FOF 2007 vs. Pro Football Simulator

[amazedbygrace86]

I am a rather new fan of text-sim sports games and looking to get a quality American football text-sim. I highly enjoy the GM parts of the games, but I also enjoy being able to make the decisions on the field that affect the course of the game (i.e. playcalling, subs, etc.)

I was wondering if any of you had any thoughts on how FOF 2007 stacks up to Pro Football Simulator by Barcode games?

Both cost $25 so I am wondering which one is worth the money at this point?

I've been impressed with Pro Football Simulator's excellent customer support, but the lack of playcalling in-game is a huge drawback for me. However, maybe play-calling is over-rated in text-sims.

Any thoughts?

[Mike Lowe]

It's a tough decision. I love FOF, but am really following what Brooks is doing with PFS as I believe his vision, not to mention his commitment, is stellar.

PFS sounds like it's going to have some huge changes on the horizon. For me, the feel of FOF just isn't there anymore. Both games have their quirks, but I'm excited to see what PFS has to offer in the coming months especially--reminds a lot of folks of OOTP when it was getting off the ground.

If you're looking to get into a multi-player league for PFS, check out the league we just started a few days ago:

PFS Network | The football simulation fix you've be waiting for (http://www.pfsnetwork.net)

Our first file update for the (NFL) 2011 season (free agency week 1 preseason) is November 28th.

[QuikSand]

Play calling is absolutely overrated, for what that's worth.

[amazedbygrace86]

Guys, thanks for your thoughts! Keep 'em coming!

QuikSand, in your experience, why is playcalling overrated?

[AgustusM]

I like the direction PFS is headed and I am troubled by the lack of modernization of FOF. But as they stand today there is no comparison. FOF is a product that has over 10 years of development, testing and improvements behind it while PFS is still a new product.

If you are looking to buy a product today I think FOF is the only way to go, as PFS matures and assuming we see no more updates from FOF that may change.

[freddylamar]

Definitely go for PFS and save yourself the headache of watching these boards religiously to see if this game will ever have another update or new release. Jim has a rather large community of gamers that have been playing his games for years now and he can't even drop one line to us as of what direction FOF is going. The game was great four years ago but without a true update we are stuck playing the same game over and over and over and over. I am simply tired of being handcuffed by this developer. If PFS has an active developer that is being active with the community to give us the best game I say go with them. We all should jump ship and show Jim we aren't just another twenty something dollars in his pocket. The game has become unplayable to me and that's a shame. I have spent countless hours playing this game and believe it will always be dear to my heart. I just wish we could have some closure if there isn't another version in the works. Come on Jim, man up and show this community a little respect and give us a line or two. :banghead:

[corbes]

I've always enjoyed calling my own plays in FOF, for what it's worth.

[amazedbygrace86]

Again, thanks for everyone's thoughts!

Corbes, why do you enjoy calling your own plays?

[Epi_862]

Definitely go for PFS and save yourself the headache of watching these boards religiously to see if this game will ever have another update or new release. Jim has a rather large community of gamers that have been playing his games for years now and he can't even drop one line to us as of what direction FOF is going. The game was great four years ago but without a true update we are stuck playing the same game over and over and over and over. I am simply tired of being handcuffed by this developer. If PFS has an active developer that is being active with the community to give us the best game I say go with them. We all should jump ship and show Jim we aren't just another twenty something dollars in his pocket. The game has become unplayable to me and that's a shame. I have spent countless hours playing this game and believe it will always be dear to my heart. I just wish we could have some closure if there isn't another version in the works. Come on Jim, man up and show this community a little respect and give us a line or two. :banghead:


Couldnt possibly agree with you more. To the original poster: i'd definitely go with PFS, only because thats being actively developed. There's no sign FOF will ever get a modern overhaul. Even though as it stands now, FOF is the superior game, you'll get your long-term money's worth with PFS.

[AgustusM]

play calling is a huge thing for me and I could see making a more serious switch when PFS supports it. Putting the team together for me is only one part of the experience, I need to be able to call the plays so I can run the team in the way I intended when putting it together.

Both games could go a long way by adding a simple OOTP style -in game editor. I like to be able to pop in to the game and make changes especially at the beginning that are a more accurate reflection of my interpretation of what is happening in the real NFL. Yes I know about FOF's csv import, but I find it cumbersome and even with randomizing of files turned off I still get highly out of line ratings with every new start. To each is own, but I tend to spend a lot of time getting the initial roster just right and then play it for 20+ seasons depending on how often we see a new version.

