IMO FOF is missing just one major feature

maximus · 12-03-2003, 02:20 PM

NOTE: (this is based on what Jim said during his chat before the release of FOF2k4)

The one thing that keeps me from getting FOF2k4 is that there is no option for compatable versions (where stats and careers can be transfered/imported from version to version). I am the type of person who likes to have an ongoing-consistant career where there isn't a break in the career due to new version coming out. Anyone else interested in this option?

HornedFrog Purple · 12-03-2003, 02:31 PM

At the expense of adding additional things such as attributes and general improvement of the game and engine.... no.

But there are babysteps taken by Jim in this approach with making the TCY draft files compatable with the last 2 versions. Perhaps when the core is finalized you might be getting more of what you wish for.

Between this version and the first 3, there are a ton of additions and improvements. I wouldn't mind a few more versions going this same route.

Hands to the Face · 12-03-2003, 02:31 PM

No, but I suspect that's because you've never, ever mentioned this before.

Ben E Lou · 12-03-2003, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by HornedFrog Purple
At the expense of adding additional things such as attributes and general improvement of the game and engine.... no.

Same thought here. The reason that Jim's games are not compatible is that there are major changes in data structure, etc. I'd rather have the much-more-important changes like those.

maximus · 12-03-2003, 02:38 PM

I know that TPF is trying to go this route. I believe that they say it really isn't al that hard since most of the stats can be stored in HTLM (?). I ma not a programmer so that doesn't mean much to me.

I agree, I wouldn't want to neglect the sim engine over this option, I , however, would like to see this option implemented at some point (in the near futre). This is the only feature that really keeps me away from FOF. Another note about TPF is that the database where all the player stats and all other info about a players history will be fully 3rd party friendly....I wish Jim would take this approach so that utilities could be made more easlily. However, this also has gotten off to some good strides. The utilities seem to be getting easier to make.

Bee · 12-03-2003, 02:41 PM

While I agree with most here that this is of lesser importance to me than significant upgrades to future versions, I suspect Jim's approach may change somewhat if multiplayer FOF takes off. Then there will be significant demand to make previous versions compatible with new ones.

maximus · 12-03-2003, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bee
While I agree with most here that this is of lesser importance to me than significant upgrades to future versions, I suspect Jim's approach may change somewhat if multiplayer FOF takes off. Then there will be significant demand to make previous versions compatible with new ones.

Very good point Bee. I never really thought about that. This could have an impact.

Neuqua · 12-03-2003, 02:43 PM

While it's something I would LIKE for multiplayer leagues it's not a huge deal for me playing solo.

Ben E Lou · 12-03-2003, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bee
While I agree with most here that this is of lesser importance to me than significant upgrades to future versions, I suspect Jim's approach may change somewhat if multiplayer FOF takes off. Then there will be significant demand to make previous versions compatible with new ones.

It will be interesting to see how this goes, because:

1. We're dealing with a one-man show.
2. He's never released more than one game per year.
3. He has two, and probably eventually three, game titles. (Remember, his original plan was to release a game in a new sport this year.)

Point being, it is quite reasonable to expect that it will be three years before there is an FOF6:

Fall 2004: TCY2
Fall 2005: Front Office Baseball, Hockey or Basketball
Fall 2006: FOF6

The multiplayer community would probably be much more willing to start over after three years, as opposed to after one such as in OOTP, for the promise of many new options and features.

Maple Leafs · 12-03-2003, 02:48 PM

For solo play, it will be nice.

For multiplayer, it will be crucial.

Imagine Jim releases FOF2005 with no backwards compatibility. Will people just abandon their old online leagues that they've spent a year working on? I doubt it. More likely they'll stick with FOF2004. Some may also buy the new version for solo play, others won't.

Given that in theory the multiplayer types are often your best customers, it would be suicide to cut them off. On the other hand, if you include backwards compatibility you're guaranteeing upgrades. Look at OOTP. Every time a league commish decides to upgrade, that's 30 more sales for Markus.

It's a tough issue, and I can't help but wonder if this is why Jim was so reluctant to get into multi-player in the past.

Bee · 12-03-2003, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SkyDog
It will be interesting to see how this goes, because:

1. We're dealing with a one-man show.
2. He's never released more than one game per year.
3. He has two, and probably eventually three, game titles. (Remember, his original plan was to release a game in a new sport this year.)

