OOTP 9 - First Screenshots!

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by BYU 14

I agree, it's amazing in the difference the new screenies are being received between the FOFC and OOTP boards. It seems like the view here has been generally favorable and there is a lot of whining over there.

I don't get it, I think Markus is doing the right thing ...I was actually (cringe) considering getting BM09, but it looks like I will remain on the OOTP bandwagon after seeing these.

Totally agree. I have heard how they are bunch of you know what's over there on the OOTP board (generalizaion) and now I see that is much more fact than fiction. I now see why Markus gets like he does sometimes.

[SteveMax58]

Originally Posted by Hell Atlantic

why would i need to know my scout's BMI?

And maybe the more important follow-up question...why would I NOT see my player's BMI, if I am even bothering to look at my scout's BMI?

Maybe it's on another page that isnt captured by the screenshots...but that goes to much of the general criticism of the modern OOTP UI which is...I cant find the same things in the same and/or logical places most people might look for them.

I like the new screenshots of the UI better...but I wasnt a big critic of the modern(SI) UI in the first place. I have always preferred the older 6.5 look and feel...but the SI look never really bothered me.

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by SteveMax58

And maybe the more important follow-up question...why would I NOT see my player's BMI, if I am even bothering to look at my scout's BMI?

Maybe it's on another page that isnt captured by the screenshots...but that goes to much of the general criticism of the modern OOTP UI which is...I cant find the same things in the same and/or logical places most people might look for them.

I like the new screenshots of the UI better...but I wasnt a big critic of the modern(SI) UI in the first place. I have always preferred the older 6.5 look and feel...but the SI look never really bothered me.

The BMI is just a part of the debug version that was used for the screenshots

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

OOTP7, the SI version. Several of us brought these issues up back last April/May or so (as I can recall), so it's not related to any specific career I created. I could start a new career tonight, run 75 years of history, and find the same things.

No offense, but I don't have OOTP8 so I can't tell you if the same issue is occurring. I hope it's not. I'd be happy to do some checking if you want to send me a copy of OOTP8 or add me as a beta-tester for this limited purpose on the new game. I'm getting pretty good at spotting them, at least from the obvious lists of above-average players (mostly pitchers is where I'm seeing the issue).

I'll definitely look into this...

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

OOTP7, the SI version. Several of us brought these issues up back last April/May or so (as I can recall), so it's not related to any specific career I created. I could start a new career tonight, run 75 years of history, and find the same things.

No offense, but I don't have OOTP8 so I can't tell you if the same issue is occurring. I hope it's not. I'd be happy to do some checking if you want to send me a copy of OOTP8 or add me as a beta-tester for this limited purpose on the new game. I'm getting pretty good at spotting them, at least from the obvious lists of above-average players (mostly pitchers is where I'm seeing the issue).

Good news: I was able to find a pretty nasty bug which causes this weird behavior. It does not only effect historicals, but other leagues as well... OOTP 9 fixes this, which results in way better overall AI

[Ksyrup]

Awesome news!

Is this going to let us to set the percentages almost entirely on statistics and have the AI act accordingly, or was the bug related to something else? Or ,by fixing the bug, will it allow the evaluation percentages to work better?

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Awesome news!

Is this going to let us to set the percentages almost entirely on statistics and have the AI act accordingly, or was the bug related to something else? Or ,by fixing the bug, will it allow the evaluation percentages to work better?

It now works as advertised, the bug screwed the whole system basically... it works like in this example now:

Player A:
Expected OPS by ratings: .900
Current Year OPS: 1.100 in 150 PA
Last Year OPS: 0.800 in 550 PA
2 years ago: 0.900 in 600 PA

Now, the AI settings are like this:
Ratings 30%
Current Year 40%
Last Year 20%
2 years ago: 10%

OK, now, the resulting OPS is:
0.3 * 0.900 (30% of the ratings)
+ 0.12 * 1.100 (150 PA from the 500 minimum is 30%, so it uses 12% (40% * 0.3) of current stats)
+ 0.48 * 0.800 (the remaining 28% from the previous step, plus 20% last year)
+ 0.1 * 0.900
= 0.876 ... so, for the AI this guy is a hitter with an 0.876 OPS.