[amazedbygrace86]

Again, I really appreciate everyone's insights and input!

At this point, I'm going to run with PFS. I love the developer's active support, and I like the direction the game is going. Personally, I would love some play-calling, too, but I'm willing to wait and be patient for that to develop.

[aston217]

Well, I may be biased. But PFS doesn't seem to be a very deep game in the player development.

That might not be bad if it had a kickass interface, but it looks even more terrible than FOF, if that's possible. Looks like a web form.

I get the impression that PFS ratings are kind of just all over the place. FOF...there are layers, and layers, and layers of mystery. Well, maybe unless you are Ben, but for the rest of us. I've been playing this for a couple years now, and there's so much stuff I just haven't figured out all.

And the great thing about FOF, is you have a community like this where people have put in a lot of thought and done a lot of testing to try and figure some of that stuff out. Plus, great utilities like Stelmack's suite, where you can run Gameplan Analyzer on your opponents and really try to build a gameplan week to week.

SP is another thing entirely, but in my opinion, the FOF multiplayer experience is just unmatched. There's no time like draft time!

[Mike Lowe]

As I mentioned, love(d) FOF but 2 things that always bothered me:

Once a player goes out with an injury, he's done for that game. Period. Never coming back no matter how minor the injury is.

Also, QB's (or other positions) are never benched for poor performance IIRC. Maybe a QB? I might be wrong on this one...not entirely sure.

Again, PFS probably doesn't do this either, but it was just a couple of things that I'm hoping PFS gets right and I'm not waiting for Jim to fix, bless his soul.

[aston217]

Hrmm. When was the last time you played FOF? These seem like things that have always been in 2k7.

Players frequently get injured but tough it out. There are some injuries that will knock them out for the rest of the game, but many times they play through it. One game in the OSFL last season, my starting weakside linebacker hurt his hand, and then reinjured it twice in the same game. Thankfully it was nothing serious.

The QB playing time can be set to various thresholds for when to pull the starter. Poor performance/game being out of hand are probably the two factors there, and though it's not perfect, I think that is the general idea behind it.

In the CyFL late last season, my starter wasn't cutting it and we were being fairly lifeless. I think the backup played a good portion of the 2nd half, and actually did much better. We were still beaten handily, though, so I guess you could say his 2TD performance was in garbage time.

I admit I haven't given PFS a really detailed shakedown, so maybe I'm spewing some inaccuracies about that game :) Feel free to correct me where I am wrong.

[Rizon]

Again, thanks for everyone's thoughts!

Corbes, why do you enjoy calling your own plays?

For me:

Adjustments. I absolutely love to make adjustments on the fly (during a game). I guess it might be a control thing.

Creating a roster is 50% of my fun. The other 50% is making my own decisions during a game.

[corbes]

Corbes, why do you enjoy calling your own plays?

For me, for the most part, computer sports text sims are merely a convenient way to continue the imaginary sports universes I created for myself when I was a kid. I choose text sims because an important part of the imaginary universe back then was building teams from imaginary year to imaginary year. Another important part of the universe was playing out each game, and playcalling is now the extension of that for me.

[MizzouRah]

I see PFS has 2011 rosters, anyone have some impressions?

[MizzouRah]

I purchased the game today and I'm quite happy with it thus far.

The great thing is, the game designer is very active on his forums and does an excellent job of answering questions and has made quite a few updates.

[Yoda]

While the PFS is pretty, there are parts of it I find very counter intuitive. I spent about a month playing it, and at the end of that time, still found it lacking and substandard compared to FoF.

While I agree Jim could do a lot better in terms of mass communications- the times I have emailed, I have gotten good responses.

[amazedbygrace86]

Yoda, what parts of PFS were counter intuitive?

Also, I've tried messaging Jim in the past through this forum, but never heard back from him. What email did you use to contact him?

[Yoda]

Just about the whole interface, tbh. I really don't have the time atm or the inclination to go through each part and explain why. I get paid for that in real life, I don't want to start doing it for free. ;)

I've sent emails to the customer support address listed on the faq. The last time was on 8/15/2001.

[MizzouRah]

FOF is superb, I'm just ready for something new/different.

