MP- What's needed for a pay text sim model?

[Tim Tellean]

I was talking to someone last night and we were arguing/discussing MP and the viability of a textsim type game and the pay model (ala WOW)
My question is what would make a good MP game, what capablities do games have now and what do they need to do to make MP a bigger market share to make the developers pay more attention.
Is it live action? Watching the 2d/3d pixels move around live? Is it more reporting? More live interaction?
I have looked at FM live but haven't played so is that the ultimate now?
Right now you can't charge for the limited services of theses games and too many people play OOTP, DDSPB, BBCF, FOF without actually owning the game. Its a lost revenue stream that the small developers lose out on don't/aren't willing to explore.

thoughts?

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Tim Tellean

too many people play OOTP, DDSPB, BBCF, FOF without actually owning the game

Are you talking piracy? I wasn't aware that any leagues were set up to let you play these games without owning them. That would just be a nightmare for the commish.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I can't really imagine a scenario where I'd pay to play MP since I have no interest in it when it's a free feature.

Yeah, I'm not your primary target with this question because of that I guess, but I figured I'd give you .02 from that side of the aisle anyway.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

Are you talking piracy? I wasn't aware that any leagues were set up to let you play these games without owning them. That would just be a nightmare for the commish.

Yeah, I can't imagine playing in a BBCF or FOF league without owning the game.

[Mustang]

There are several games that I can think of that are pretty much text sim that are pay services - Duels, Goal Line Blitz and Whatif Sports. The thing that drives games that you pay for is the lure of that next level in front of you. At best though you are hoping for a niche market and it will no way be near WoW levels.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Tim Tellean

Right now you can't charge for the limited services of theses games and too many people play OOTP, DDSPB, BBCF, FOF without actually owning the game.

In the immortal words of my boyhood friend and idol, Wayman C. Wanamaker, Jr., a Great American:

Do WHUT???

I don't play DDSPB, but I can't imagine anyone putting up with running a MP league of OOTP, BBCF, or FOF without every participant owning the game. Are you suggesting that people are sending in instructions and commishes are entering them wholesale? I can see that happening on a limited basis, but I'm having a really hard time imagining that working long-term. Do you have evidence of this claim? I'd love to see a league like that. I can't imagine it being viable long-term.

[Young Drachma]

The current roster of text-sim developers can't design a web site out of a paper bag. So really, a multi-player online game from any of them gets me as excited as a wet noodle.

I think this fishing expedition will leave your cooler quite empty.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

In the immortal words of my boyhood friend and idol, Wayman C. Wanamaker, Jr., a Great American:

Do WHUT???

I don't play DDSPB, but I can't imagine anyone putting up with running a MP league of OOTP, BBCF, or FOF without every participant owning the game. Are you suggesting that people are sending in instructions and commishes are entering them wholesale? I can see that happening on a limited basis, but I'm having a really hard time imagining that working long-term. Do you have evidence of this claim? I'd love to see a league like that. I can't imagine it being viable long-term.

I can't imagine it, either...but even if it *was* happening, would that sort of thing be different than a guy running a solo career on his PC with input from his friends on how to manage the other teams, then putting the results on-line?

I like the idea of billing people for vicarious enjoyment of others' hobbies, though. It's kept the porn industry in business for about a billion years now.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

In the immortal words of my boyhood friend and idol, Wayman C. Wanamaker, Jr., a Great American:

Do WHUT???

I don't play DDSPB, but I can't imagine anyone putting up with running a MP league of OOTP, BBCF, or FOF without every participant owning the game. Are you suggesting that people are sending in instructions and commishes are entering them wholesale? I can see that happening on a limited basis, but I'm having a really hard time imagining that working long-term. Do you have evidence of this claim? I'd love to see a league like that. I can't imagine it being viable long-term.

I wasn't in any of the leagues, but I do remember several ootp leagues a few years ago advertising that people didn't need to own the game to play, that they could send in instructions each sim. I agree that I couldn't imagine how painful that must be on the person running the sims.

These days I think most of those leagues ended up just becoming ootp5 online leagues (since ootp 5 is free to download and play now).

