Pure Sim, OOTP 2006 or Both?

[jbmagic]

Which game you plan to get this year?

[Young Drachma]

I just had them refund my pre-order of OOTP 2K6, I'm leaving for the summer and won't get to play until...so..I'll wait to get it, especially since they lower the price and with all the bugs you find, seems better to just hold off.

[GoldenEagle]

Where are you going for the summer?

[kingfc22]

I'll probably get OOTP but not until it has been patched a few times.

[Young Drachma]

Umm..in mid to late June, I'm heading back to Connecticut to be tennis director at a camp I've worked at for part of 3 summers since I got out of the Air Force. I did apply for a FT job here with the university doing IT, but haven't gotten a call regarding it as of yet, so my hopes arent up.

Honestly, the best part of camp is getting paid to play tennis polo/toccer and to plot stuff for the following year. We've got big plans for next year, so..it's worthwhile for me to give up 9 weeks of my summer, plus they pay pretty well. But this will be the last summer I do most likely.

[Rizon]

I'll get OOTP2006 next year when the price goes down, they add H2H and a manual, and all the bugs are ironed out. And they fix the stuck-ball-in-the-wrigley-field bug.

[jbmagic]

Originally Posted by Rizon

I'll get OOTP2006 next year when the price goes down, they add H2H and a manual, and all the bugs are ironed out. And they fix the stuck-ball-in-the-wrigley-field bug.

ootp 2006 manual will be over 200 pages.

http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...78&postcount=2

[DaddyTorgo]

too early to ask this jb. wait for the demos of PureSim and OOTP and THEN you can actually ask this question. right now...who really knows which of the games they'll get based on "feature lists" and "screenshots" ???

i know i certainly don't. it's about the GAMEPLAY not the name on the box

[Deattribution]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

too early to ask this jb. wait for the demos of PureSim and OOTP and THEN you can actually ask this question. right now...who really knows which of the games they'll get based on "feature lists" and "screenshots" ???

i know i certainly don't. it's about the GAMEPLAY not the name on the box

But the which game would you buy - Unannounced Solecismic professional football that doesn't even have a feature list or screens, or Unannounced Solecismic college football that also doesn't have feature list or screens poll was okay?

Or is this just because JBmagic posted it?

[Franklinnoble]

I think the addition of Lahman's database really gives PureSim a nice edge this year.

[Ramzavail]

Originally Posted by Franklinnoble

I think the addition of Lahman's database really gives PureSim a nice edge this year.

I agree.

[KWhit]

OOTP.

[Godzilla Blitz]

Unless I hear significant complaints about PureSim within a few days of release, I'm set on picking that one up. One, for the sake of supporting one of the genre's better developers, and two, it looks like it's going to be a solid game.

I'm going to play it by ear with OOTP. I think the change of platform will create issues, and I'll follow the release to see how things go. If the reports are solid, I might pick it up, depending on where I am with PureSim at that time. Like I did with EHM, I might wait a version for SI to get the little things sorted out with OOTP.

[Cuckoo]

I would say Puresim (with the Lahman inclusion) has moved into my "intend to buy" category. If I'm happy with it and it comes out sooner than OOTP, I'll probably hold off on OOTP until I see some feedback on the redesign. Eventually, I'll probably buy OOTP as well, particularly if my MP league changes over.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Deattribution

But the which game would you buy - Unannounced Solecismic professional football that doesn't even have a feature list or screens, or Unannounced Solecismic college football that also doesn't have feature list or screens poll was okay?

Or is this just because JBmagic posted it?

well no, cuz college and pro football are different beasts. MLB games are all different iterations of the same beast.

i've got no hate for jbmagic, he knows that.

[FBPro]

Originally Posted by Franklinnoble

I think the addition of Lahman's database really gives PureSim a nice edge this year.

Maybe I'm missing something but what is the big advantage to this over any other year?

[lynchjm24]

Originally Posted by Cuckoo

Eventually, I'll probably buy OOTP as well, particularly if my MP league changes over.

Cardinals Suck.

If you are a fan of baseball text sims, I don't see why you wouldn't get both.

[Cuckoo]

Originally Posted by lynchjm24

If you are a fan of baseball text sims, I don't see why you wouldn't get both.

Money, my man, money. I think I can afford both this year, but generally my bank account is lower than your team's winning percentage...

[lynchjm24]

Originally Posted by Cuckoo

Money, my man, money. I think I can afford both this year, but generally my bank account is lower than your team's winning percentage...

Then you need a second job and need to spend a lot less time on the UBL...

[Cuckoo]

Originally Posted by lynchjm24

...need to spend a lot less time on the UBL...

You sound like my wife.

[Izulde]

I'm honestly not sure. I'm leaning towards OOTP2K6, but I'll probably wait until I'm back from Russia before deciding.

[dervack]

Originally Posted by Izulde

I'm honestly not sure. I'm leaning towards OOTP2K6, but I'll probably wait until I'm back from Russia before deciding.

