't bought 2007 yet for a variety of reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of the game. I certainly will purchase it before next season rolls around.

That said, as many other vets have stated, I have no interest whatever in play calling in any form (I tried it once, lost 2 yards and never went back). I have no interest in MP because my recreation time available fluctuates into the 'none available' zone too often these days. So single player, long career is what I do.

That said, I'm not sure I would go for customization for fictional or historic leagues. I think those are two separate products. For example, I love OOTP for fictional or current/fictional forward use. But I use Baseball Mogul for historic replays do to its simplicity and decent results. I like to watch he AI trade and the WWII players stay out of the military, but that is a one shot deal, really, and not worth taking the time to setup in OOTP. BM does this quick and simple, and for only $20.

Redoing history when you know who is good takes all the team building fun out of the equation. Drafting HOFers and bragging about how much fun it was for you is all metal masturbation, akin to going on and on about how much fun you have jerking off while looking at pictures of Rosie O'Donnell and Hillary Clinton.

OTOH, my best moments of FOF came with the expansion Browns, building a winner, watching those retire, and then having an over-the-hill Tim Couch (remember him?) put on the jersey one last time and lead a 9-7 barely made the playoffs with a rookie QB (injured in the last game) team to one last championship.

I like the expansion option with the expansion draft (which you don't get with the empty cupboard approach) and first pick in the college draft. But with 32 teams currently in the real NFL, I don't see how Jim could make this work without mucking up the schedule. That version went from 29 tp 32 over time, adding two teams that you could pick up as GM along the way, but you'd have to go to 36 IMO to make that work today. I have trouble following 32 teams and 36 would be even more of a chore. It would lessen the immersion for me.

I'd like to see more FM style interaction with the players and media.

Game planning? I still feel that's border line cheating, much like the super tactics in earlier versions of FM. If you are doing something the AI can't, its an exploit, not a feature. I can see its application to MP, but then code added to MP is code I'll never use. Its a major So What?

I'm looking forward to Labor Day weekend when I hope I'll have the chance to spend 72 hours (who needs need bed time when your wife is away?) with FOF2007. What I've read here sounds very good.

Most complaint threads are in the 'this is a million to one chance against this happening' without considering that FOF enthusiasts sim several million games each year and so (at 1 in a million odds) these oddities should happen several times overall, just like lotteries are won by someone routinely. Instead of complaining about FOF being unrealistic, those whiners should feel good about winning the lottery of unusual events. (In truth, many old-timers do feel great about bizarre plays that kill them).

Anyway, I pretty much like the game as-is and will appreciate whatever non-MP features Jim adds.

stevew

05-22-2007, 09:39 AM

My idea anyways....

I suppose, he could program in a bunch of different scenerios in the next version. While it wouldn't be perfect, he could have the option to start at several different stages w/preassigned perameters.

Say the options would be pre-75(26 teams), pre-95(28 teams), pre 2002(30 teams), and "modern day"(32 teams)

For instance, the first one could be the pre-75 universe, 26 teams, (1970 era, and on)....you could play that way for as long as you want, and at any point in time after that, you could hit a button to expand and add 2 teams(Seahawks and Bucs) to go to 28.....there would be a draft, you could then play that way for as long as you wish. The new schedule and bye weeks would automatically be triggered.

Then at some point in the future after that(maybe like a min of 5 game years), you could choose the option to go with the 95 expansion, and add 2 more teams(jacksonville/carolina). The divisions would then automatically go into the proper alignment, the schedules as well.

And then, for ease of programming, and I'm sure the odd schedule was a bitch to program....I would say that the final possible expansion you could trigger would be a combo Browns/Texans expansion, which would bring it to current era schedulings.

It wouldn't be perfect or anything, but hopefully something like that could be implemented, as it would re-incorporate expansion, as well as giving a limited choice of various league sizes. FOF has to have some sort of structure to it, so I'm sure something like my idea wouldn't break that part of the game too badly. I know it would be limited to only have 3 different times to create an expansion scenerio, but hell, you could stretch that into a 100 year career probably relatively easily.

st.cronin

05-22-2007, 09:52 AM

That's actually a very neat idea, stevew.

Logan

05-22-2007, 10:19 AM

I agree that it could work, and it would be something I would be mildly interested in (I say mildly because I wouldn't go too far back with it...I'd probably start with the "30 to 32" file).

