FOF4 vs Last EA Version

[spleen1015]

Can you guys fill me in on the difference between FOF4 and the last version EA put out. I think that was 2002, right?

[Abe Sargent]

FOF2k2 is buggy as all get go. It's just a refurbished 2k1 with more bugs and a roster update. I never upgraded my 2k1 but I loved it.

FOF4 is a different product with many of the same rules and so forth. The screen and input is significantly different and the general "feel" of the game is different too, although I can't say exactly how.

I never could get into FOF4, to be honest. And I really tried. However, a lot of people on this board really love it and play it more than any other non-TCY FOF game.

-Anxiety

[FBPro]

FOF4 "for me" added alot, the ability to begin with various rosters helped alot as well as using draft classes. Some detail in records, etc are a big plus also.

I have played it quite a bit, though the game overall is still lacking a bit and honestly not sure what.

[Swaggs]

I think if you have never played the series before, you will love FOF4, as it is probably the best game in the series. I personally think that it was not a huge improvement on past versions (like FOF2 was from the original), and that is why some of the FOFC vets, myself included, were not drawn into it.

I would also recommend FOF4 b/c it supports the developer rather than the evil EA empire.

[Bee]

Originally posted by Swaggs
I think if you have never played the series before, you will love FOF4, as it is probably the best game in the series. I personally think that it was not a huge improvement on past versions (like FOF2 was from the original), and that is why some of the FOFC vets, myself included, were not drawn into it.

This nails it on the head for me as well.

[Leonidas]

I like the 2K version better stricly based on the actual gameplay. But the game crashed so damn much it was unenjoyable to deal with. Get rid of its bugs and I would never have bought FOF4. But 4 does have some redeeming features. I like the playcalling interface. It also gives you way more control on building gameplans, although for me it tends to become a pain in the butt and contributes greatly to carpal tunnel.

Finally, my biggest hack on FOF4 is it signs your rookie contracts for you. You draft them and they magically appear signed with no negotiations.

[Dutch]

FOF4 hands down over FOF2k2. Not neccessarily the greatest product ever, as TCY and FOF2 were better (IMO) but it was a rebuilding year for FOF and the end patched product is above average for enjoyability in a text based sim.

[Samdari]

Originally posted by Swaggs
I think if you have never played the series before, you will love FOF4, as it is probably the best game in the series. I personally think that it was not a huge improvement on past versions (like FOF2 was from the original), and that is why some of the FOFC vets, myself included, were not drawn into it.

I'll echo this. The consensus here seems to be that everyone's first version in their favortite.

[Solecismic]

This brings up another question... many people have told me FOF4 can be a bit tedious, though it obviously has more function than past versions.

From reading email and a lot of forum posts, I think it's because of the split between positions. Some NFL teams are really anal about this, and their LDE would never play RDE unless there was an emergency, or an intervening training camp. Other teams may switch if it's third down.

The penalty for making a switch like that in FOF4 is very slight, except when it comes to offensive tackles, because most teams want their top tackle at LT.

So, my question is "was the split the reason you didn't embrace FOF4, and if so, should it be eliminated, or is there a better way to handle it, given that every position does have subtle differences?"

[Bee]

I didn't mind the position split myself. It seemed like a relatively minor thing either way, definitely not a game breaker or even a major concern IMO. If I had to pick a method of doing it, I think what you did in FOF4 was as good as any I could come up with. I think my biggest "issue" with FOF4 was the overall roster management from the computer controlled teams.

[Buzzbee]

My thoughts:

Over the past few weeks I have been participating in the Kitty Hawk GroupThink3 with QuikSand, Fritz, Albionmoonlight, and recently Cuervo (the threads are in the Dynasty section for those who care). In our two seasons of play we have done a fair amount of position switching, primarily using LB's as DE's and FB's as TE's. I know this doesn't really address the idea of "splits", but feel it is related background info.

What we have found is that if a player is designated as a LB, but plays in the DE position, there doesn't SEEM to be much of a dropoff. However, if you actually change the player from a LB to a DE, then the system does modify the ratings and therefore one would ASSUME affect performance on the field.

How this relates to Jim's question is this: I would expect changing postions from Safety to Linebacker or CB to Safety to be a little more drastic than going from WILB to WOLB. Yes, WILB and WOLB are different positions with different responsibilities, but the talents or abilities to play those positions are very similar.