[SirFozzie]

If FM Live isn't going gangbusters (and I'm not saying it ISN'T, just that I'm not hearing about it going gangbusters)... no pay text sim model is viable at this point in time.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Mustang

There are several games that I can think of that are pretty much text sim that are pay services - Duels, Goal Line Blitz and Whatif Sports. The thing that drives games that you pay for is the lure of that next level in front of you. At best though you are hoping for a niche market and it will no way be near WoW levels.

Yup.

We've had this discussion ad nauseum here, but these games (sadly) are what are making money.

It's very possible - but it needs to be done with a web presence. There are people making plenty of money off of text sport MMO's, they're just not games that we like.

[stevew]

I played in a JSB league where several didn't own the game. The depth charts were so simple that the commish made a script to generate them. It was better in some ways cause you could easily presim that game since it wasn't locked for MP.

[lordscarlet]

I have said, probably several times on this board, that I think textsims should go the way of a subscription model via the web. Some people agree, some don't. But there is nothing that I am aware of in textsims that can't translate well to the web (except, perhaps, the ability to play disconnected). I think it
would do really well, and I think it would sell well outside the desktop textsim market (as GLB has shown).

I think the model needs to have a low cost of entry. The way to success, in my book, is allow people to play for free. You either charge for advanced features (but not advanced stats, like GLB, because, well, that's just lame as a player -- however, a great revenue model) or charge for multiple leagues. Perhaps one league is free, but you pay per season for each league after that. Some people charge extra, say, for advanced playcalling features. But I think you can charge for extra leagues and/or a single player mode. Hell, an ambitious developer/studio could use google gears to allow offline play for those that want to be able to pound away on a single player league while offline. If I had the time I would certainly make an attempt, but I really just don't think I have the time to do it. Maybe if I had a developer or two to work with that I knew were ambitious about it and could get the job done, but the textsim world seems to be very greedy with it's ownership (and I have now taken up a chunk of my time with TSN.

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

The current roster of text-sim developers can't design a web site out of a paper bag. So really, a multi-player online game from any of them gets me as excited as a wet noodle.

I think this fishing expedition will leave your cooler quite empty.

+1

You need to pay for a quality designer to do the site.

[lordscarlet]

dola (unless someone beat me) the GLB model is the best REVENUE GENERATING model. Allow people to get better stats if they pay extra money. It works in GLB, it works in web-based resource management games, etc. It is a model that works if you get people to play that aren't serious about the realism -- if you just want to make money, allow people to boost their stats by paying extra.

[QuikSand]

On a semi-related note... I wonder how much potential there might be for a limited access game (like a text sim) where there was some real money attached to the operations?

How cool would it be to play a game like Multiplayer FOF but have an *actual* bottom line involved? Like when you spend $6m on a free agent WR, you're spending play money that you actually had to buy with real money. If that $6m costs you a real world ten bucks, and winning a championship would earn you, say, 200... Then you've got a whole new level to this game that we simply don't see in a text sim with a toothless financial system.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

On a semi-related note... I wonder how much potential there might be for a limited access game (like a text sim) where there was some real money attached to the operations?

How cool would it be to play a game like Multiplayer FOF but have an *actual* bottom line involved? Like when you spend $6m on a free agent WR, you're spending play money that you actually had to buy with real money. If that $6m costs you a real world ten bucks, and winning a championship would earn you, say, 200... Then you've got a whole new level to this game that we simply don't see in a text sim with a toothless financial system.

You have to be careful about crossing the "gambling" line. But I could sure see some model where you pay cash to get in-game cash, and earning money from ticket sales, concessions, etc earns you in-game cash as well. For-free people play in the minors developing players for the people who want to pay money to own a "professional" franchise. Add in a relegation model so that people keep competing with others at the same resource level and you may have a winner.

[Swaggs]

I played in a number of Diamond Mind Baseball leagues that did not require you to own the game. You just set your vsRHP/vsLHP lineups (w/ positions) and pitching staff roles. It was a pain at the beginning of the season and if teams got overly trade happy, but otherwise not too bad.

[Tim Tellean]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

In the immortal words of my boyhood friend and idol, Wayman C. Wanamaker, Jr., a Great American:

Do WHUT???

I don't play DDSPB, but I can't imagine anyone putting up with running a MP league of OOTP, BBCF, or FOF without every participant owning the game. Are you suggesting that people are sending in instructions and commishes are entering them wholesale? I can see that happening on a limited basis, but I'm having a really hard time imagining that working long-term. Do you have evidence of this claim? I'd love to see a league like that. I can't imagine it being viable long-term.