I just like expansion because going through the expansion draft is fun, as is the idea of drafting your (hopefully) franchise QB and seeing how quickly you can build that team into a winner.

I would be perfectly content with something like this: have an expansion mode that starts at current day (or, preferably, at the end of the current season), but select an existing team as your "new team." Have the computer do a dispersal draft for that team's players (hey, you can even manually do this if you wanted to), and then you're left with an expansion squad. The other 31 teams select the players that will be available for an expansion draft, and then off you go. Your new team remains in the old team's "slot" so scheduling and division alignment isn't a problem.

If this option is available at any point in the game (i.e. at the beginning of the 2011 season, not just at the true beginning of the game), it will eliminate the potential problem of people seeing the same players available in the expansion draft everytime they chose to begin the game with that option. Now, people might have a problem with Peyton Manning suddenly QBing the Lions, but screw those people, this is my game.

Abe Sargent

05-22-2007, 01:07 PM

Post the first:

I am not sure I understand the expansion camp. If you want to rebuild a team why don't you take the worst team in the league and cut every single player off the team and start empty cupboard. I like expansion but not to the point of some of posters here it seems. I honestly think immersion is key...

Here's the deal. It's not the same thing at all. Grabbing these bad players and trying to find diamonds in the rough in the expansion draft is amazingly fun - no dice with an empty cupboard scenario. EC has a problem with the salary cap and whatnot - not so the expanioners. It's not a true sim of expansion. I want to remind you that we had expansion before. Maybe its clumsy to schedule, but we already had it. It already worked!

I've played empty cupboard games and I've played expansion. Playing as an expansion team is simply the single most enjoyable experience of my FOF career.

Post the second:

I am not against expansion I just would rather see time invested in things that will actually make the game fun.

I know that you followed this up with a smiley face, so I;m not going to give you too much of a hard time over this line, but I want to point out that it sounds seriously arrogant. "You 25 people or so who have responded that expansion and customization would be a game selling point should realize that would not make the game more fun," is the undertone of that statement. Even with a smiley I still found it jarring.

Jestre

05-23-2007, 07:45 PM

The last Football text sim I bought was Lance Haffner, the next football text sim I will buy will be an OOTP-like football game with league customization and historical play. Until then I will continue to wait. Hopefully FOF will be the one.

Logan

05-23-2007, 08:00 PM

Just out of curiosity, have you been a lurking guest for a while?

Jestre

05-23-2007, 08:16 PM

Nope, was directed here from a thread on the OOTP site. I follow the FOF development there. Thought I am the target group for this thread.

Logan

05-23-2007, 08:22 PM

Cool, no harm intended.

Icy

05-24-2007, 11:26 AM

Wouldn't buy it if that is the only major addition.

Apart from the usual nice AI and gameplay improvemenmts that Jim adds to his games, I really think it needs an interface redesign, and i'm not talking about too much graphics that distract from the game, but at least to not to have the feeling of playing with an 80's game (no offense intended).

Of course that is just my opinion and i know some of you love the current interface, but for me it's really old and boring and one of the reasons of why i use FOF just for online leagues, the game has little immersion factor for me to play solo.

My biggest excitement would come from:

- Players, coaches, scouts and agents personalities and integration, media and news, fans reactions, etc ala FM. I want to feel the fans and owner pressure if i have a crap season, the excitement of reaching the playoffs, the players talking with me to complain about playing time, about a redflag team mate, etc. Instead of just seeing a boring screen with the disgruntled word in it. I would like to know why are they holding out, what do they think of the new contract i offered them, etc. Also a funny draft experience with media articles, mock draft etc (like Gary's basketball game). In resume, i want a real game universe surrounding the great game engine to help me to feel i'm a real GM.

- A 2D engine would be nice too.

Kobeck

05-25-2007, 04:16 AM

Expansion and contraction would be great fun. In other words possible start a league with 8, 12 teams whatever. Add teams in 2s or 4s and if the league looses too much money a couple of teams are nixed and there is a contraction draft for the remaining teams. Sounds fun too me anyways.