Point being, it is quite reasonable to expect that it will be three years before there is an FOF6:

Fall 2004: TCY2
Fall 2005: Front Office Baseball, Hockey or Basketball
Fall 2006: FOF6

The multiplayer community would probably be much more willing to start over after three years, as opposed to after one such as in OOTP, for the promise of many new options and features.

That's very possible, but the opposite might prove true as well. Anyone who has committed 3 years to a multiplayer league may be even more reluctant to "start over". It will be interesting to see how it develops.

HornedFrog Purple · 12-03-2003, 02:52 PM

Also remember that Jim has made it easier for the historical leaguers to make player files. I think he did that because he knew of its existance and the interest in it from here. I believe as he sees multiplayer work and gain interest he will do his best to make things flow. Who knows, he probably has already surmised this and will come up with some kind of converter for any future versions.

Maple Leafs · 12-03-2003, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bee
That's very possible, but the opposite might prove true as well. Anyone who has committed 3 years to a multiplayer league may be even more reluctant to "start over". It will be interesting to see how it develops.

That's what I was thinking. I'm in OOTP leagues that have been going for a year or so, and I can't imagine the whole league agreeing to start over. Hell, we can barely get them to agree to go back and redo three days due to a glitch. Any FOF league that stays together for three years is not going to want any part of restarting, new features or not. There's too much time invested.

Subby · 12-03-2003, 03:35 PM

And with the wholesale changes promised in v6 - Markus inimating no real upgrade path - I think some leagues are going to be s.o.l...

Ben E Lou · 12-03-2003, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Subby
And with the wholesale changes promised in v6 - Markus inimating no real upgrade path - I think some leagues are going to be s.o.l...

I didn't realize that, so OOTP6 is going to require a new start? This sounds like good news. Is there a feature list out yet?

korme · 12-03-2003, 03:46 PM

I think you CAN continue from 5 to 6, but changes to players may be drastic.

TroyF · 12-03-2003, 04:03 PM

For solo play, I simply don't care.

To me, it's actually more trouble than it is worth. Lets assume I had a 200 year old league and I wanted to convert that to the next FOF game. I'd have to first play the new game to death to determine if any bugs or differential in the stat engine would impact my two century dynasty. By the time I finished up with all of that, I'd then have to see how any "new" feature impacted my old league. Do all the rating transfer over accuratly? How about the coaches and their differences? If I have a 75 injury rating, will I see the exact same injuries in the new version or will I have to adjust? What about new ratings for players, do my old players transfer accurately?

When I figure that the next fof will be a minimum of 1 1/2 years away and quite possibly a lot longer, I'm not going to forgo the enjoyment I'd get over the next couple of years with this away because I can't enjoy it FIVE years down the line.

I'm not saying thinking another way is wrong. I will say that it is the complete opposite of the way I think.

TroyF

3ric · 12-03-2003, 04:04 PM

I'm skeptical to the claim that you can design a football sim that well in the first iteration that you won't need to do changes to the save game structure when updating/adding new features. Jim's game is in its fifth generation and stand a much better chance of remaining in a constant state.

12-03-2003, 02:31 PM	#2
HornedFrog Purple Hattrick Moderator Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Fort Worthless, Tx	At the expense of adding additional things such as attributes and general improvement of the game and engine.... no. But there are babysteps taken by Jim in this approach with making the TCY draft files compatable with the last 2 versions. Perhaps when the core is finalized you might be getting more of what you wish for. Between this version and the first 3, there are a ton of additions and improvements. I wouldn't mind a few more versions going this same route. __________________ King of All FOFC Media!!! IHOF: Fort Worthless Fury- 2004 AOC Deep South Champions (not acknowledged via conspiracy)

12-03-2003, 02:43 PM	#8
Neuqua Pro Rookie Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Chicago, Ill	While it's something I would LIKE for multiplayer leagues it's not a huge deal for me playing solo. __________________ Our Deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us. We ask ourselves, 'Who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, fabulous?' Actually, who are you not to be?

