I play OOTP - how does this compare??

[wesy]

It's great that Matrix is picking up PS. I enjoy it and I also like OOTP. However, for in game experience and statistical accuracy, nothing comes close to Diamond Mind (url is diamond-mind) IMHO. However, it's not a GM simulator, replay only. If you're interested in replay you should defintitely check it out, I own all thrre and it just depends on what i'm looking for on any particular day.

[Paul Vebber]

What is it about Diamond Mind that you like?

[JonnieR]

Diamond Mind is a very accurate statistical rendition of the whatever season you happen to be replaying. However, since the season already took place the replay is somewhat anti-climatic. I own Diamond Mind as well OOTP and Pure Sim.

I prefer PureSim because the management aspect is much more interesting than either of the other products (OOTP is like managing in hospital, extremely sterile, and Diamond Mind doesn't offer the variability of either OOTP or PureSim.

As for the game engine, I program complex simulations for a living, and I believe PureSim produces a far superior simulation when compared to OOTP. Diamond Mind is focused in a different direction, but does an excellent job of "recreating" baseball scenarios based on past statistics. However, it can't generate career modes like PureSim.

[DandricSturm]

Overall I prefer PureSim but I'll list a couple things I like about OOTP better. OOTP keeps track of single game records, like hits, K's etc. OOTP keeps separate records for each league if you have more than one (although I don't consider this to be really a big deal) OOTP keeps track of things like no hitters, perfect games, 4 HR games etc. PureSim lists these in "Highlights" but these are wiped after each season.

I do prefer the interface in PureSim, moving from screen to screen with links like a website while OOTP uses more drop down menus. It feels clunkier to me to try and move between looking at rosters and schedules and such in OOTP.

[wesy]

Don't get me wrong - I like each for different reasons - i don't mean to bash at all.

Diamond Mind Baseball is a recreation base on past season stats. Although they do offer Projection Teams as well. So for instance you can buy the game with either past seasons and/or Projection 2005 seasons etc. - they ship projection seasons 2 times I belive once in the winter, then right before the season starts to reflect roster changes. Here are few reasons why I like Diamond-Mind - taken fron their website, but it does make it enjoyable for me - I'm more into the play-by-play than being a GM.

Here's a link to a PC Mag review - it's a weird one it has DMB, PureSim, Inside the Park (not be confused with OOTP), Baseball Mogul - strange brew indeed. DMB won the editor's choice, but I don't know if these are real BBall fans.

ESPN - Projects by Tom Tippett (desiger of DMB)

PC Mag Baseball Reviews

One of the main reason is that I can switch from individual batters to pitch by pitch on the fly. I'll play the game in batter mode until someone gets on base, then I'll go to pitch by pitch mode. I guess like my wargames I like statistical accuracy above playing multiple seasons. etc. That just my preference. I like PS (I paid for it) and OOTP as well, but I prefer DMB.

Here is a little more detail. It's not cheap 49.99 + $20 for season disks - I know w/PS it's free and you can use the Lahman database etc. However, like Shaun, the support from the DMB folks is very very good. I guess more people would compare them to SOM Baseball than either OOTP or PureSim. Check it out there's definitely room for all 3 games on the market!

Pitch-by-Pitch Simulation
Diamond Mind Baseball is the first and only statistically-accurate pitch-by-pitch baseball simulation.

you can call for pitchouts and pickoff throws by pitchers

you can order your hitter to take the 3-0 pitch or give him the green light to swing

pitcher fatigue is based on pitch counts, and to help you keep track, the game displays the number of pitches thrown and the number of strikes

runners are automatically on the move with two out and the count full

the game generates realistic patterns of balls, called strikes, swinging strikes, foul balls and balls put in play, and produces highly-accurate walk and strikeout rates

pitchers throw more strikes when behind in the count, especially with three balls, and expand the strike zone when ahead, while batters swing at strikes more often when behind in the count, especially with two strikes, and are more selective when ahead

batters hit for a higher average and more power when they are ahead in the count, and swing more defensively when behind

when pitchers tire, they have more trouble finding the strike zone, more of their strikes are put into play, and more of the batted balls they allow are hit for power

for those of you who like to play with past seasons, the game accurately reproduces the lower rates of walks and strikeouts that occurred earlier in the century. And you can play realistic games among teams from very different eras, because DMB makes the necessary adjustments.