In my opinion, the talent a player has should determine what position they play. For example, if you have a DE that is a monster pass rusher, but is weak against the run, then you will most likely want to play him on the right side of the defensive line (which is usually the weak side of the O Line). This will enable him to better rush the passer and make him less susceptible to the run.

But if you split out the positions, this player might be slotted as a LDE. Therefore, because the game deems him to be a LDE, there is a slight penalty if you try to use him for the position which he is more aptly suited, and would likely play in real life.

So, I think MY preference would be to simply have DE's and let the gamer determine which postion he is best suited for. Same thing for OT, OG, DT, LB, S, WR, and CB. I can see a reason to leave FB and RB separate, because those two positions usually have two distinctly different types of players.

Just my $.02. Sorry for the ramble.

[Buzzbee]

Dola - By the way, I second what Bee said above. It isn't a gamebreaker and really doesn't affect how "tedious" the game is, since you can plug in a LDT as a RDT if you want to without a significant affect on performance. If there was a big difference, then it would be a big issue (IMO).

For me I think the tedium can be caused by the large number of options the gamer has coupled with the AI. I know this may sound silly, but hear me out. With FOF4 gamers have the option of setting up their gameplan with very in-depth detail. They can even go so far as to call each individual play. Yes, they can go with the scout recommendations, and let their coach call the plays, so there is an argument that this reduces the tedium. And it does.

However, there is room for a seed of doubt. The gamer knows he could tweak those items, but leaves it to the scout. After the game or after the season you might say to yourself:

"Self, we lost that game by two points. I wonnder if I had called the plays if we would have won. I've got a great running back but he didn't seem to carry the ball as much as I would have let him. I wonder...."

If the gamer feels the AI is doing a good enough job in those areas, then this becomes less of an issue. However, if there is a perception that there is weak AI, the gamer feels compelled to handle those areas himself, or feels like he is being undermined by a weak AI. Thus, my statement that the number of options, coupled with the AI CAN lead to tedium.

Sorry for the rambles.

[The Afoci]

This relates more to TCY more than anything, but I really hated that fact that when recruiting a guy, his position was already decided. I would love to have the option of recruiting a guy and promising him the ability to play QB or WR or OL or RB. Or to take a 2000 yard rusher in high school and turn him into a strong safety. Take an option QB and turn him into a WR or RB. This is lacking completely in the game. I don't know how hard it would be to do, but it would add tons of realism. You always hear in college how a player comes in wanting to play QB but his freshman year the teams FS or whatever gets injured and he decides to switch to play. I would love to be able to distribute my athletes to where they are needed.

[Taur]

Originally posted by Leonidas
Finally, my biggest hack on FOF4 is it signs your rookie contracts for you. You draft them and they magically appear signed with no negotiations.

In FOF2002 this was an option that you would set to Automatically sign your draft picks or not. Was this option removed from the FOF4 version?

[Honolulu Blue]

Originally posted by Solecismic
So, my question is "was the split the reason you didn't embrace FOF4, and if so, should it be eliminated, or is there a better way to handle it, given that every position does have subtle differences?"

Glad you're around and listening. Best wishes to the ones at Casa Gindin.

Anyway, you asked about split positions. I didn't like it, still don't, and feel that it's a small reason that FOF4 was something of a disappointment for me. In my mind I group players as tackles and guards, not as LTs, RTs, LGs, and RGs, for example.

How better to handle it? A couple of ideas:

1) A text rating between his loyalty and horoscope sign.
2) A numerical rating with 0 being "much better on the left side" and 100 being "much better on the right side". Similar divisions can be made between SE and FL, and SS and FS.

The REAL problems with FOF4 as I see it are twofold:

a) It's still too easy to rack up long consecutive playoff runs at the highest level. I know most of your buyers aren't the diehards we are, but couldn't you throw us a bone? I don't care if the AI cheats; just tell me how and I'll figure out the best way to adjust for it.

b) It's far too hard to make subtle changes to the game plan. In FOF Classic, there were 16 run % ratings and 5 pass distance ratings, all conveniently on the same screen. Now there are 160 run % ratings and 80 pass distance ratings split over 10 screens. Manipulating all those numbers to get satisfying game plan results is the definition of tedious.

