The Critics Have Spoken And We're #1!

[Hammercraft]

Originally Posted by rudel.dietrich

OOTP is the #3 or maybe #2 best sports sim.

If there's a better one out there then I haven't seen it in 30 years of looking, you'll need to tell us about these rare treasures so we can play them too.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by Hammercraft

If there's a better one out there then I haven't seen it in 30 years of looking, you'll need to tell us about these rare treasures so we can play them too.

Well, even Markus has publicly mentioned that, in his opinion, FM is the best game in the genre. Despite my love for OOTP, I can't disagree.

But given that they have probably 10 times the staff, that's not a huge shock. Also, IMO OOTP has been quickly closing the gap recently.

FM seems to be somewhat stagnant right now, or at least moving in a direction that doesn't get me terribly excited.

[rudel.dietrich]

Originally Posted by Hammercraft

If there's a better one out there then I haven't seen it in 30 years of looking, you'll need to tell us about these rare treasures so we can play them too.

FM and maybe EHM. EHM nails modern real word hockey but has nothing beyond that. No historical of fictional unless you put a lot of work in.
And I am not slamming the game. I called it the second or third best game in it's genre.
I just don't like the direction this forum has taken in terms of reactions to differing opinions.


And yes, FM does have a massive amount of resources and staff. I want OOTP to reach that level. But the treatment of new players and new ideas on this forum is not going to help that.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by rudel.dietrich

I just don't like the direction this forum has taken in terms of reactions to differing opinions...But the treatment of new players and new ideas on this forum is not going to help that.

I don't disagree entirely about the tone that the forums sometimes take, but this is true for literally every place on the internet. The atmosphere here is far more welcoming than most corners of the internet and most gaming forums I've been to.

It's a hard thing to get right, getting a good tone on the forums without pushing away enthusiastic contributors who sometimes step a bit over the line.

[kq76]

Warning: rant incoming...

Originally Posted by rudel.dietrich

Thank you for this bit of sanity.
This forum has grown to become way too fanboyish.


OOTP is the #3 or maybe #2 best sports sim.
It is a fantastic game. But declaring it the best ever is a nice marketing ploy but I think stands in the way of progress which has stagnated in the last few versions.

Where was that said? In the OP TJ called it "the 123rd highest rated PC game OF ALL-TIME!!!". The 123rd highest, considering how many PC games have been made is pretty good, but I'd say it's a far cry from "best ever", or at least 122 away. Was there an ad somewhere that said that?

I don't think the forum is too fanboyish at all. What was disconcerting was when there used to be fights between the Mogul fans and OOTP fans, but that stopped years ago. Most people would probably be surprised to find out Mogul is still going. I was. Besides, it's not like this is some general gaming site, it's OOTP's site. Of course most people here are going to be homers.

I don't even really think of OOTP as a PC game or a management sim, which it technically is, but it's its own category to me. If you want a baseball sim, you probably want OOTP. If you don't want that, you wouldn't want OOTP. Same thing with FM. They're not like a lot of games where if you want something like Dark Souls you might be equally interested in some other AAA franchise like Fallout or Witcher. I realize there are some people like yourself that are interested in multiple management sims, but I really think that's got to be like less than 5% of management sim gamers. And it's certainly an even tinier fraction of gamers in general.

OOTP could be worked on for 100 years (now wouldn't that be cool) and some people would still be unhappy. Similar to Eugene, OOTP4 was awesome to me and OOTP17 is far beyond what I could have ever hoped for, in 2002. If OOTP never existed, until 2016, it'd probably blow most of our minds. But there has to be no doubt that there'd still be people wanting more and better, and while I'd agree many wants are legitimate, sometimes you should take a moment and be happy with what you do have.

I know, it happens every year, OOTP asks for metacritic reviews, the homers get there first, presumably because there are more of us, it gets a great 9+ rating, then slowly but surely the haters find their way there and give it zeroes to, in their minds, "even out" the high scores. But let's be honest, a perfect 10 has got to be much closer to an honest score of OOTP than a zero, but oh no, the haters' scores deserve more weight because, well... well, because there are less of them? Even the people who are frustrated by what they consider a bug, is a zero seriously honest? And you know what, it pisses me off because I wish we all tried to rate things honestly as I do rely on reviews/ratings for games I have no idea about and don't want to just buy everything, and I imagine many others are in the same boat. But it is what it is and because we're human it won't ever change so why get angry over it. Eh, whatever. The point is, it doesn't matter what the score is. If you want a baseball sim, you should really get OOTP, but if that's not what you want then it doesn't matter. The one good thing about OOTP's high score year in and year out is people are more likely to find out about it. As long as it's a fairly high score, what it's actual score is, matters none.

