Whats going on in the Sim Market?

[Mota]

Originally Posted by lynchjm24

Maybe, but compared to the interest before Version 6 or the first SI version it's a tiny fraction.

I agree, the boards for pretty much every text sim games are dead right now. GDS, Wolverine, etc. The only board with any life is this one, and most of it is off-topic.

I think that may be in part from the lack of releases in the past few years. Other than wrestling / fighting games from GDS, there really hasn't been much out in a LONG time. I would kill for a new football game from somebody ... ANYBODY. (but especially from Jim)

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

Hey Marc - question I thought of earlier: Why do you SI guys release a data-update at the transfer window encompassing moves done during the year and then give players the ability to start back at the beginning of the season with inaccurate rosters? I understand why "joystick-jockey" games make the choice to do that (as much as I abhor it), but I don't understand why you all do that with FM?

We found in the early years people liked starting with up to date 'real world' data and a lot of people did unofficial updates to provide this to users - I know its not 'realistic' starting with updated data, but hey neither is a 16 year old kid managing Manchester United

(on a more serious note - personally I'd like to release data updates which actually 'program in' the various moves and have them happen as they did in real-life - but that isn't something which has been practical yet)

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan

We found in the early years people liked starting with up to date 'real world' data and a lot of people did unofficial updates to provide this to users - I know its not 'realistic' starting with updated data, but hey neither is a 16 year old kid managing Manchester United

(on a more serious note - personally I'd like to release data updates which actually 'program in' the various moves and have them happen as they did in real-life - but that isn't something which has been practical yet)

Gotcha. I'm honestly surprised that a lot of people like starting with "real world" data - like I said, I understand it in joystick-jockey games, but I wouldn't have thought it would carry over necessarily. Strange. I do applaud you guys for offering patches/updates both ways though. That's really doing your customers a solid.

And on the "more serious note" - that'd be damn sweet!

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Mota

I agree, the boards for pretty much every text sim games are dead right now. GDS, Wolverine, etc. The only board with any life is this one, and most of it is off-topic.

I think that may be in part from the lack of releases in the past few years. Other than wrestling / fighting games from GDS, there really hasn't been much out in a LONG time. I would kill for a new football game from somebody ... ANYBODY. (but especially from Jim)

It's not a coincidence that this is the only board that's NOT run by the company and so, I think that has a lot of to do with its relative health compared to the others.

[Mac Howard]

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan

We found in the early years people liked starting with up to date 'real world' data and a lot of people did unofficial updates to provide this to users - I know its not 'realistic' starting with updated data, but hey neither is a 16 year old kid managing Manchester United

That is surprising but true. I get fed up of saying "but those are the players that started the season" to users complaining the latest transfers have not been included.

(on a more serious note - personally I'd like to release data updates which actually 'program in' the various moves and have them happen as they did in real-life - but that isn't something which has been practical yet)

You could even go so far as to include results of games as well and many would like that. The 'replay" game has a great deal of appeal and combining the management game with a replay element I think would work for many users. It allows users to match their performance against the real-world manager's and provides some sort of basis on which to measure their performance.

Mexico 86 was probably my most successful game both commercially and from a user feedback point of view. The schedule of the game was that of the real-world England team prior to the Mexico City World Cup and results that could be included (except for the user's matches) were included. But when I developed the game later to include random draws for Qualification and Finals sections of World Cup and European Championships the user response wasn't nearly as good. One user wrote to me and said "it simply doesn't have the holding power of Mexico 86". It was heartbreaking after so much development work but I think it was that the game had moved further away from the real-world even if it was now far deeper and more encompassing.

I think we make a mistake in believing that all users approach the games with a great intensity. The guys who get really deep into the games seem to prefer a greater level of fiction - Tris always argued for a totally fictitious database and always played with a fictitious club and players - but I think the average user becomes more involved when there's a closer approximation to the real-world.

[twothree]

Personally, there are two sim designers that I think are currently doing a very good job with their particular niche products. Adam Ryland with his Total Extreme Wrestling, World of Mixed Martial Arts, and Wrestling Spirit games. And, Mark Loveday with his Starters Orders and Greyhound Manager games.

Both of them continue to release patches for their most current sims that improve or fix errors that are pointed out by users, while they work on their next big project. Both of them have new patches out that are less than 30 days old for their most recent sim. And, both of those sims are around 9 or 10 months old. They both probably average over one patch a month, which may make you think their games are full of errors, but most of their patches are just to fix minor elements or tweak the A.I. to improve it.