Yeah I had this argument at Wolverine internally and externally after a user posted on the forums about running a league w/o buying and another that wants to join a league w/o owning the game and they don't care and just shrug there shoulders. The elicense model doesn't work unless you add a bit of code to check for ownership. Seems to me that the industry either doesn't want to face or deal with this issue, even with the leagues that require game ownership how do actually check for that?

[Tim Tellean]

Originally Posted by lordscarlet

dola (unless someone beat me) the GLB model is the best REVENUE GENERATING model. Allow people to get better stats if they pay extra money. It works in GLB, it works in web-based resource management games, etc. It is a model that works if you get people to play that aren't serious about the realism -- if you just want to make money, allow people to boost their stats by paying extra.

I haven't played GLB and that model isn't exactly what I thinking about, with Action PC! games you can watch the games in play and make moves.
I'm wondering if a model where you can watch your league games, manage live, chat with other users would actually work in a text sim environment?

[Tim Tellean]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

I played in a number of Diamond Mind Baseball leagues that did not require you to own the game. You just set your vsRHP/vsLHP lineups (w/ positions) and pitching staff roles. It was a pain at the beginning of the season and if teams got overly trade happy, but otherwise not too bad.

This is kind of like Yahoo fantasy where you set lineups and make moves for free but if you want "live" action you need to buy stat tracker. How many people actually buy stat tracker?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Tim Tellean

after a user posted on the forums about running a league w/o buying

Now that part I'm having a tough time figuring out how it would work.

another that wants to join a league w/o owning the game

This on the other hand I'm not sure how I see a reasonable way around it. I mean, unless you want to lock commissioners (that own the game) who are willing to do the work for a non-owning team out of being able to manually handle that I don't see how you could prevent it. And I would think there's a better chance that a non-buying owner might eventually make a purchase than there is that a mp-player would buy a full copy strictly for the purpose of participating in a single league, so it's probably an extremely small potential net win than a big loss.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Tim Tellean

Yeah I had this argument at Wolverine internally and externally after a user posted on the forums about running a league w/o buying and another that wants to join a league w/o owning the game and they don't care and just shrug there shoulders.

Wanting to do something and actually doing it are two different things, though. People have mentioned other games in this thread that people used to do that sort of thing with, or single-season games. I'm talking about the existing leaders in Pro Football, College Football, and Pro Baseball MP, though, and games that run multiple seasons (meaning FA, contract extensions, and recruiting are, uh, important). And I say it again: I can't imagine any league being able to do that on a remotely long-term basis. It's just too much work on the commish. With recruiting in BBCF and free agency offers in OOTP and FOF, it would be a royal pain to take care of that for even one extra owner, let alone multiples.

...even with the leagues that require game ownership how do actually check for that?

Here's a hint: if a guy asks the commish to make every single change to his team that he needs, he doesn't own the game. Pretty simple. It would be either that situation, or the owner would be not an owner, but a spectator. "His" team would be managed 100% by the AI. And if there's a guy who wants to do that, the text sim companies wouldn't be losing a anything from that weirdo's sale. *shurg*

[Flasch186]

a revival of the economy

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

You have to be careful about crossing the "gambling" line.

Well, I know what you mean, but *I* don't really have to worry about anything. *I* would be a lot more interested in this as a gambling game than as an empty exercise. If there's no payout, then I think you're on the track of GLB -- which seems to be making money just fine, incidentally. But I have no interest at all in participating in a game with any seriousness where money gets you more development/equipment/success than those without money, but there's no way to get your investment back in any form.

But for the sake of making the game more approachable... sure, I think a negative-sum model could still work. Imagine playing a game even halfway a complex as FOF, but where each of the 32 teams puts in, say, $20 to play each season. And then maybe you allow people to pay real money to have additional resources usable for things like paying signing bonuses -- not enough to just take over the league, but enough to add a genuine financial engine to the game. A league takes in maybe $500 a year, gives back $400 of that to the winners in some fashion, and the operator gets a haul to administration. It's a workable model. (And yes, it's potentially gambling)

I just really like the idea of having to decide whether a certain player contract is "worth it" in a meaningful way. Maybe that's a function of the salary cap problems in the MP FOF leagues where I play, but that's something I think could add a lot to the game environment.