12-03-2003, 02:52 PM	#12
HornedFrog Purple Hattrick Moderator Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Fort Worthless, Tx	Also remember that Jim has made it easier for the historical leaguers to make player files. I think he did that because he knew of its existance and the interest in it from here. I believe as he sees multiplayer work and gain interest he will do his best to make things flow. Who knows, he probably has already surmised this and will come up with some kind of converter for any future versions. __________________ King of All FOFC Media!!! IHOF: Fort Worthless Fury- 2004 AOC Deep South Champions (not acknowledged via conspiracy)

12-03-2003, 03:35 PM	#14
Subby lolzcat Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: sans pants	And with the wholesale changes promised in v6 - Markus inimating no real upgrade path - I think some leagues are going to be s.o.l... __________________ Superman was flying around and saw Wonder Woman getting a tan in the nude on her balcony. Superman said I going to hit that real fast. So he flys down toward Wonder Woman to hit it and their is a loud scream. The Invincible Man scream what just hit me in the ass!!!!! I do shit, I take pictures, I write about it: chrisshue.com

12-03-2003, 04:04 PM	#18
3ric College Starter Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Sweden	I'm skeptical to the claim that you can design a football sim that well in the first iteration that you won't need to do changes to the save game structure when updating/adding new features. Jim's game is in its fifth generation and stand a much better chance of remaining in a constant state. __________________ San Diego Chargers (HFL) - Lappland Reindeers (WOOF) - Gothenburg Giants (IHOF) Indiana: A TCY VC - year 2044 - the longest running dynasty ever on FOFC!

12-03-2003, 02:31 PM	#3
Hands to the Face n00b Join Date: Jan 2003	No, but I suspect that's because you've never, ever mentioned this before.

12-03-2003, 02:38 PM	#5
maximus Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Where the system is screwed	I know that TPF is trying to go this route. I believe that they say it really isn't al that hard since most of the stats can be stored in HTLM (?). I ma not a programmer so that doesn't mean much to me. I agree, I wouldn't want to neglect the sim engine over this option, I , however, would like to see this option implemented at some point (in the near futre). This is the only feature that really keeps me away from FOF. Another note about TPF is that the database where all the player stats and all other info about a players history will be fully 3rd party friendly....I wish Jim would take this approach so that utilities could be made more easlily. However, this also has gotten off to some good strides. The utilities seem to be getting easier to make.

12-03-2003, 02:41 PM	#6
Bee Pro Starter Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Fairfax, VA	While I agree with most here that this is of lesser importance to me than significant upgrades to future versions, I suspect Jim's approach may change somewhat if multiplayer FOF takes off. Then there will be significant demand to make previous versions compatible with new ones.

12-03-2003, 02:48 PM	#10
Maple Leafs Coordinator Join Date: Jan 2002	For solo play, it will be nice. For multiplayer, it will be crucial. Imagine Jim releases FOF2005 with no backwards compatibility. Will people just abandon their old online leagues that they've spent a year working on? I doubt it. More likely they'll stick with FOF2004. Some may also buy the new version for solo play, others won't. Given that in theory the multiplayer types are often your best customers, it would be suicide to cut them off. On the other hand, if you include backwards compatibility you're guaranteeing upgrades. Look at OOTP. Every time a league commish decides to upgrade, that's 30 more sales for Markus. It's a tough issue, and I can't help but wonder if this is why Jim was so reluctant to get into multi-player in the past.

12-03-2003, 03:46 PM	#16
korme Go Reds Join Date: May 2001 Location: Bloodbuzz Ohio	I think you CAN continue from 5 to 6, but changes to players may be drastic.

12-03-2003, 04:03 PM	#17
TroyF Coordinator Join Date: Oct 2000	For solo play, I simply don't care. To me, it's actually more trouble than it is worth. Lets assume I had a 200 year old league and I wanted to convert that to the next FOF game. I'd have to first play the new game to death to determine if any bugs or differential in the stat engine would impact my two century dynasty. By the time I finished up with all of that, I'd then have to see how any "new" feature impacted my old league. Do all the rating transfer over accuratly? How about the coaches and their differences? If I have a 75 injury rating, will I see the exact same injuries in the new version or will I have to adjust? What about new ratings for players, do my old players transfer accurately? When I figure that the next fof will be a minimum of 1 1/2 years away and quite possibly a lot longer, I'm not going to forgo the enjoyment I'd get over the next couple of years with this away because I can't enjoy it FIVE years down the line. I'm not saying thinking another way is wrong. I will say that it is the complete opposite of the way I think. TroyF

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)