While some people may not be interested in these sims, I admire the dedication both have shown to their respective products over the last 3+ years.

[DeToxRox]

Ryland is great. He makes products that every year are must buys for his fans. Plus, it does help a big portion of wrestling fans are big internet users. He is almost the prototype for how to have a successful sim.

[MizzouRah]

I just hope Jim is putting the final touches on FOF 2009.

[spleen1015]

I hope Jim is working on World Championship Euchre 2009.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

I just hope Jim is putting the final touches on FOF 2009.

2010.

And where do you think he could go with it? Seriously, what would make the game significantly different that it would be a must purchase?

I think most people considered FOF4 to be a letdown, adding little in the way of added value over 2001. Then 2004 (2003?) came and multiplayer injected a huge breath of life into the series. 2007 seemed to be back to the iteration treadmill. The new feature that really felt new was Solevision (gasp, presentation?). And that was largely a feature for multiplayer -

At some point, 'tweaking the game engine' ceases to be an attraction, doesn't it? What could be done do get the huge breath/life injection feel again? What could make it feel different from the game many of us have been playing for years?

[lordscarlet]

It looks like the market is finally moving to the web somewhat. The attempts may not be great, but it's getting there.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Samdari

2010.

And where do you think he could go with it? Seriously, what would make the game significantly different that it would be a must purchase?

I think most people considered FOF4 to be a letdown, adding little in the way of added value over 2001. Then 2004 (2003?) came and multiplayer injected a huge breath of life into the series. 2007 seemed to be back to the iteration treadmill. The new feature that really felt new was Solevision (gasp, presentation?). And that was largely a feature for multiplayer -

At some point, 'tweaking the game engine' ceases to be an attraction, doesn't it? What could be done do get the huge breath/life injection feel again? What could make it feel different from the game many of us have been playing for years?

Customization. The ability to expand, contract, change playoff formats, alter league structure, etc. would be the biggest upgrade in the history of the series.

Some other theoretical, less major upgrades:

-A revamped financial model
-More complicated owner/player interactions
-Improved AI roster management (less turnover every year)

[spleen1015]

Originally Posted by molson

Customization. The ability to expand, contract, change playoff formats, alter league structure, etc. would be the biggest upgrade in the history of the series.

Some other theoretical, less major upgrades:

-A revamped financial model
-More complicated owner/player interactions
-Improved AI roster management (less turnover every year)

I don't think these options fit in with Jim's vision of the game. That is just my assumption based on things he has said in the past. Just a feeling I get.

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by molson

Customization. The ability to expand, contract, change playoff formats, alter league structure, etc. would be the biggest upgrade in the history of the series.

Some other theoretical, less major upgrades:

-A revamped financial model
-More complicated owner/player interactions
-Improved AI roster management (less turnover every year)

Better integration for the MP community (data exports preferrably)

but that won't happen.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by molson

Customization. The ability to expand, contract, change playoff formats, alter league structure, etc. would be the biggest upgrade in the history of the series.

Some other theoretical, less major upgrades:

-A revamped financial model
-More complicated owner/player interactions
-Improved AI roster management (less turnover every year)

I think it would take a lot to beat "multiplayer" for the biggest upgrade in the history of the series.

I have not fired up FOF2001 in quite some time, but didn't it have some choice as to league size? Or some other version?

The rest sound like refinements to me. Exactly the kind of thing that won't drive me to purchase a new pro game. I would still "feel" like I was making the same decisions I was making 8 years ago.

I guess improved AI would be a big improvement to the single player experience, but I am not sure it would change that much for me. I'd still feel like I was making the same decisions as alway - and thus feel like I was playing the same game.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Samdari

I think it would take a lot to beat "multiplayer" for the biggest upgrade in the history of the series.

I have not fired up FOF2001 in quite some time, but didn't it have some choice as to league size? Or some other version?

The rest sound like refinements to me. Exactly the kind of thing that won't drive me to purchase a new pro game. I would still "feel" like I was making the same decisions I was making 8 years ago.

I guess improved AI would be a big improvement to the single player experience, but I am not sure it would change that much for me. I'd still feel like I was making the same decisions as alway - and thus feel like I was playing the same game.

I never played multiplayer so I'm sure I don't appreciate that implementation for what it is. I was turned off reading about other leagues where it just sounded like everyone was trying to get under the hood and crack the code for success. So it seems like there's lots of room for improvement in that area, to make multiplayer feel more like a football competition than a puzzle/math competition.