[Bee]

Originally posted by Taur
In FOF2002 this was an option that you would set to Automatically sign your draft picks or not. Was this option removed from the FOF4 version?

yes it was removed (or probably more accurate - left out - since FOF4 was a rewrite of the previous code.

Again, this isn't a major issue IMO because with the rookie salary cap in place currently, salaries are all but decided by draft position (although every year, there seems to be some rookie holding out for that extra $50K in incentives ).

[Dutch]

a) It's still too easy to rack up long consecutive playoff runs at the highest level. I know most of your buyers aren't the diehards we are, but couldn't you throw us a bone? I don't care if the AI cheats; just tell me how and I'll figure out the best way to adjust for it.

Woah, remember, if we are that good at the game that we can make the playoffs every year, we are probably good enough to encourage house rules. I want to play against the AI. I don't want the AI to say, "Okay, that playoff year #2, let's knock Dutch's team ratings down by 10% across the board and do it every year he continues to make the playoffs". That is EA Sports'ish. House Rules have been a tradition since FOF and one that should stay for the integrity of the AI and thus allow Jim to improve upon it each year and not dumb it down more each year by adding cheats.

b) It's far too hard to make subtle changes to the game plan. In FOF Classic, there were 16 run % ratings and 5 pass distance ratings, all conveniently on the same screen. Now there are 160 run % ratings and 80 pass distance ratings split over 10 screens. Manipulating all those numbers to get satisfying game plan results is the definition of tedious.

I have to agree with. Those are a lot of numbers that Quiksand like people can probably look at naturally and run with, but for us less than computerized version of people, I need to visualize each situation on the football field and by screen #3, my brain starts to hurt. I liked the FOF and FOF2 days much better in this regard. I felt I had more control over results. Now the compromise would be to have the normal version for us dumb guys and the advanced 10 screen 160 billion situations for those who think that helps...just a click away.

[T-Storm]

Woah, remember, if we are that good at the game that we can make the playoffs every year, we are probably good enough to encourage house rules. I want to play against the AI. I don't want the AI to say, "Okay, that playoff year #2, let's knock Dutch's team ratings down by 10% across the board and do it every year he continues to make the playoffs". That is EA Sports'ish. House Rules have been a tradition since FOF and one that should stay for the integrity of the AI and thus allow Jim to improve upon it each year and not dumb it down more each year by adding cheats.

It might be an FOFCTradition, but probably not a tradition for those not posting on the dynasty board. Taking me as an example, I just can't play with house rules, some years after starting a dynasty i just fade back into playing without any house rules. So I'd definitely need a stronger ai, to continue have fun playing.
Obviously an cheating ai would be the easy and bad way to fix it.
But FOF4 definitely has some quite serious ai-roster-managment flaws, that simply shouldn't be there and need to eliminated to make this game not only competitive and thus better, but more fair. As it is right now it's unfair because the ai simply isn't able to make smart roster moves.

The Left-Right /Strong-Weakside distintions don't make it much more tedious or difficult for me, the human player, but for the ai they can be quite backbreaking.
Constantly I can witness the ai sloting much inferior players to start, just because i've got 2 great strongside-linebackers and one rather terrible weakside linebacker. I'd strongly imagine this also happens to ai teams quite alot and hampers their ability to play competively.

The rookie development also is a source of pain.
Example a (as witnessed thousand times) the ai drafts a terriffic looking qb/rb/whatever in the first round... 1st overall and picks up an undrafted rookie qb/rb/whatever. considering the 1st round pick looks so incredibly much better than the undrafted rookie and nobody else on the roster looks anything good, one would imagine the ai to let the drafted rookie start infront of the undrafted one. but more often than not this doesn't happen and the undrafted rookie (with less current ratings and much less future ratings) start. I really wonder why this happens?
Considering how often it happens i realy doubt that it is an scouting error. also there'd have to be 2 teams that have scouting errors, mine and the other teams scout.
That problem would solve itself during the next few years, but
the problem is, that most development comes from playing, and in case of a rookie qb, he won't play much if somebody is in front of him and thus won't develop much. Thus it's quite likely that he'll end his rookie contract not only with marginal playing time, but also without developing much. That would be easily solveable, if the development wouldn't depend as much on playing time.
But that's only one part of the problem. Many times teams draft a player high one year and sign a good player in free agency the next. thus a player (qbs are often affected) starts his rokie year but then not again until his rookie contract expires.
This is a very big problem imo. I strongly believe this is one of the problems harming the ai very much. but combined with the next problem it pretty much kills the ai.