[Fidatelo]

Originally Posted by Tim Tellean

This is kind of like Yahoo fantasy where you set lineups and make moves for free but if you want "live" action you need to buy stat tracker. How many people actually buy stat tracker?

In the leagues I've been in there are usually 1 or 2 guys that buy the stat tracker. I've come pretty close myself a couple times.

[Tim Tellean]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Wanting to do something and actually doing it are two different things, though. People have mentioned other games in this thread that people used to do that sort of thing with, or single-season games. I'm talking about the existing leaders in Pro Football, College Football, and Pro Baseball MP, though, and games that run multiple seasons (meaning FA, contract extensions, and recruiting are, uh, important). And I say it again: I can't imagine any league being able to do that on a remotely long-term basis. It's just too much work on the commish. With recruiting in BBCF and free agency offers in OOTP and FOF, it would be a royal pain to take care of that for even one extra owner, let alone multiples.

Here's a hint: if a guy asks the commish to make every single change to his team that he needs, he doesn't own the game. Pretty simple. It would be either that situation, or the owner would be not an owner, but a spectator. "His" team would be managed 100% by the AI. And if there's a guy who wants to do that, the text sim companies wouldn't be losing a anything from that weirdo's sale. *shurg*

Heres A thread from WS as an example.
thebasketballsim.com || New League - Wolverine Studios

[miked]

I love those people saying it's stealing because he lets them email/submit their changes. People are really idiots, I'm glad somebody from Wolverine had the brain to say it was fine.

I mean, it's an admirable thing, but in no way would I ever run a league where I had 29 other GMs submit their changes to me and do that. Plus, with a game like baseball, you have extensions, FA signings, etc. I'd have to find out on any given sim what a player was asking and relay it to the various GMs. It's like a full-time job.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Tim Tellean

Heres A thread from WS as an example.
thebasketballsim.com || New League - Wolverine Studios

So your example is a league in its first year that hasn't gone through any of the "hard" parts yet?

[Sgran]

I'll tell you one thing: text sims are killing my eyes. I stare at a computer all day at work and then go home and strain my eyes watching scrolling text. The more I can "watch" the game the better.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Tim Tellean

This is kind of like Yahoo fantasy where you set lineups and make moves for free but if you want "live" action you need to buy stat tracker. How many people actually buy stat tracker?

I believe ESPN gives you the same thing as that stat tracker for free, so probably very few. You'd think anyone interested enough to plop down $125 would also have considered a couple other sites first.

Anyway, my thinking is that if you want people to invest a good amount of money on a regular basis, the biggest thing is to enhance the strategy element of the game. While randomness will probably have to be part of it, people will stay and keep the community large if they feel like their actions and strategies have a direct impact on the game.

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by Tim Tellean

I haven't played GLB and that model isn't exactly what I thinking about, with Action PC! games you can watch the games in play and make moves.
I'm wondering if a model where you can watch your league games, manage live, chat with other users would actually work in a text sim environment?

This implies something that is an argument I seem to never win in this community: The future of text sim sports is the web.

The only desktop applications I use these days: Web browser, development tools (Visual Studio, textmate, etc) and a media player. I use google documents, mint.com, turbotax online, etc. The only games that interest me are web-based ones (largely in the "text sim" sort of genre, but I haven't found any good sports ones, just resource management, etc).

[jdavidbakr]

I've been thinking about this myself and was surprised to see this come up here (when I was searching for something completely different - I don't spend much time in the Off Topic forum). Anyway, I've got something of a concept if there are any programmers interested in helping me out - either a subscription model or possibly open source - PM me if you think you've got the knowledge and skillset to at least chat about it.

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

If FM Live isn't going gangbusters (and I'm not saying it ISN'T, just that I'm not hearing about it going gangbusters)... no pay text sim model is viable at this point in time.

This is definitely a misnomer imho - what is considered 'viable' or a 'success' saleswise at a publisher like SEGA is far different to what would be considered a success for a small independant developer.

This is largely because being able to pay yourself a salary as an independant developer is considered a 'success' - whether its a neccassary cost for a company like SEGA and they're more interested in the surplus money which is made on top of that (ie. just being able to 'break even' after salaries isn't a success).