Ya, one of the older FOFs had expansion, there was a specific number of hard-programmed "expansion years", that I think was based on the old NFL six-division setup, where there was expansion until each division had the same number of teams. That would be harder to pull off with the current NFL setup.

I'm sure I'd buy any new FOF. It's been talked about a lot on this board, but I'd rather just see the games continue to improve, rather than just load every new version up with features that complicate things and cause more bugs/AI issues. I'd pay for a new FOF every year, even if the only changes were revised rosters and AI tweaks. But if a new version had a ton of new features that complicated game play, I'd hold off until a couple of patches at least, and confirmation from the online community that things "work".

[Logan]

A better single-player experience, for Christ's sake.

[Fidatelo]

I hate the focus on multiplayer games

[kcchief19]

There is still room for additions and improvements to FOF but let's be realistic, the leaps and bounds took place in earlier versions.

If football simulations are the direction for Solecismic, the missing product from the catalog is an updated TCY with multi-player.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

There is still room for additions and improvements to FOF but let's be realistic, the leaps and bounds took place in earlier versions.

If football simulations are the direction for Solecismic, the missing product from the catalog is an updated TCY with multi-player.

QFT. C'mon Jim, us college football fanatics are waiting to shove money at you for an updated TCY...

[Big Fo]

Originally Posted by Logan

A better single-player experience, for Christ's sake.

An easier way to edit your team's playcalling would be nice, and the whole coaching staff part could use some work.

[Dutch]

MP gameplanning needs to be overhauled, but in order to overhaul it, it's damned near got to be revolutionary in nature. Right now, the object is to exploit the gameplan, opponent be damned. It should be a matchup between two football teams where each owner tries to exploit one anothers weaknesses. FOF2k7 is a LONG way from that.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

I hate the focus on multiplayer games

There is a ton of focus among FOFC on multiplayer, but FOF sure doesn't put much of a focus on it. Difficulty in having multiple league setups / editing city data, half-done commissioner control (commissioner should be able to do anything to any team), half-done password protection (can't change it with a new owner), limited HTML / no export capability (which is where the binary file hacking came in), poor export / import process (as commish, try importing files twice during FA), amount of time required by commissioners, even with some of the automated utilities, etc. It's a lot of effort, and it barely changed with 2k7 (some commissioner control plus the password system added). 2k7 was mostly single-player improvements.

[Izulde]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

I hate the focus on multiplayer games

So do I. I prefer to go at my own pace with these things rather than be confined to a set schedule.

[damnMikeBrown]

I'd like a little of an rpg twist in it. Give the players some personality. Have a GM email you testing the waters for a draft day trade..then have him refrence a previous deal and how well you made out in it. Give the agent personality some personality. Let me see how the college season is shaping up..and not just the seniors. I love talking heads. Disagree with them and bash them, but they can make the season/draft much more entertaining.

Just some thoughts.

[Fidatelo]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

There is a ton of focus among FOFC on multiplayer, but FOF sure doesn't put much of a focus on it. Difficulty in having multiple league setups / editing city data, half-done commissioner control (commissioner should be able to do anything to any team), half-done password protection (can't change it with a new owner), limited HTML / no export capability (which is where the binary file hacking came in), poor export / import process (as commish, try importing files twice during FA), amount of time required by commissioners, even with some of the automated utilities, etc. It's a lot of effort, and it barely changed with 2k7 (some commissioner control plus the password system added). 2k7 was mostly single-player improvements.

I know FOF doesn't focus on MP, it's actually a beef of mine in every genre of video games in general. I just don't really care to play against other people most of the time. But especially with text sims.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Logan

A better single-player experience, for Christ's sake.

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

I hate the focus on multiplayer games

+1

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

+1

Add me to the list. I hate people some much I actually play MMO and do it almost entirely solo

[gstelmack]

Well, the people who play multiplayer talk a lot more than the people who play singleplayer. So speak up, with specifics!

[Logan]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

Well, the people who play multiplayer talk a lot more than the people who play singleplayer. So speak up, with specifics!

Sure thing. This is a post I put in a thread SkyDog started called "Ping: Fast Sim, GM Types" where he solicited ideas for what he thought these types of players wanted. I've re-posted it in a variety of threads.

I just wanted to take the time to say that Buc captured exactly where I'm coming from regarding FOF.

What's the name of the game? Front Office Football. Can we really say that the game at this point is focused on the front office? I think it's great that Jim has appeared to nail the gameplanning AI so that you can get exactly what you want from your players and run the system that you want to run. But that's a head coaching function (or at least it should be) and I think we all recognize that.