hiring/firing of players by the ai. also contract negotiations are a problem for the ai.
The never releases a player, that once got a big contract. the player might not start anymore, the player might have ratings beyond good and evil, but he still collects his 10% of the cap money. I wouldn't even complain if it was because of a signing bonus and thos not make much sense to cut him, but often times the players contractstatus looks like this:
5 year contract, 20million signing bonus, 140million base salaries. in the closing years of the contract the base salaries increase dramatically, thus if a player sustains a career altering injury (which seem to happen a bit too frequently) at the end of year2, and while being completely healed, looks like he'd be unable to perform at a high level, let alone a level worth this much money, he won't be released. He will collect about 25, 30, 35million in base salaries the next few years while having a cap value of 29, 34, 39million. Am I the only one who thinks it doesn't make any sense at all to keep a such a player fo marginal abilities?
He should either be cut or renegotiated, but the ai does neither.
Because of the ai's dislike to renegotiate contracts i feel to many players land in the free agent pool every year. that's not just good players, but often times the best players at any given position.
What makes it even harder for the ai compared to the human player, the ai never makes any great bargains or "think" for the longterm, when resigning players.
While I can resign a player in the last year of his contract rather cheaply when i offer him an even salary over the next few years (more than he wants in the first year, but incredibly much less during the later years of his contract) the ai isn't able to do so.
This might be the biggest reason why the cpu teams are simply overmatched most of the time.
I would believe, this could be easily solveable too, to tell the ai to resign players more often and have players drop their contract demands in later years of the contract signifcantly. as it is, it's not that realistically anyway. most real contracts are rather cheap in the first few years and explode then. and when the contract explodes players are either traded (and get renegotiated contracts from the new team), released or renegotiated.
so i think this would be an easy solveable issue, to let make players demands more even over the course of the contract.

And another minor problem: trading between ai teams.
As we all know ai teams won't trade fan favorites or idolized player with a human team. but they trade these players with other ai teams. that shouldn't happen either i'd imagine.
The same thing applies to players with huge signing bonuses coming up. another thing about signing bonuses and trades not working because of them: i believe it'd be better if drafted players only would have their contract count against the salary cap after the draft, thus you could trade with the ai for players, after they were drafted and their demands are visible).
Also deals are sometimes rather lopsided (example i just experienced and a t the least temporarily killed fof4 for me):
new england, with a team consting of great starting players but no backups, and also no draft picks (neither present nor future, as i decided to somewhat remotely manage it, while playing another team myself). we are in the fourth round of the draft. the ai decides that new england (currently having one bad 2nd year rb, no fbs, one great running back [6th year, 6390 rush yards, 4.9 ypc, contract running for 4 more years with a signing bonus of about 8millions a year, idolized by fans]) should trade their great running back for a fourth round pick. ok... running back has quite a lot of signing bonus still counting against the cap, is idolized, a great player, has no competition for playing time... I would understand this, I really would, if there was a player that would be of more help to them than one of the better running backs in the game. Well, there wasn't. They took a fullback - with the 4th round pick they received for their monster running back. not that it was a great fullback, it was a pretty mediocre fullback. can anyone please explain this ai decision to me? anyone? please?

[Swaggs]

T-Storm, I have never seen you post before but see that you have been around for awhile. I agree 100% with your post--very well thought and written. It summarizes many of the AI problems that make the game less enjoyable than it could be.

Good post.

[Samdari]

Well Jim, for me it was this. I tend to 'overplay' games. I play them until I cannot stand the thought of playing them anymore. I am sure I got more play hours per dollar out of FOF2001 than any game I have ever played. But, after a while, it felt like doing the same thing all the time. The newness was gone.

Since the play calling held no attraction for me whatsover, FOF4 felt like there was nothing new whatsoever. It felt like exactly the game I had already played to death, only with an interface I liked less.