This is fairly 'normal' as far as businesses go and is why you still see lots of 'mom and pop' stores around at retail - they're generally people who enjoy what they do and are just happy that they can make a living doing it - despite not being able to turn over the vast profits that say Walmart might.

(so in summary I think a MMO sports sim from an indie dev is viable)

[AgustusM]

a couple things have killed my interest in web based text sims

1, everyone I see has fake names and teams. I don't want Bill Jackson from the New Mexico Marauders, I want Albert Pujols from the St Louis Cardinals. Doesn't matter to a lot of people, but it is an automtic loss of interest for me

2. well run leagues - it only takes one guy to trade his 5 best players for the guys 5 worst because he doesn't care, collusion, or anarchist.

3. poor designed - GUI matters. If if didn't we would all still be DOS, or even UNIX for that matter. It is a web 2.0 world and I expect web 2.0 GUI

I do think the model is a very good idea, resolves much of the issues of troubleshooting the endless PC configurations, makes patch/updates far easier and something that could be done whenever a bug is fixed.

Ideally a single site that offered the major sports in the same crisp GUI with well run leagues and real players and teams would be worth a great deal to me and I would definitely pay for that. Nothing I have seen, has come even close.

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

The current roster of text-sim developers can't design a web site out of a paper bag. So really, a multi-player online game from any of them gets me as excited as a wet noodle.

Ok I'll bite - can you explain why you dislike each of the websites? - as I've always thought OOTP Developments and Wolverine (amongst others) do a good job on theirs.

[jdavidbakr]

Originally Posted by AgustusM

1, everyone I see has fake names and teams. I don't want Bill Jackson from the New Mexico Marauders, I want Albert Pujols from the St Louis Cardinals. Doesn't matter to a lot of people, but it is an automtic loss of interest for me

Unfortunately, EA Sports has an exclusive rights arrangement with the NFL, so that's not likely going to (legally) change any time soon.

[Tim Tellean]

Originally Posted by AgustusM

a couple things have killed my interest in web based text sims

1, everyone I see has fake names and teams. I don't want Bill Jackson from the New Mexico Marauders, I want Albert Pujols from the St Louis Cardinals. Doesn't matter to a lot of people, but it is an automtic loss of interest for me

2. well run leagues - it only takes one guy to trade his 5 best players for the guys 5 worst because he doesn't care, collusion, or anarchist.

3. poor designed - GUI matters. If if didn't we would all still be DOS, or even UNIX for that matter. It is a web 2.0 world and I expect web 2.0 GUI

I do think the model is a very good idea, resolves much of the issues of troubleshooting the endless PC configurations, makes patch/updates far easier and something that could be done whenever a bug is fixed.

Ideally a single site that offered the major sports in the same crisp GUI with well run leagues and real players and teams would be worth a great deal to me and I would definitely pay for that. Nothing I have seen, has come even close.

1. This comment I always find interesting since within a few years all the players are fake as all the other players retire.

2. Is this AI trades? Its really hard to micro manage human behavior.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Tim Tellean

1. This comment I always find interesting since within a few years all the players are fake as all the other players retire.

Although it wasn't my comment originally I'll take a stab at at least one reason. The learning curve for games tends to be speeded up quite a bit when you start from a set of reasonably knowns. That also lends itself to a faster immersion factor.

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by Tim Tellean

1. This comment I always find interesting since within a few years all the players are fake as all the other players retire.

I personally play one game each version of our products - normally for 30+ seasons each iteration.

However one thing I'm very aware of is that I'm actually in the minority and from our old surveys (back when FM was CM) a large proportion of our users played for 5 seasons at a throw or less - their reasoning for doing so was generally that they wanted to play with players they knew irl.

[Tim Tellean]

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan

I personally play one game each version of our products - normally for 30+ seasons each iteration.

However one thing I'm very aware of is that I'm actually in the minority and from our old surveys (back when FM was CM) a large proportion of our users played for 5 seasons at a throw or less - their reasoning for doing so was generally that they wanted to play with players they knew irl.

So many the key would be to offer perhaps an unlimited time league and leagues of say 1,3,5,10 years in duration.
The problem though is really the money to pay for real player, team, league license rights, the cost is prohibitive for most developers.

[AgustusM]

Originally Posted by Tim Tellean

1. This comment I always find interesting since within a few years all the players are fake as all the other players retire.

