Quote:
Originally Posted by jcard
Acknowledging that these matters are subjective
I guess that I am in the minority. My feeling is that the priority should be on refinement and QoL, not additional features and customization options. I believe that the state of the current game reflects a disproportionate emphasis on the latter. Eight complete versions and widespread feedback concerning ongoing issues as fundamental as whether goalies matter, hits, giveaways and takeaways. Similarly, insufficient explanations of how attributes actually work, tactics and roles, etc. Numerous typos, inexplicable interface navigation restrictions, lack of table and view preference accommodation (for example, having to reset column width and so forth every time you switch the reference team or otherwise leave the current table page).
Moreover, it is debatable whether some of the new features are net positives or negatives, given the limited resources with which the team has to work. Introducing a complicated financial model that the AI cannot adequately navigate, for example, just induced an immersion-puncturing raft of unrealistic and senseless front office decisions.
I cannot blame the developers, because threads like this show that they are responding to the desires of a majority of their customer base- each member of whom has an opinion as meaningful as mine. I just feel that layering on top of an incomplete foundation is the wrong way to move forward.
|
I agree with a lot of this, especially the interface/navigation issues which are a huge pain. Fortunately for the guys at OOTP this is the best hockey sim now (even though its 2D engine is still quite inferior to EHM's, basically everything else is much better) so I begrugingly re-sort and re-filter pages over and over again and intend to do so again on FHM9's release