Hope that makes sense This allows you to have the AI act entirely based on stats if there are enough PA/IP for the player in the past...

[Ksyrup]

That's freaking awesome. I feel like my bit of "grognarding" finally paid off!

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

That's freaking awesome. I feel like my bit of "grognarding" finally paid off!

This bug was around since OOTP 2006... but I wasn't able to find it until today

[spleen1015]

I don't think I would be talking about that in public.

[Coffee Warlord]

Sweeeeeeet.

That was the deal breaker I was hoping got hunted down. Sold.

[Ksyrup]

Is the pre-order available, come and gone, or am I missing it completely? I followed the link in Marcus' first post in this thread, see some general discussion of OOPT9, but no reference to it on the OOTP Developments page. Just wondering what the status is and whether I've missed the pre-order opportunity.

[Drake]

I just pre-ordered. I am Markus's bitch.

[Drake]

dola...

Here's the link in case you didn't get the e-mail: https://www.elicense.com/ootpdevelopments/store/

[Ksyrup]

Thanks. I used to be on their list, maybe I got it and didn't realize it.

[RainMaker]

Great discussion here, sad it doesn't take place more at the OOTP forums. Seems their biggest concerns are how often a top 100 list is created and whether a scouting director should wear a suit in his screenshot.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Great discussion here, sad it doesn't take place more at the OOTP forums. Seems their biggest concerns are how often a top 100 list is created and whether a scouting director should wear a suit in his screenshot.

OMG! But that'd be SOOO realistic d00d!

[DaddyTorgo]

sweet - with that bug hunted down i just may pre-order tonight

[Oilers9911]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

OMG! But that'd be SOOO realistic d00d!

Dood no suit on scouts = EPIC FAIL. WTF +1

[Johnny93g]

Will you be releasing a patch that fixes this bug, that screwed up the whole system for OOTP8?

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

It now works as advertised, the bug screwed the whole system basically... it works like in this example now:

Player A:
Expected OPS by ratings: .900
Current Year OPS: 1.100 in 150 PA
Last Year OPS: 0.800 in 550 PA
2 years ago: 0.900 in 600 PA

Now, the AI settings are like this:
Ratings 30%
Current Year 40%
Last Year 20%
2 years ago: 10%

OK, now, the resulting OPS is:
0.3 * 0.900 (30% of the ratings)
+ 0.12 * 1.100 (150 PA from the 500 minimum is 30%, so it uses 12% (40% * 0.3) of current stats)
+ 0.48 * 0.800 (the remaining 28% from the previous step, plus 20% last year)
+ 0.1 * 0.900
= 0.876 ... so, for the AI this guy is a hitter with an 0.876 OPS.

Hope that makes sense This allows you to have the AI act entirely based on stats if there are enough PA/IP for the player in the past...

[lighthousekeeper]

if (scout.BMI > 30)
{ facegen.type = suit }
else
{ facegen.type = uniform }

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by Drake

I just pre-ordered. I am Markus's bitch.

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

sweet - with that bug hunted down i just may pre-order tonight

Me too. And damn you Kysrup and FOFC! K-H-A-N !

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Great discussion here, sad it doesn't take place more at the OOTP forums. Seems their biggest concerns are how often a top 100 list is created and whether a scouting director should wear a suit in his screenshot.

Yeah no kidding. I couldn't believe the uproar about the f#$%ing 100 list thing and when it is created. Geez wtf! There are other things that should be focused on.

[Galaril]

Umm I hate to utter this question but I will since I couldn't remember if a release date "window" had been metioned? When is the release date?

[Coder]

...and once again the Euro-price is waaaaay higher than the USD-price.. pre-order price, special discount, $39..

I'll either buy it through proxy or have a friend buy it for me and I paypal him the money..

[21C]

Originally Posted by Coder

...and once again the Euro-price is waaaaay higher than the USD-price.. pre-order price, special discount, $39..

I'll either buy it through proxy or have a friend buy it for me and I paypal him the money..

Yep, that is the exact reason why I never bought the last two versions - and the reason I won't be buying this version.

US$25 = $26.40 Australian
25 Euros = $41.80 AUS

What a fucking joke!