2. Is this AI trades? Its really hard to micro manage human behavior.

1. a few years? I am in year 5 of an OOTP league and 90% of my players are real. Even in year 10 it will still be close to 50%. I never tend to make it much longer than that since I lose interest when all the players are fake. It is one of the reasons I enjoy playing historical replays as well since I know all of the players.

Plus the team is important to me. For example I have never and will never play any team other than my lifetime rooting interest the Giants.

OOTP is my all time favorite game of any type, but if it didn't have real player/and team mods from the first version I played (v2) I would have never even have played it.

I am not saying this is the only way, or even the right way. I am simply stating that for me personally it is the only way.

2. It really isn't hard for a commissioner to reject egregious transactions - I have done so for years in fantasy leagues and real world youth sports. I have also been in online leagues with good commissioners who have done so. Laissez-faire leadership in online games ruins them for me, especially when you have collusion that leads to a loss of competition.

[Icy]

First, I think there are employees in some of those text sims companies more than capable of designing a good website.

Second, even if there aren't, it doesn't mean one can't be hired for the right project.

About current models of business for an online text sim, I see three options:

- Pay per month subscription like "What if sports" and "FM Live".

- Free to play but pay to enhance, like Goal Line Blitz or Cyberdunk. The problem is the imbalance it creates between paying and not paying players.

- A mix of both, like hattrick, where you can play for free but you can also pay a monthly subscription to become supporter and get some extra benefits that do not affect gameplay. The good thing i that it doesn't create any imbalance between paid or free players.

I guess the second generates way more money, but it can also lead to players losing fast the interest and not investing anymore. I have expended around $300 in GLB at first, and enjoyed it a ton, but i haven't for a while and in the last week i haven't even loging once to check my players. For what i have read in the forums and the lots of contacts i made there, a lot of 1st season veterans are also loosing interest as i did.

The free to play model is not bad either if you manage to create a huge fan base. Even if those fans do not pay for playing, you can always sell ad space to other companies as you have a huge audience. Of couse it only works for major sports like hattrick with soccer, and it's a more long term project.

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by AgustusM

a couple things have killed my interest in web based text sims

1, everyone I see has fake names and teams. I don't want Bill Jackson from the New Mexico Marauders, I want Albert Pujols from the St Louis Cardinals. Doesn't matter to a lot of people, but it is an automtic loss of interest for me

2. well run leagues - it only takes one guy to trade his 5 best players for the guys 5 worst because he doesn't care, collusion, or anarchist.

3. poor designed - GUI matters. If if didn't we would all still be DOS, or even UNIX for that matter. It is a web 2.0 world and I expect web 2.0 GUI

I do think the model is a very good idea, resolves much of the issues of troubleshooting the endless PC configurations, makes patch/updates far easier and something that could be done whenever a bug is fixed.

Ideally a single site that offered the major sports in the same crisp GUI with well run leagues and real players and teams would be worth a great deal to me and I would definitely pay for that. Nothing I have seen, has come even close.

1. I am the exact opposite. I don't want to recreate reality -- I want to create a team in my hometown that would never exist in the real world.

2. I think this is something that can be overcome with a commissioner structure like FOF MP leagues -- Give a lot of control to an elected commissioner and play with guys you trust.

3. Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. As I've said before, I don't have empirical evidence, but I think companies lose a lot of customers just based on their first impression based on the initial website. If people have analytics set up, they could have bounce rate data, but I don't. Good UI developers and designers can be expensive, but I think you can get one for a price that will pay for itself over time. I could certainly be wrong, though, and I'm not the one paying the bills.

[AgustusM]

Originally Posted by lordscarlet

1. I am the exact opposite. I don't want to recreate reality -- I want to create a team in my hometown that would never exist in the real world.

very interesting. I bet where you grew up has a lot to do with where people fall on this issue. I went to my first Giants game in 1972 and have never lived more than an hour away from the stadium my entire life. Thus, my allegiance. I have no perspective on what it would be like to not have a team or even to move around to different areas. I can see how that would dramatically impact ones feeling on the real team issue.

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by AgustusM

very interesting. I bet where you grew up has a lot to do with where people fall on this issue. I went to my first Giants game in 1972 and have never lived more than an hour away from the stadium my entire life. Thus, my allegiance. I have no perspective on what it would be like to not have a team or even to move around to different areas. I can see how that would dramatically impact ones feeling on the real team issue.