Picking up a bride?

[MizzouRah]

As of now, I'm going with Puresim this year. I know SI is an elitist in text sims, but ootp is starting to get too complicated for my gaming needs. OOTP 6.5 is still fun anyhow.. albeit frustrating at times.

Just looking at some of those screens filled with too much data make my eyes hurt. I want something simple to drive, yet complicated under the hood.

[lynchjm24]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

As of now, I'm going with Puresim this year. I know SI is an elitist in text sims, but ootp is starting to get too complicated for my gaming needs. OOTP 6.5 is still fun anyhow.. albeit frustrating at times.

Just looking at some of those screens filled with too much data make my eyes hurt. I want something simple to drive, yet complicated under the hood.

I'm actually getting tired of testing Puresim, I'm ready to just actually play it.

There is some great new stuff in this version. I think that it's a pretty big step forward, and I think that the new career arc modeling is going to really create many much more varied individual careers.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by lynchjm24

I'm actually getting tired of testing Puresim, I'm ready to just actually play it.

There is some great new stuff in this version. I think that it's a pretty big step forward, and I think that the new career arc modeling is going to really create many much more varied individual careers.

Yes indeed, that definitly has me intrigued. Even if I can't have expansion/contraction in this release, Puresim seems like it's taking a leap forward.

[Icy]

OOTP already preordered, Puresim will depend on the reviews. I like to deal with complex contract negotiations, economics and to manage my full minors and for what i know until now, Puresim is simpler than OOTP. From puresim i like the pbp interface with the graphics representation.

[lynchjm24]

Originally Posted by Icy

OOTP already preordered, Puresim will depend on the reviews. I like to deal with complex contract negotiations, economics and to manage my full minors and for what i know until now, Puresim is simpler than OOTP. From puresim i like the pbp interface with the graphics representation.

Puresim has a lot of potential in the economics of the game. I've never been patient enough to edit all the moving parts to get it where I'd really like it to be though.

Minors are now 3 levels, but the games are simulated like OOTP now - they aren't played anymore. The key is having the player at the right level, otherwise there is a penalty. You don't set lineups or rotations in the minors - the AI handles that, but you need to make sure you don't have 3 SS in AA because that would hold a player back.

[lynchjm24]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

Yes indeed, that definitly has me intrigued. Even if I can't have expansion/contraction in this release, Puresim seems like it's taking a leap forward.

If I had to guess expansion will become one of the features that is added via patch after release. The right way to do it is to set historical simmers up without any work by auto-expanding like real life.

I'm tweaking some of the setting on the career arc this afternoon, it's fun. I have a 42 year old in my league now who could play every day. This is what some of the XML looks like - you can set the percentage chance that a player peaks/starts to decline/craters by age:

PEAK_AGE RangeMin="0" RangeMax="4" age="23" /
PEAK_AGE RangeMin="5" RangeMax="10" age="24" /
PEAK_AGE RangeMin="11" RangeMax="20" age="25" /

So in these lines a player has a 4 or 5 percent chance of peaking at 23 and a 10 percent chance of peaking at 25. Most are still bunched from 26-28, but you can have players who peak at 32 or higher if you want to set values for them.


DECLINE_AGE RangeMin="63" RangeMax="75" age="36" /
DECLINE_AGE RangeMin="76" RangeMax="86" age="37" /
DECLINE_AGE RangeMin="87" RangeMax="91" age="38" /
DECLINE_AGE RangeMin="92" RangeMax="95" age="39" /
DECLINE_AGE RangeMin="96" RangeMax="98" age="40" /

CLIFF_AGE RangeMin="97" RangeMax="98" age="42" /
CLIFF_AGE RangeMin="99" RangeMax="100" age="43" /

The speed of decline is based on the difference between decline age and cliff age. So if a player had a peak age of 27, decline of 33 and cliff of 40 it would be a long slow decline. If you are a peak 28 decline 36 cliff 37 you'd go in the tank 'overnight' out of the blue. It wouldn't be constantly good to age 36 - decline refers to 'true' decline, so it would be a flatter more normal aging to the decline age.



You can also tweak the minor level/age penalty somewhat In this example, players who are 7 or more years from their peak should be at A. Players who are 5 or 6 years from their peak should be at AA. I have mine set that 3 to 4 years from peak should be at AAA, and at 2 years from peak should be in the majors. I'm thinking about bringing that up to 3 years from majors - but I see the problems that might cause down the line - since true prospects don't usually spend more then 1 year at a level - however at the same time if you tighten the corridors that much it would be tough for the AI to place players.

* Players younger than their peak age that are not at their optimal level may not improve * Players older than their peak age that are not at their optimal level will possibly decline more, and be more likely to retire

OPTIMAL_LEVEL RangeMin="7" RangeMax="99" optimal_level="-3" /
OPTIMAL_LEVEL RangeMin="5" RangeMax="6" optimal_level="-2" /

[MizzouRah]

Thanks for that post lynchjm24!!