Maybe that's my issue...I have no clue how the head coach function works. Is he simply there to call plays? When I'm using this dynamic gameplanning "recommend" function, is this simply an AI issue (matching up your guys vs their's) or does it take into account the coach's style, experience, knowledge, etc. Actually, do coaches even have styles? We know their "talent" within position groups, motivation skills, play calling ability, etc...but are there Mike Martzes out there? Marvin Lewises? I guess that's what I'm looking for: hire a coach who fits the type of offense/defense I want to run (for which I go out and acquire the preferred types of players) and turn it over to him. Done. Follow-up and see if he's running the system properly...if not, decision time to either change the coach or go out and get new players.

I think that should be the limit as to how involved I get. But if you take out all the gameplanning and tweaking, I don't think there's enough in this game anymore to satisfy the guy who wants to just be the GM.

How to fix it: IMO, it starts with the draft. Not just because it's easily the most entertaining part of the personnel process, but because it's the area that, if expanded, could basically be going on throughout the entire universe of the game. Yes, seeing mock drafts (at least prior to the draft, but maybe even updating monthly during the season) would be a great first step. But it shouldn't stop there...

In this thread (and others have done so elsewhere), Buc brought up the "TCY universe that runs parallel to the game" idea. Obviously, this would be a huge addition to the game and would go very far in improving the GM aspects. I think back to how the freeware EHM handled the draft, and more specifically, scouting for the draft. For those who don't remember or never played, near the beginning of the season, the Central Scouting Bureau puts out the list of the top X number of prospects (I don't remember the #, but it was large...250 maybe?). And as the season goes on, I believe the rankings changed. Just this would be a great start to something in FOF. But where it really got cool is in scouting. You have a stable of scouts (6-8?) who, throughout the season, could be assigned to evaluate your shortlist of players (guys on your team or others who you want to know more about), NHL teams, or entire countries. Looking at the countries will get you reports on the draft-eligible players. Assign a guy to the US, Russia, Canada, Czech Republic, etc and a couple weeks later you start getting scouting reports back on these players.

Can't this work in FOF? Instead of assigning your scouts (yes, not just one guy...although the fine print within FOF seems to indicate that you technically have a staff) to countries, you assign them to different regions of the country (or even NCAA conferences). Then you start getting reports back about players with strengths and weaknesses. I recognize that I'm getting extremely greedy here...but can you imagine something where you didn't necessarily just get a "Ray Rice, RB, Rutgers" report (which would be great in and of itself, and no, I didn't choose that just for the alliteration), but instead your Big East scout gave you weekly reports that discussed who played well, who sucked, etc. "Rutgers defeated Boston College 24-17. Ray Rice ran for 135 yards and 2 TDs on 27 carries, and BC LB Brian Toal looked poor in run support." If you use these resources, you have a tremendous depth of knowledge when it comes to preparing for the draft. I WANT TO KNOW THESE PLAYERS!!! Say you're the GM of a team who is starting a massive rebuilding process. You have the 4th pick in the draft, and you have needs on the defensive side of the ball but you also need a QB of the future. There's a stud DE sitting there for you, as well as a QB who seems to have the physical talents but didn't perform very well in college. But because you're aware of what else is going on in college football, you know that Tennessee's sophomore QB is tearing up the SEC to the tune of 350 yards a game. Maybe now you take the DE instead of the questionable QB, hoping to nab the stud the year after.

That's all the time I have now. So if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna go change my pants.

Institute it, update it, and I'll be set for life.

[gstelmack]

The fun part is the way fast-sim leagues are coming into vogue, something that made FA/the draft a lot more fun while marginializing GM activity during the season might actually help MP leagues. 3 weeks for the offseason (with more detail and better contract handling to keep the interest level up) and maybe a week to run the entire season (preseason, season, wilcard, division, conference, bowl) would be fantastic.

[RedKingGold]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

The fun part is the way fast-sim leagues are coming into vogue, something that made FA/the draft a lot more fun while marginializing GM activity during the season might actually help MP leagues. 3 weeks for the offseason (with more detail and better contract handling to keep the interest level up) and maybe a week to run the entire season (preseason, season, wilcard, division, conference, bowl) would be fantastic.

In large part, I agree. The problem is the draft. Without the ability to get a live draft, using any draft utility every month can get a little bit exhausting. I know that was the problem in the long forgotten ECFL.