the game correctly charges walks and strikeouts when substitutions are made in mid-count, as required by rules 10.17(b) and 10.18(h)(3) in the official baseball rule book

We've done detailed studies of real-life manager tendencies using play-by-play and pitch-by-pitch data from recent seasons. We've learned how the count affects decisions made by real-life managers -- which types of hitters are allowed to swing on 3-0 counts; favorite counts on which to steal, hit and run, make pickoff throws, or pitch out; and a lot more. All of this information has been used to provide you with an intelligent computer manager that provides a very challenging opponent and that can be trusted to manage your team when you're playing in a league.

[Abev]

We gotta compare apples to apples here. I am sure if Shaun had a development company to help implement his ideas PS would be a much better product for the "main stream". To me when I look at what was done by ONE person, I am simply amazed.

When Shaun gets a small army of developers, then lets compare. If you remember what PS looked like in the beginning, to what it is now, there is always a progression in the new versions. Heck, a giant like EA Sports and their titles take steps back all the time; how many times have Shauns new versions taken steps backward?

OOTP will cater to more of the main stream. It's 'popier'. But I dont want standing O's and fireworks. Go to Flushing for the former and Chicago for the latter.

I don't know what Matrix role will be in PS if its only distribution, but I surely hope it will be more than that. This is not to take a step backwards in my opinion, PS has a better 'pure' baseball feel.

[dneely]

I have played and owned all of the sims mentioned here plus PC Action Baseball, APBA and a few others. Of the career sims right now I prefer PureSim over OOTP, but I still play in leagues with OOTP.

The one BIG thing (to me anyway) that separates PS and OOTP from games like DMB is the ability to play online versus a real opponent. Both DMB and PC Action offer that option and there are tons of leagues out there where guys play H-2-H over the net. It is easy, fun, extremely realistic and does not take hours to play. I have constantly asked for more in game managerial options and upgraded text in PureSim because I don't want to just sim my teams games. But for the complete feel of managing your team, making all the crucial decisions there is nothing like DMB. It "feels" like real baseball, has thousands of play outcomes and is a real challenge to manage against an opponent. PureSim is more fun,much prettier and allows you to see your players and grow with them but if you want to truely manage your team a game like DMB or PC Action is very hard to beat.

DNeely

[sd5175]

I play ootp but I have tried puresim in the past and liked the way it looked and the in game managing which is very important to me. I was real excited when Shaun was going to take on the Total Pro Baseball project. When he left the project ("developing games in stealth" if I remember correctly) He said he wanted to keep Pure Sim fun. He did not think that his gamers wanted real waiver rules. Please do not take this as a Shaun bashing because I have been a big fan of his work from the bbpro and fbpro days. I remember when he annouced he was going to attempt a baseball sim back on one of the old forums we used for Sierra games.My point being that I personally need both GM realism and pitch by pich in game management. Things like 40 man rosters,Waiver rule, minor league options, minor league free agents, rule 5 draft and september callups are such a big part of everyday Major League Baseball news now it feels weird not to have that in games. Baseball is my favorite gaming sport but I find myself not completing seasons because of not having everyhting in one game. I think that last time I finished a season was High Heat 2002 but I only cared about in game managing. Having a real ball flight physics for results was great I had no reason to play God and tweak league totals, creation modifiers or development and aging modifiers. I do not need graphics but a game engine with results based simply on pitch velocity, location and bat speed and a manage only mode I would pay 65 dollars for it.

Paul which game will be released first Max Football or Puresim Gold?

[Paul Vebber]

Paul which game will be released first Max Football or Puresim Gold?

Nothing is cast in stone. My money is on the Baseball game mostly because David Winter is going to be gone for awhile.

Don't hold me to that though...

[sd5175]

ORIGINAL: Paul Vebber

Paul which game will be released first Max Football or Puresim Gold?