This is actually part of a broader problem in society right now. It seems like everyone is so quick to hate on everything right now. Pick any news item that comes up, there are probably countless people who can't wait to go online and give their anonymous negative viewpoint on the topic. It doesn't matter what is, "let's get 'em!". It can be the most positive story imaginable and you can bet someone's going to go negative on it. The internet is amazing, but somehow it's also brought us back to the times of the witch hunts at night with pitchforks. Maybe it's always been this way and I just haven't been paying close enough attention, but I swear it's getting worse. If you've got a choice between being positive or negative, or a homer or a hater, surely it's usually better to be positive. Sure, being negative is sometimes necessary, but when it's not necessary, why not be positive. There's enough negativity in the world, there's no sense in adding to it unnecessarily.

It's not like OOTP is going to stop improving the product just because they get a great score or even if it really does one day become "the best ever".

[RchW]

Originally Posted by rudel.dietrich

I just don't like the direction this forum has taken in terms of reactions to differing opinions.

Here is a recent exchange. Fanboys, supposedly the problem, are trying to help someone with a problem and this is the response. Who's setting the tone here?

Originally Posted by RchW

Have you uploaded a league file? A simple question.

Originally Posted by TwinsGuy34

Don't know how and frankly, don't want to know.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by lukasberger

Well, even Markus has publicly mentioned that, in his opinion, FM is the best game in the genre. Despite my love for OOTP, I can't disagree.

But given that they have probably 10 times the staff, that's not a huge shock. Also, IMO OOTP has been quickly closing the gap recently.

FM seems to be somewhat stagnant right now, or at least moving in a direction that doesn't get me terribly excited.

And yet I find FM boring and unplayable because it is just too much work. I'm looking for an escape, a hobby, not a second full time job. Should I go on their forums like rudel has here and trash the game? No. I know it's a good game but it's just not suited for me despite my early childhood playing football and watching Rangers at Ibrox Park. Just because a game doesn't work perfectly for someone's style it doesn't mean the game is bad or stagnant. Just not a fit.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by RchW

And yet I find FM boring and unplayable because it is just too much work. I'm looking for an escape, a hobby, not a second full time job. Should I go on their forums like rudel has here and trash the game? No. I know it's a good game but it's just not suited for me despite my early childhood playing football and watching Rangers at Ibrox Park. Just because a game doesn't work perfectly for someone's style it doesn't mean the game is bad or stagnant. Just not a fit.

Yeah, makes sense. I completely understand where you're coming from.

For me it is stagnant in part because I love FM. Been playing it far longer than I've played OOTP and my total time spent playing it dwarfs my OOTP time (though maybe not the time I've spent working on OOTP).

Sadly a bit of the bloom seems to have come off the rose lately for me though, just feels like they work too much on media interaction and other fluffy stuff, and not enough on the match engine or adding stuff like historical play, or improving the African and Asian parts of the db, or lower league db, or other stuff that would get me excited.

Not saying they're wrong to do as they're doing, as you mention it's just personal style. FM's just gotten a bit stale for me personally, that's all.

Maybe they're simply facing the issue of "how do you improve a nearly perfect game enough to get people to buy a new version each year". Who knows, OOTP might even have to face that issue in a few years, though I certainly hope not.

[Elf Marine]

Was there ever any doubt! Awesome game with a well deserved ranking. Congrats to the entire staff that made the game!

[battists]

I don't think Markus is really trying to claim that OOTP is the best video game ever invented or anything. I'm sure the vast majority of general console gamers would look at OOTP and think, "What the hell?" Honestly, the whole "rating" concept is silly, since what any given person is looking for in a video game could vary widely, and of course the same holds true for the people reviewing the games.

But I think it's fair and reasonable for Markus to be proud and crow a bit when his game is so well-received. He's been at this hard for a long, long time, longer than most indie developers survive. At the end of the day, for a developer, having your product be well-received is an enormous pat on the back.

As far as sample size goes, it's also disingenuous to look at sheer volume. Sure, Dark Souls has eighteen thousand reviews, because it's a major console release. No idea how many copies they sell, but it has to be astronomical compared to a niche product like OOTP. A better measure than volume would be, "what % of users rate the game highly."

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by battists

I don't think Markus is really trying to claim that OOTP is the best video game ever invented or anything. I'm sure the vast majority of general console gamers would look at OOTP and think, "What the hell?" Honestly, the whole "rating" concept is silly, since what any given person is looking for in a video game could vary widely, and of course the same holds true for the people reviewing the games.

But I think it's fair and reasonable for Markus to be proud and crow a bit when his game is so well-received. He's been at this hard for a long, long time, longer than most indie developers survive. At the end of the day, for a developer, having your product be well-received is an enormous pat on the back.

As far as sample size goes, it's also disingenuous to look at sheer volume. Sure, Dark Souls has eighteen thousand reviews, because it's a major console release. No idea how many copies they sell, but it has to be astronomical compared to a niche product like OOTP. A better measure than volume would be, "what % of users rate the game highly."

I agree with all of this...my only point is that there ARE in fact many more critic reviews....so my question remains: why won't Meteoritic include them?

[battists]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I agree with all of this...my only point is that there ARE in fact many more critic reviews....so my question remains: why won't Meteoritic include them?

There used to be an FAQ on metacritic that explained exactly how all of that works. I can't find it now, I can only find one that seems specific to movies:

Frequently Asked Questions - Metacritic