2d game engine sounds good on the surface, but I would probably not like it because I would be yelling at the SS dot to get in the box pre snap and then be yelling at the same SS dot for falling for the play action and getting burned on a Fly - lol

Would like to see fewer city options though. More of an OOTP market thing. Above average for say Miami and Tiny for Jonesboro instead of the non editable details offered now. Not that I don't like those details, just that they are not editable.

As long as I am just saying things I would like I agree with all the newspaper, ect ideas. Would also love to see an all-star game and a complete spring league that players could be allocated too. Teams allocate as many players they want, within eligability guidlines, and then have to watch the games or read the stats too see how they did.

On a side note I really cheer for that Japanese KR/PR guy in the Europa league. Can't remember his name but he looks cat quick against NFL-E competition. Yes I actually watch NFL-E when I can.

Hoosierbuckeye

05-25-2007, 10:43 AM

I'd vote for an option to expand an existing league. Some leagues have wait lists and this would be a perfect opportunity for a different challenge that exists within the real world of football. . .building a new team to compete against preexisting clubs. This one little tweak would add to the immersion of the game.

richard recliner

12-16-2007, 11:55 PM

I have inquired directly with Solesemic directly regarding the issue of customized league setups, flexible scheduling and playoff formats. additionally I also asked about setting up a competing league, aka NFL v AFL or USFL v NFL. I too was given the reasoning that it requires far to much programming. I really dig FOF, but have refused to buy it just for this very reason. I would be willing to pay as much as $50.00 for this version. I have to believe that all the online league players / commissioners would really dig a feature like this. It can't be that hard.

cartman

12-17-2007, 12:06 AM

Capital

12-17-2007, 12:34 PM

Expansion and the ability to control an expansion team is the only customization I want.

I don't need all of the variety of OOTP (it's borderline too much). It virtually requires a tutorial just to get started.

molson

12-17-2007, 12:47 PM

Expansion and the ability to control an expansion team is the only customization I want.

Same here.

Anything more than this and I'm convinced it won't work as well.

Maybe a compromise could be 2-3 options for league formats. An NFL-style setup, a couple of smaller ficitional leagues with set conference and playoff structures, and maybe a older-style NFL setup with 6 divisions.

I'd rather Jim keep forever improving what he has then start a brand new game where we'll have to wait years to get back to where he is with the current FOF.

rkmsuf

12-17-2007, 12:48 PM

maximum customization is very important

larrymcg421

12-17-2007, 01:04 PM

As for major changes, I would prefer head to head playcalling for MP leagues to customization.

Logan

12-17-2007, 01:12 PM

Build up the SP game with more immersion. Nothing else really matters to me.

Synovia

12-17-2007, 01:16 PM

I wouldn't buy the game with customizable league sizes. That would mean that very little time had been spent fixing things that I think matter:

Like the poor AI, like totally non-understandable game planning, etc.

molson

12-17-2007, 01:25 PM

like totally non-understandable game planning,

Ya, I'd probably buy any FOF game unless this isn't addresed. I want to be able to decide what kind of offense and defense my team will run without trying to figure out how that translates to dozens (hundreds?) of number on a spreadsheet. That seems so 1998. I'm not a computer programmer, so I shouldn't be punching in numbers and seeing how they relate to each other.

MikeVic

12-17-2007, 01:29 PM

I'd like expansion teams and the ability to make a CFL.

rkmsuf

12-17-2007, 01:31 PM

I can't imagine there is going to be another version anytime soon anyway.

Toddzilla

12-17-2007, 03:33 PM

Whomever bumped this thread needs a cock-punch.

Pumpy Tudors

12-17-2007, 03:34 PM

i think the next fof game should fire you if you don't win the championship. call it "don't be don shula"

Grammaticus

12-17-2007, 05:19 PM

Adding the ability to customize league structure with an expansion feature would be a value added feature worthy of purchase. Obviously it does not juice up the excitement for some people. I too have not purchased the 2007 version. I'm sure there is a lot of updated logic that makes the game better. In the end, to me it is pretty much the same game with an update.

This game is doing what Madden does to a different audience. While Madden makes graphics and eye candy big hit features to milk its customer base, FOF is doing something similar on the sim side. Obviously there are other differences as Madden is an annual release and FOF is sporadic.

If you want to expand your target audience, you have to add some features that capture a wider audience. The pure sim engine guys will buy the game because it is the best sim engine available. But the interface and fantasy environment is lacking. Making your league size customizable and allowing expansion, lets you enjoy the game in an entirely different way. Now you can create a fantasy league or re-create historic scenarios. If not, you are stuck with an NFL simulator only.