..and I totally agree with this line..

If I had to guess expansion will become one of the features that is added via patch after release. The right way to do it is to set historical simmers up without any work by auto-expanding like real life.

I would like to see it happen sooner than later though.

I assume out of the box, the XML is setup for modern day baseball?

[jbmagic]

lynchjm24

How is online play on it? Is it similar how ootp does it?

[Booj]

OOTP because I need a baseball game for my Mac... (None if the Mac deal falls through)

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Booj

OOTP because I need a baseball game for my Mac... (None if the Mac deal falls through)

Mac's.

haha

[MJ4H]

Apostrophe's.

haha

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by MattJones4Heisman

Apostrophe's.

haha

well played

[Mr. Sparkle]

OOTP for me, although I'm interested in Pure Sim. I feel fully confident that SI will push OOTP to the next level. I loved EHM even though I know little about hockey works, especially its minors. Baseball, however, I know extremely well. If the depth in OOTP is anywhere near that of EHM, I think I will absolutely love the game.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by Mr. Sparkle

OOTP for me, although I'm interested in Pure Sim. I feel fully confident that SI will push OOTP to the next level. I loved EHM even though I know little about hockey works, especially its minors. Baseball, however, I know extremely well. If the depth in OOTP is anywhere near that of EHM, I think I will absolutely love the game.

Glad you are confident cuz I am having reservations that the EHM/FM platform can do baseball. We will see I guess. But Puresim is a definite buy.

[Marc Duffy]

OOTP is actually using a new platform engine developed by SI and handles it fine.

[Shaun Sullivan]

I find polls like this depressing

[Joe]

neither

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Marc Duffy

OOTP is actually using a new platform engine developed by SI and handles it fine.

At the risk of nitpicking, I'd say the consumers would be the better judge of how it handles it.

[FBPro]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

At the risk of nitpicking, I'd say the consumers would be the better judge of how it handles it.

Nitpicker

[TroyF]

I'll get both. I really like Pure Sim last year, but never really had the time to play it in depth. I'm really looking forward to this release.

I love what I've seen of the screenshots for OOTP. Especially that web based PBP pic.

If both games are good, I'll put the quickest one on my slower laptop and play both of them while I'm in poker tournaments.

[Marc Duffy]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

At the risk of nitpicking, I'd say the consumers would be the better judge of how it handles it.

I'd agree 100%, but at this moment in time Galari (who hasn't played OOTPB2006) was concerned, and I (who has played OOTPB2006) wanted to put his mind at rest.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Marc Duffy

I'd agree 100%, but at this moment in time Galari (who hasn't played OOTPB2006) was concerned, and I (who has played OOTPB2006) wanted to put his mind at rest.

Whatever.

It just seems rather arrogant, almost incredibly so since that isn't the usual SI style, to believe those concerns would be relieved by reassurance coming from someone who isn't really in a position to be objective on the subject.

But hey what do I know, I'm just a consumer, all of our concerns are easily remedied by enough p.r.

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Whatever.

It just seems rather arrogant, almost incredibly so since that isn't the usual SI style, to believe those concerns would be relieved by reassurance coming from someone who isn't really in a position to be objective on the subject.

But hey what do I know, I'm just a consumer, all of our concerns are easily remedied by enough p.r.

Yeah.....How dare SI answer questions about the game and use such underhanded tactics as PR

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by BYU 14

Yeah.....How dare SI answer questions about the game and use such underhanded tactics as PR

Spare me the eye rolling.
I'm entitled to not like the dismissive tone of the post by a company rep and to make an observation about it.

If you don't like it, the FOFC ignore feature works really well. I'd do the same for you except I'm not sure there's much point, given the awesome level of contributions your handle has made in the past 2+ years. So please feel free to shove your rolly eyes up your ass at your leisure.

[FBPro]

Now where is my fire-resistant vest......

[Franklinnoble]

Anyone interested in how the Lahman's database results work over a 25-year period should check this out:

http://www.digitalstadium.org/smf/in...sg1738#msg1738

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Spare me the eye rolling.
I'm entitled to not like the dismissive tone of the post by a company rep and to make an observation about it.

dismissive tone? i certainly didn't see that in Marc's post. more like "trying to address a potential customer's concern using his practical, hands-on knowledge."

i think it's common sense that the consumer will be the final judge of how well the game handles in the end, but since it's still not available to them Marc was trying to help by providing us with a "hands on" perspective.

edit: spelling

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

... using his obviously biased knowledge."

Fixed that for ya.

He may be perfectly spot-on, time will tell, I'm completely open to that possibility. But how on earth could his perspective not be considered less than skewed by the situation?

What's he going to come on here and say? "Oh, the platform has been a miserable failure & we've really given up hope at this point?"

Benefit of the doubt is one thing but good grief, talk about somebody/some company getting their butts kissed ... defending this is about as silly as I've seen here yet.