[aran]

The player attribute system is not fine-grained-enough for it to be a particularly deep simulation of football. I find the attributes system to be really bland compared to the more nuanced and complex system in FOF.

[Mike Lowe]

The player attribute system is not fine-grained-enough for it to be a particularly deep simulation of football. I find the attributes system to be really bland compared to the more nuanced and complex system in FOF.

And this is what can force people to look beyond the "madden generation overall rating" and look at performance on the field--another reason why the relative overall ratings are so nice.

[PhinsFan]

I haven't played PFS extensively but I have messed around with the demo recently and back over a year ago when I tried several demo's of various games. I decided on FOF because of the Multi-Player community and the depth of the game. FOF is very good in the MP environment.

Play calling being a SP function would serve different taste I would think. If your an SP player then the PFS game might suit ones taste more.

I like the MP leagues, I don't think that way of playing can be beat.

[Templar]

From the PFS developer Brooks:
"Next major upgrade will include coaches... then after that we'll probably look at calling plays. I'm sure we'll have lots of other features added in there as well, but those are the 2 primary ones".

More Information:
http://www.barcodegames.com/
and
http://www.barcodegames.com/Forum/index.php

[AnthonyL]

From the PFS developer Brooks:
"Next major upgrade will include coaches... then after that we'll probably look at calling plays. I'm sure we'll have lots of other features added in there as well, but those are the 2 primary ones".

Good news. If play calling becomes a regular feature of PFS and doesn't get messed up like in some games, I'll definitely buy it!

[Magnum357]

I would like to give my input here as well. Although I'm still on the fence continuing using FOF 2k4 version, I will say this about Front Office Football. I've tried a number of Football Simulations on computers over the years, and the thing I like about Front Office Football is that is all played on the Windows GUI interface. Granted, no graphics or fancy bells and whistles like console games or some of FOF's competiters, but that is why I kinda like FOF. You don't have to worry about the game not functioning in your GUI.

I don't know anything about this "Pro Football Simulation" but if the interface and install is more complex then Front Office Football, I will probably just ignore it. If I wanted that kind of complexity with the interface, I would just play on the console or play Max Football/Football Pro.

[amazedbygrace86]

Magnum357, I tend to agree with what you're saying. However, compared to Pro Football Simulator, I found myself getting a little bit overwhelmed with all of the options provided in FOF2007.

PFS has a pretty simple interface, and while it's not close to FOF in terms of immersion yet, I think the active commitment of the developer more than makes up for the lack of features.

[Templar]

Right, FOF can be overwhelming at first. Usually you get used to it.

PFS did not offer much less statistics than FOF. The major (Gridiron Greta is fine, but ...) statistics you'll find.
And by update to uptade more features are supplied.
The 2D play display (not yet final) is also an interesting feature that comes with the game.

[mrfahaji]

Seems a strange recommendation to go for PFS on the basis that their developer seems keen and you will "get more for your money in the long term" UNLESS all future improvements or releases will be free or heavily discounted. Surely you should buy FOF and wait until a version of PFS is released that is better?

[Verloren]

From when I bought PFS, it was a buy once, get all updates deal.

[Groo]

One problem a lot of FOF people are going to have with PFS is the fact that they have been playing FOF for so long they can't get in tune with the different interface and gameplay mechanics. Some people have put a lot of time and effort trying to 'crack' the game, and they feel like they are throwing all that away in going to another game... or they feel like they have to go through all that effort again. For those, it's better for them to stay with FOF.

Personally, since seeing this game, I really not only enjoy the game a lot but also love the fact that they game has a positive, energetic, and active person running the game and making updates regularly. I believe Jim was like this long ago...

[Blackadar]

I've toyed around with getting FPS, but every time I do I visit their forums and see something like "a rating 34 punter is being selected in the 1st round over a 95 rated QB". Then I walk away for 6 months before looking again...and the cycle continues.

[Templar]

One problem a lot of FOF people are going to have with PFS is the fact that they have been playing FOF for so long they can't get in tune with the different interface and gameplay mechanics.

I also made this experience!

So I play both in online leagues and I love both games.
As always there are two games in light and shadow.

Professional Football Simulator (PFS) is definitely worth a (multiple) view(s).
But you must prepare yourself to an unusual, in some case strange way, just adjust to a new mechanic and take you time. ;)

So many GM's are member in multiple FOF online leagues.
Why not playing in two, three...six FOF online leagues and give it a try in one PFS league beside?