[DaddyTorgo]

you guys complaining about the exchange rate realize that that's just the way it is right? nobody complains about it when they can get things for cheaper because their currency is weak vs. the dollar, everyone complains when their currency is strong vs. the dollar and they get shafted.

I guess I don't see why one would expect a computer game to be priced at a "flat rate regardless of exchange rates" versus a physical product which wouldn't be, because at heart the computer game is still a physical product, it's physical bits of code.

As coder mentioned, there are ways around this - so use them. or don't. I paid something close to $60 USD including shipping for FM07 because the dollar was shit against the pound at that point. It's just a fact of life.

[21C]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

you guys complaining about the exchange rate realize that that's just the way it is right?

And why is it just the way it is? That doesn't really make sense especially when you are discussing a digital downoad rather than a physical product.

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

I paid something close to $60 USD including shipping for FM07 because the dollar was shit against the pound at that point. It's just a fact of life.

And I understand this when you are talking about a boxed product (even though it is digital by nature) but it doesn't relate to this situation at all.

[bhlloy]

So the developer should give the game for cheap to people in other countries just because the exchange rate is unfavorable and there's no box? Or am I missing something?

[21C]

So just explain why it is cheaper in US$ compared to Euros when the US$ has been getting weaker against it for the last 5 years?

I'm sure you are missing something.

http://finance.yahoo.com/currency/co...EUR&amt=1&t=5y

[21C]

BTW I never understand why so many people get upset about people venting about this when it doesn't really affect them. Just let us vent godammit!

[bhlloy]

It was a serious question. I had no idea what the Euro was against the dollar. I'm sure there is a good reason for it - taxes or publisher rights maybe? I still don't see what the difference is if I get a box or not, but never mind.

Anyway, I have tens of thousands of GB pounds worth of student loans and I earn US dollars. That really sucks right now. Count yourself lucky that you only have PC games to bitch about

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by 21C

So just explain why it is cheaper in US$ compared to Euros when the US$ has been getting weaker against it for the last 5 years?

I'm sure you are missing something.

http://finance.yahoo.com/currency/co...EUR&amt=1&t=5y

because the dollar does not get "weaker" in a vacumn. it gets weaker compared to other currencies. dollar-to-dollar we see the change in inflation.

[21C]

Yeah my question was a serious one as well. I just don't understand the discrepancy in the US-Canada price and the everyone else price.

[sabotai]

I must be missing something. If the Euro is stronger than the USD (IOW, if 1 Euro > 1 USD), shouldn't the price of the game in Euros be cheaper than the price of the game in USD?

If the game costs $25, then, according to current exchange rates (0.63 USD to 1 Euro), shouldn't the game cost 15.77 Euros?

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by sabotai

I must be missing something. If the Euro is stronger than the USD (IOW, if 1 Euro > 1 USD), shouldn't the price of the game in Euros be cheaper than the price of the game in USD?

If the game costs $25, then, according to current exchange rates (0.63 USD to 1 Euro), shouldn't the game cost 15.77 Euros?

yes. That would make sense wouldn't it?

[Coder]

The OOTP series has been priced at exactly €1 = $1 since SI took over. I was hoping it would be back to only being priced in USD when Marcus went into business for himself again but I guess not.

Just like Sab says, if the pricing had been following the currency rate, the price would be cheaper in Euros than in USD, but the OOTP exchange-rate has been the same for the last 3 years.

[gmoses]

I just recently bought OOTP8 and will probably play this for another six months before shifting to OOTP 9. (I'll wait a while and let you guys work out any issues. Then when I get to the end of a season I'll switch over)

My question is that since in Marcus's words "the bug screwed the whole system basically" can we expect a mini-patch to fix this one issue in OOTP8? Or is this really not that serious?

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by gmoses

I just recently bought OOTP8 and will probably play this for another six months before shifting to OOTP 9. (I'll wait a while and let you guys work out any issues. Then when I get to the end of a season I'll switch over)

My question is that since in Marcus's words "the bug screwed the whole system basically" can we expect a mini-patch to fix this one issue in OOTP8? Or is this really not that serious?

Sorry, but the time for patching OOTP 8 is gone... also, the issue is not that big, the game is just a bit less smart that it could be

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Sorry, but the time for patching OOTP 8 is gone... also, the issue is not that big, the game is just a bit less smart that it could be

As is the time for purchasing it, unfortunately for gmoses!