[Young Drachma]

1. Customization is still a very, very onerous process for most of these games. The more of a Sandbox, the better for a lot of folks.

2. Online play is still very, very demanding on people who run the leagues. The process isn't exactly the smoothest in most games. We tolerate it, but...I think you can increase the replay life and increase sales of these games if those bumps were worked out.

3. I agree with people that say that solo play doesn't offer enough, but I think that'd be fixed with #1 to some degree.

[Young Drachma]

Oh and I'd pour a lot into a sim that really focused on better financial models. But I realize I'm in the minority that I really do want a GM sim more than I want anything else. If I never managed a lineup or a game in my life, I'd be fine with it.

[path12]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

If I never managed a lineup or a game in my life, I'd be fine with it.

Yes. Yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes.

I agree.

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by molson

I never played multiplayer so I'm sure I don't appreciate that implementation for what it is. I was turned off reading about other leagues where it just sounded like everyone was trying to get under the hood and crack the code for success. So it seems like there's lots of room for improvement in that area, to make multiplayer feel more like a football competition than a puzzle/math competition.

Yes, yes.

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

2. Online play is still very, very demanding on people who run the leagues. The process isn't exactly the smoothest in most games. We tolerate it, but...I think you can increase the replay life and increase sales of these games if those bumps were worked out.

Yes. It is amazing what you guys accept as being a major advancement in MP.

[Bigsmooth]

Although I've been in a Bowl Bound online league for years now, I haven't really tinkered with the game planning functionality much, mostly settling for "AI suggest". That being said, I've recently started delving into the playbook options where you can actually gameplan using specific plays. Anyhow, my point is, Bowl Bound is a great freaking game. Every time I fire it up though, I am so frustrated. It is great, but it is SO CLOSE to being PERFECT. It just needs some relatively minor tweaks and it would be pure gold. I can't believe there hasn't been a new release. Fix the Polls, add more plays to choose from when gameplanning, add a "Solevision" like viewer, tinker a little, here and there. So much potential.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by lordscarlet

Yes. It is amazing what you guys accept as being a major advancement in MP.

Well it's why I resisted online play until literally last spring. And yeah, you can get into it..but for me, it's barely something I look forward to these days because of all of the inertia involved in setting one of these suckers up and trying to play in them.

I think the "fun" of it, outweighs for most. And it can, provided the league is worth it's weight. But talk about needing some major strides.

[molson]

This is as good a thread to any to say how awesome GDS and Adam Ryland are for putting out a patch for TEW07 recently, months and months after TEW08 came out, to help run the game in Vista without crashing. I've been running my old TEW07 dynasty forever, even knowing that I was guaranteed a crash in about 45 minutes of game time. I installed the new patch and the problem is solved. Just outstanding service. This is a group you can buy from in total confidence.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by Bigsmooth

Although I've been in a Bowl Bound online league for years now, I haven't really tinkered with the game planning functionality much, mostly settling for "AI suggest". That being said, I've recently started delving into the playbook options where you can actually gameplan using specific plays. Anyhow, my point is, Bowl Bound is a great freaking game. Every time I fire it up though, I am so frustrated. It is great, but it is SO CLOSE to being PERFECT. It just needs some relatively minor tweaks and it would be pure gold. I can't believe there hasn't been a new release. Fix the Polls, add more plays to choose from when gameplanning, add a "Solevision" like viewer, tinker a little, here and there. So much potential.

Since they are working on a pro football version, they may add some of that into it. I'm highly interested to see what they have in store for that game, but it's rather silent in terms of news on it.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by molson

This is as good a thread to any to say how awesome GDS and Adam Ryland are for putting out a patch for TEW07 recently, months and months after TEW08 came out, to help run the game in Vista without crashing. I've been running my old TEW07 dynasty forever, even knowing that I was guaranteed a crash in about 45 minutes of game time. I installed the new patch and the problem is solved. Just outstanding service. This is a group you can buy from in total confidence.

Is there a patch that makes them not about wrestling?

[dubb93]

Originally Posted by Samdari

Is there a patch that makes them not about wrestling?

Yea, they have a patch called WAMMA 2 that is about mixed martial arts.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by Matthean

Since they are working on a pro football version, they may add some of that into it. I'm highly interested to see what they have in store for that game, but it's rather silent in terms of news on it.

Given the history in this market of getting people too excited too soon, I'm taking more of a low-key approach to the pro game's development. You'll know when we're close though as news will actually be coming at a steady stream.

