I'm sure it's a huge reason why. The individual seasons are the bell cow of the replay games. It's how they stay in business. I purchased Action Pc Baseball earlier this year. With this game you can replay a historical season(if you own that season) with real transactions, real lineups and the game updates daily, so the players available on each 25 man roster are those that were available on that day in real life. This is amazing. Think of the amount of work required to create this. That being said, the whole time I'm playing, I'm thinking......so once the season is over...it's over.

Yes - they claim each season disk has hundreds of hours of research, yadda yadda yadda.

In my book, it is just not worth it. I am a former SOM player and now I don't bother and play OOTP only.

I don't get the appeal of doing a historical season this way. If I do 1998, I already know the Yankees are good and the Devil Rays aren't. For me, the appeal of doing historical play is is career mode so a good team can become bad over time and visa versa, and you work on trying to build your bad team into a good one. Or, the appeal to me is to have players from different eras mixed so I can have the Micky Mantle/Jake Arrieta match up (for instance).

There's just no appeal to me in trying replicate past results.

You are exactly right about that, you are not allowed to mention there competators.

The Mantle - Arrieta matchup is what I love about Strat because I love making my own seasons ( I have about 80 ) and doing some fun quick projects to have great pitcher- batter matchups from different eras.

I appreciate all the replys and I am for sure going to get the OOTP 17 baseball game, but I will continue to keep getting the new seasons from strat.

Does Action really have daily promotions and demotions?

I play both.....really enjoy C and D from Strat, have the computer game, and I love OOTP. I think the biggest difference in Strat, the game engine is individualized for each player. In OOTP, it seems set up to produce yearly stats, not individualized stats........if that makes sense.

From the game: AS PLAYED--This mode can be used for seasons that include complete transactions. Rosters for each game will include actual active players for that game, taking into account real life injuries, trades, signings, call-ups and demotions. Real life lineups and starting pitchers will be used.

You can also play with all the above transactions, but set your own lineups.

Just want to give MLB Showdown some love too! Pretty much a dumb down version of Strat-o-matic.

I played so many season with that game and I loved keeping track of the stats. I tried breaking the game out again but now being older it's kind of more of a pain than anything to keep track of everything and setting everything up haha.

I think MLB Network should create their own league just to provide content from November to February. Barring that, they should create a computerized league with historic players with OOTP or another stats-based engine, but with MLB The Show for visuals. The managers would be the former players that are currently on-air talent. Imagine: "Here comes manager Harold Reynolds to take out Christy Mathewson."

I wouldn't count on it. What it has would be the same thing OOTP has, which is Retrosheet transactions. Those are a long way from being complete daily transactions once you get back 50 years or so. Anyone who got into a game that day should be available. The ones who didn't may or may not match the real bench, depending on the completeness or lack thereof of the Retrosheet transaction list.

I have a historical OOTP game going with real transactions and lineups set in 1901. I strongly suspect there's more bench and bullpen available than there was in real life. Still, no one else has 1901 lineups. Someone had to research that, and he did a pretty good job.

Just going by what the game says. I would prefer Retrosheet close and 25 man rosters(just using 25 here to make my point, so LGO there's no need to come in and school me on roster sizes over time) over a system in which every single player that's currently on a team on said date is game time active. 1901 wouldn't be an issue. Modern day it is. 15+ pitchers available out of the pen is not for me.

Will say it again, one thing I really wish OOTP would add is a special injury setting just for the "real transaction" aspect of the game. This injury setting would limit injuries to no longer than a week in length. Heck this type of thing would be great for those that play shorter seasons as well.

One thing I'm really glad OOTP hasn't ever messed with is player usage meters/penalties. I would rather drive nails into my ears than play a game that forces me to calculate whether I'm over using a player. OOTP "make bad" feature is so much better. Just wish there was a way for OOTP to disregard a couple real life injury seasons when performing recalc. That way a guy like Chris Carpenter doesn't go from Cy Young winner to the bottom of his teams bullpen one season to the next. Or Hank Greenberg doesn't hit 40 bombs and end up a pinch hitter when 1941 arrives.

David, I agree with you about limiting injuries. I'm doing an historical replay starting in 1933 (now in '34) and although I'm GM of the Reds, I use commissioner mode to limit injuries. I always check a player's real-life stats to see how many games they played in the season and if a long term injury happens I scale it back to an appropriate number of games. I'm not about to have Babe Ruth or Jimmy Foxx out for the season.

When you use recalc, you can adjust those default numbers for making bad. Greenberg's only problem, of course, is that he was drafted early in the season and would likely have been his usual devastating self if he had played the whole season. Cut the adjustment numbers to 50 AB and he'll be fine. I play with actual lineups, so I usually get rid of those adjustments entirely.

Strat-O-Matic games were the gold standard before computer sims existed. (Except the basketball game, but basketball is really hard to do.)

Computer management sim games broke through the barrier of long-term playability. A long time ago I played a solitaire Strat-O baseball season with all MLB teams and a 32-game schedule, and it took me a year and a half. Strat-O hockey, about the same thing with a 20-game schedule and full playoffs. Football, I never came close to getting through a season with every team because it doesn't make sense to play a fraction of a football season. It was fun, but it was really limited.

Other things that are better about computer sims: 1) They have a life of their own and don't simply recreate what happened last year in real life; 2) The fictional league option is a hoot. My Sacramento Royales just lost two out of three to the Brooklyn Oil Kings, but at least we didn't let Jeremy "Grumbles" Bowman beat us this time. Ya got no chance against Brooklyn if you don't keep Bowman from going off on you. Everybody knows that. :)

The only reason I would play Strat-O now is if I was in a league with friends, rolling dice and drinking beer. That was fun when I was doing it 25 years ago and I think it would still be fun.

Just edit the min time and max time in the injuries.txt file. Open with a spreadsheet and you can adjust them in less than 15 seconds for the whole file.

Their original basketball game was not good, agree. But....

Did you play it in the mid '80s? Once they went to action cards, and nerfed FGA for players that didn't shoot much IRL, keyed rebounding to (I think) rebounds to minutes played, among other changes I can't recall off the top of my head I thought it became a great game. I played many seasons with the Showtime Lakers solo and the stats, W-L records were nearly spot on.

If you thought Strat's original basketball game was bad, you should have tried APBA's. I finished a quarter once. The best of the old basketball games was Fast Break, by Mickey Games.