[Johnny93g]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Sorry, but the time for patching OOTP 8 is gone... also, the issue is not that big, the game is just a bit less smart that it could be

You called it a nasty bug, that screwed up the whole system basically. Now you say the issue is not that big. Which one is it?

I'm kinda put off that you won't fix the current version of your game. 40 bucks for the new one, naw, I feel ripped off enough.

[Drake]

Oh, for fuck's sake. You make it sound like this isn't the way that all software patching works.

[MizzouRah]

It is kind of funny that something BIG was supposedly found and you can get the fix in version 9!!

I know games are like that.. but it's still funny.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

It is kind of funny that something BIG was supposedly found and you can get the fix in version 9!!

I know games are like that.. but it's still funny.

Maximum Profitability

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

It is kind of funny that something BIG was supposedly found and you can get the fix in version 9!!

I know games are like that.. but it's still funny.

Of course, that is assuming fixed really means it was fixed.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

Of course, that is assuming fixed really means it was fixed.

that's what ootp10 is for

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

that's what ootp10 is for

pa-da-ta-bump!

[spleen1015]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

I don't think I would be talking about that in public.

.

[gmoses]

Well I'm a long time fan and still have my initial copy of OOTP1. I'm sure I'll get OOTP9 at some point and I appreciate at least getting a quick answer from Marcus.

Obviously we are long past the time for normal patches to OOTP 8 or previous versions. Still it seems that if a distinct bug has already been located then why not fix it??

I guess maybe it would need to be tested. I'm sure noone wants to delay OOTP9. Maybe just make the quick fix and call it a beta patch and let interested users test it. Or perhaps when he says he's found the bug it's not as simple as changing a couple lines of code.

Or maybe it really isn't that important.

[kq76]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

It now works as advertised, the bug screwed the whole system basically... it works like in this example now:

Player A:
Expected OPS by ratings: .900
Current Year OPS: 1.100 in 150 PA
Last Year OPS: 0.800 in 550 PA
2 years ago: 0.900 in 600 PA

Now, the AI settings are like this:
Ratings 30%
Current Year 40%
Last Year 20%
2 years ago: 10%

OK, now, the resulting OPS is:
0.3 * 0.900 (30% of the ratings)
+ 0.12 * 1.100 (150 PA from the 500 minimum is 30%, so it uses 12% (40% * 0.3) of current stats)
+ 0.48 * 0.800 (the remaining 28% from the previous step, plus 20% last year)
+ 0.1 * 0.900
= 0.876 ... so, for the AI this guy is a hitter with an 0.876 OPS.

Hope that makes sense This allows you to have the AI act entirely based on stats if there are enough PA/IP for the player in the past...

Markus, to allow the value to be closer to the weights people input, I'd like to recommend that you spread the left over weight over the last 2 years (when there are 2 previous years of stats), not just dumped all onto last year's.

That is, instead of .48*.800 you do (it's simpler than it looks):

((500-150)/500*.4/(the sum of the weights which might be lower than 1 if you give 0 weight to ratings)*(.2/(.2+.1))+.2/(the sum of the weights which might be lower than 1 if you give 0 weight to ratings))*.800

and instead of .1*.900 you do:

((500-150)/500*.4/(the sum of the weights which might be lower than 1 if you give 0 weight to ratings)*(.1/(.2+.1))+.1/(the sum of the weights which might be lower than 1 if you give 0 weight to ratings))*.900.

I have a spreadsheet that shows the exact formulas if it's a bit confusing that I can send you if you want. It might look a lot more complicated than yours, but it's not; I just included everything to make sure you get it. The key differences are *(.2/(.2+.1)) for last year and *(.1/(.2+.1)) for 2 years ago which spreads the left over.

Also, I'd like to make sure you're including the "/(the sum of the weights which might be lower than 1 if you give 0 weight to ratings)" part because if you don't that would seriously throw things off.

Lastly, what are you doing when there are no previous years' stats, ratings are 0 and there is only a portion played of this year? Do you use minor league stats when there are no previous years' major league stats? That would probably usually inflate the result, but I can't readily think of any other solution.

EDIT: Corrected the formula as it was difficult to transpose from the spreadsheet.