I'll also be making a new version of the college game shortly after using a lot of what I've added to the pro game and some user feedback.

[Honolulu Blue]

I'm still looking for the same things in games that I've been looking for for years and years:

1) Speed. We've made great progress here, not the least because I've been buying new and more powerful computers every so often. But it still takes several hours to play through one season with the usual suspects, and that's a little long to suit me and my needs.

2) Immersion. I'd like my players to act like human beings rather than a string of numbers. The usual suspects have made baby steps toward this, but other than the soccer games, we're less than 10% of where we need to be, IMO.

3) Accuracy. The usual suspects do a fine job with this, though they all have their quirks.

4) Customizability. I like having lots of options. FOF has a few, but not many. Mogul has plenty and OOTP has plenty X 10. The problem with OOTP's options is if you're not very careful with picking and choosing those options, you can wreck the sim and have to start over - which takes awhile.

5) A story. There are a couple of ways this can work - through scenarios ("take this miserable team to the pennant within seven years") or scripting ("in the year 2029, the NFL will have 48 teams; separate rookie, personnel, and general salary caps; a separate foreign draft; liberalized passing rules; and looser PED policies"). I'm surprised that none of the usual suspects have tried to be anything other than open-ended. Even Civ has a little bit of a story to it.

I care very little about multiplayer, graphics, coaching/managerial choices or historical options; I know there are lots that care about one or more of those. And they buy games, so the designers have to cater to them to some degree or risk losing sales.

[larrymcg421]

Head to head online playcalling for MP leagues is the one feature I'm dying for.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Honolulu Blue

I'm still looking for the same things in games that I've been looking for for years and years:


4) Customizability. I like having lots of options. FOF has a few, but not many. Mogul has plenty and OOTP has plenty X 10. The problem with OOTP's options is if you're not very careful with picking and choosing those options, you can wreck the sim and have to start over - which takes awhile.

5) A story. There are a couple of ways this can work - through scenarios ("take this miserable team to the pennant within seven years") or scripting ("in the year 2029, the NFL will have 48 teams; separate rookie, personnel, and general salary caps; a separate foreign draft; liberalized passing rules; and looser PED policies"). I'm surprised that none of the usual suspects have tried to be anything other than open-ended. Even Civ has a little bit of a story to it.

Maximum Football might be the perfect game for you based on these 2

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by Honolulu Blue

3) Accuracy. The usual suspects do a fine job with this, though they all have their quirks.

4) Customizability. I like having lots of options. FOF has a few, but not many. Mogul has plenty and OOTP has plenty X 10. The problem with OOTP's options is if you're not very careful with picking and choosing those options, you can wreck the sim and have to start over - which takes awhile.

To cite at least the most obvious suspect, given the name of this forum, these two don't sit all that well together. A talent distribution that produces accurate results in a full pro size league will not necesarily do so in a league 1/4 that size. Personally, I would find customizability more attractive, but this genre does attract a fair share of stat geeks to whom accuracy is more desirable.

Is it impossible to have both? I doubt it. Is it a lot to ask of independent developers, with very limited time resources - while simultaneously complaining about how long it is taking to complete the game? I am certain of that.

[gstelmack]

I think accuracy is a killer in this market, like it is for flight sims, and as long as developers are beholden to it it will remain a niche market. What is far more important than stat accuracy is strategy accuracy: I want real life strategies to have similar impacts in-game. I don't care if RBs average 3.8 ypc or 4.2 ypc, I care that with a big offensive line and a bruising back I can successfully run a smashmouth offense, and if I have a lousy offensive line it should fail miserably.

I do agree though that a fairly vocal group gets pissed off if RBs don't average exactly what NFL RBs do.

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

I think accuracy is a killer in this market, like it is for flight sims, and as long as developers are beholden to it it will remain a niche market. What is far more important than stat accuracy is strategy accuracy: I want real life strategies to have similar impacts in-game. I don't care if RBs average 3.8 ypc or 4.2 ypc, I care that with a big offensive line and a bruising back I can successfully run a smashmouth offense, and if I have a lousy offensive line it should fail miserably.

I do agree though that a fairly vocal group gets pissed off if RBs don't average exactly what NFL RBs do.

+1. I want my WR's to get huge numbers because of a great QB and a great offensive line as well as other good receivers around them (to cut down on the double teams) as opposed to some gimmick/glitch. I want real life common sense strategies to be the key to winning as opposed to gaming the system. I also want much more feedback so I can see why my guys are succeeding or failing.