A 2D or 3D graphics component would really be much better. But it is my understanding the developer does not have the skill set for that. This means he would have to hire resources. This creates a variable to his business model that represents risk, with a potential for future reward. The posts that I have read of Jim’s leads me to believe he is more likely to stick with a more conservative model of tweaking his existing game design. Sort of an “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” approach. He is making good money with low development costs and a very small market share. Taking a risk to incur costs needed to target a larger market share is….well risky.

Now that said, the game is very good. It just does not offer much improvement from the last version to the next. Now, I know many of you would jump in and tell me it is a vastly different game with much better AI, etc. I see where that was posted above and I’m sure that you folks are able to break it down and justify the cost for a new model of the same model. That really brings us back to why the target market is a very small one.

It is not necessarily a bad thing. I also don’t think it will change much until the current re-tred process is not financially viable.

richard recliner

12-17-2007, 06:40 PM

There actually is a lot more that goes into custom leagues and expansion than meets the eye. In a product that prides itself on statistical accuracy, it is much easier to get realistic results with a known league size. Once you start adding in variables like league size, changing structure, etc. that increases the complexity greatly in trying to keeps the stats as realistic as possible.

You are correct in the assumption that simply adding in a way to change the number of teams or league structure would be quite simple. But the effort needed to keep realistic stats across all of the possible combinations is what would take a very large amount of programming time.

There is a tradeoff that has to be taken into account with flexibilty and accuracy. You add more to one side, it takes away from the other.

Cartman,

I hear what you are saying about statisical corruption. But shouldn't league be able to take on a life of it's own? Part of the fun of pro football history is how the game has grown and changed over the years. In the beginning was the run game; later came the forward pass. Whoever thought Dan Marino or Bret Favre would ever pass for 60,000 plus yards in their respective careers? The point is that the game sould be able to grow and change as a league history developes.

I do agree the statisical accuracy is important. Wouldn't it be possible to add an algorithm which looks at the players statistics after the end of a season which could search for statistical anomalies and then make minor corrections to each of those players ratings. I wonder if anyone ever thought that Dan Marino would pass for over 5000 yards in a season, yet he did it.

I know this is the tip of the iceburg. But the game should be able to take on a life of its own? What do you think?

richard recliner

12-17-2007, 06:40 PM

Raiders Army

12-17-2007, 07:37 PM

I'd rather have FPS graphics added.

Edit--Front Page Sports, not First Person Shooter

richard recliner

12-17-2007, 09:11 PM

RA,

Why FPS graphics. As I remember, those graphics were terrible. How about if Mr. Gindin provide an interface which made use of the FOF game engine with the graphics of something like Madden 2008. This would be much cooler. However, it seems to me that most people who play this game are much more interested in statistical analysis and strategic game playing / planning. Of course, I may misunderstand completely what you mean when you say FPS graphics. To me FPS means Front Page Sports.

Raiders Army

12-17-2007, 09:16 PM

Yeah, I don't know if Madden 2008 graphics are available. I'd settle for Xs and Os or Tom Landry Strategic Football graphics, but I think that Front Page Sports Football Pro graphics would be a viable graphical solution as opposed to the Madden 2008 graphics.

Buccaneer

12-17-2007, 09:56 PM

Tom Landry Strategic Football

Best football game I have ever played. At the time, my Mac version was far superior to anything FPS had put out (this was about 1994-1995).

Julio Riddols

12-18-2007, 06:39 AM

I think it would be incredibly awesome, personally, to sort of merge FOF with Tecmo.

Tecmo graphics but with realistic gameplay and deep statistical career simulation would be my personal dream game. I honestly don't think I would ever leave the house, except to go buy food if I couldn't get someone else to bring it to me..

That said, I am definitely of the opinion that FOF 2007 added so much for MP mode, deeper stat tracking, and overall ability to gameplan that it was most definitely worth the price to upgrade. It is still the closest thing to my ideal game that I have ever seen, and I will probably be interested in any new version that comes out, simply because Jim has never sold me short in the past. I have never felt as though a purchase I made from Solecismic didn't come with enough new features.

And then you have the continued support, which is the best I have ever seen for any game, period.