Nope, I grew up 25 miles from DC and have lived within 60 miles of DC except for 2 years of college. But I like making a team and an identiy. I used "hometown" just for the people that don't have teams, but I actually use DC as the city for my deeproute team. I like making the logo, the uniforms, etc. To me this is much like any roleplaying game -- I am creating something that is not real. But it's also fun to create a Virginia team, even though I am a diehard Redskins fan.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by Tim Tellean

So many the key would be to offer perhaps an unlimited time league and leagues of say 1,3,5,10 years in duration.
The problem though is really the money to pay for real player, team, league license rights, the cost is prohibitive for most developers.

Ummm....if you had an unlimited time league, couldn't you just stop after 1, 3, 5, 10 years? I don't see having a set limit as being much of a value added feature.

That said, there is obviously a market for replay or historical sims, as evidenced by the Diamond Mine and Lance Haffner series of games.

[AgustusM]

Originally Posted by lordscarlet

Nope, I grew up 25 miles from DC and have lived within 60 miles of DC except for 2 years of college. But I like making a team and an identiy. I used "hometown" just for the people that don't have teams, but I actually use DC as the city for my deeproute team. I like making the logo, the uniforms, etc. To me this is much like any roleplaying game -- I am creating something that is not real. But it's also fun to create a Virginia team, even though I am a diehard Redskins fan.

but you illustrate my point exactly - you are a diehard Redskins fan because that team has been there your whole life.

as a baseball fan the senators where probably long gone before you were there and the nationals have only been there a few years for most of your life there has been no DC baseball team. Do you think you would enjoy the fictional as much if there were a baseball redskins?

Of course my point is absurd, telling you, who I don't know how you would feel is a ludicrous exercise.

In fact all of this is pure speculation and everyone is different. I am sure there is someone who grew up across the street from Yankee stadium but prefers the Hoboken Hobos - but in general I would imagine a lot of it happens to be if you have a team from your formative years.

I would also imagine some of it is generational. My ten year old son is a die hard Giants fan, but really only because I am so passionate about it and have been taking him to games, buying him jerseys, etc his entire life (yes I was one of those morons that took him to a game when he was 2 months old). I asked the other 10 year olds I coach what their favorite team was and not one of the 11 other kids had a favorite team. Amazing to me. When I was 10 I followed the team religiously. Not because my dad did, because he was barely interested. But because my friends did and because in 1972 there was nothing else to do. We listened on the radio, we studied the box scores, we read the sporting news and we played strat o matic for hours.

OK, end of old man ramblings.

[lordscarlet]

Well, your point is a little tarnished by the fact that I am a diehard, season ticket holding, Nationals fan.

But, yeah, I don't know. I watch the real teams. I don't want to be them. I consider myself die hard, but when it comes to creating a fake team, I want the free reign to do what I want with it. I think I am in the minority, but that's how I feel.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan

This is definitely a misnomer imho - what is considered 'viable' or a 'success' saleswise at a publisher like SEGA is far different to what would be considered a success for a small independant developer.

This is largely because being able to pay yourself a salary as an independant developer is considered a 'success' - whether its a neccassary cost for a company like SEGA and they're more interested in the surplus money which is made on top of that (ie. just being able to 'break even' after salaries isn't a success).

This is fairly 'normal' as far as businesses go and is why you still see lots of 'mom and pop' stores around at retail - they're generally people who enjoy what they do and are just happy that they can make a living doing it - despite not being able to turn over the vast profits that say Walmart might.

(so in summary I think a MMO sports sim from an indie dev is viable)

so you're saying FM Live is going okay? Good to know - if it ever becomes financially and time-commitment viable I want to give it a shot.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan

I personally play one game each version of our products - normally for 30+ seasons each iteration.

However one thing I'm very aware of is that I'm actually in the minority and from our old surveys (back when FM was CM) a large proportion of our users played for 5 seasons at a throw or less - their reasoning for doing so was generally that they wanted to play with players they knew irl.

really? that's sad. nothing i love more than getting deep deep deep into an FM world and developing a rich back-story. Which reminds me that I've been slacking lately, probably because I have Gigi Buffon right on the verge of retirement (he's like 39) and I don't want to keep playing and lose him.