Nothing is cast in stone. My money is on the Baseball game mostly because David Winter is going to be gone for awhile.

Don't hold me to that though...

It is going to be a great year for Matrix. I never knew you guys existed and now I am going to purchase two of your games.

[CPTBrown]

Yeah, I've been following Maximum Football since about Christmas time and I just ran across this game while checking the MF forums for updates. I'm excited for the releases and I'll be buying them both. I am still a dedicated OOTP player, but this game plays real fun (I downloaded 8.21 hours before it got taken down am playing the demo version, 15 tries left!) and I'm going to add it to my collection.

[MizzouRah_slith]

I like both games (ootp and ps), but for the solo player like myself, I like how much easier Puresim is to setup and play vs OOTP. I'm a veteran of ootp, but there's so much to tweak to get good results and honestly, I like not having waivers, rule 5 draft, etc..

The only thing I wish Puresim would have is a current MLB setup and structure. As it stands now, you can't create a similar MLB setup.

Keep up the good work though Shaun!

[roo23]

What do you mean you can't set up the game similar to MLB?

I have been using the Lahman database and playing different setups all along. Started one association in 1919 (kept Babe with the Sox!), one in '84, and even replayed the 2005 season (rosters and setup courtesy of a fellow puresimmer named lynch). Maybe I'm misunderstanding your question.

[lynchjm24]

I think he's referring to the financial setup of today's MLB - where say NY has a payroll 8 times that of Tampa - not the divisions and playoff structure.

[MizzouRah_slith]

Exactly. Fictional players are fine, I just want to use the salary structure of the MLB.

[Amaroq]

You should be able to create a set-up which matches MLB, because you can by-hand-edit the budgets for each team. You just need to decide what they are / do the research yourself.

I've done something like this, where I've created a "Quick Start" for 1901, with the team names, ballparks, and financials that I want to play with; if I start a new game, I can pick up my "Quick Start" for that year, and go from there.

The reason there isn't one in the shipping game is an intentional design decision on Shaun's part: he felt that the exaggerated differences between clubs in the real major leagues created too much disparity in the game for a new player: e.g., if I'm a new player and I play one career as the Yankees, winning everything under the sun, I may give up on the grounds that "This game is too easy." Alternately, if I come in as the Pirates, and no matter what I do, any time I get a good player his salary demands immediately price him off my team, I might decide "This game is too hard."

Personally, I think that's a mistake - I like the financial challenge inherent in Football Manager 2005 when you take over a team that's struggling financially and "turning a profit" becomes more important and more challenging than "success on the pitch", but that's just me. Shaun's point gets a lot of support if you read the FM forum, because you will regularly see players complaining "This game is too easy" in a post adjacent to somebody else's complaint "This game is too hard". Well, no, honestly its neither, and it has all to do with what your starting conditions are and which team you chose to play - but the first-time user has a hard time seeing that.

[roo23]

Ah, I see. I have just done as Amaroq did and do the names, ballparks, and financials myself. It would be nice if there was a 'default' setup like that... I actually hadn't even thought of that as being an issue - I kind of found it fun and interesting to get that info myself and sort of personalize the game. But you're right it would be nice to have right at the start.

[MizzouRah_slith]

ORIGINAL: Amaroq

You should be able to create a set-up which matches MLB, because you can by-hand-edit the budgets for each team. You just need to decide what they are / do the research yourself.

I've done something like this, where I've created a "Quick Start" for 1901, with the team names, ballparks, and financials that I want to play with; if I start a new game, I can pick up my "Quick Start" for that year, and go from there.

The reason there isn't one in the shipping game is an intentional design decision on Shaun's part: he felt that the exaggerated differences between clubs in the real major leagues created too much disparity in the game for a new player: e.g., if I'm a new player and I play one career as the Yankees, winning everything under the sun, I may give up on the grounds that "This game is too easy." Alternately, if I come in as the Pirates, and no matter what I do, any time I get a good player his salary demands immediately price him off my team, I might decide "This game is too hard."

Personally, I think that's a mistake - I like the financial challenge inherent in Football Manager 2005 when you take over a team that's struggling financially and "turning a profit" becomes more important and more challenging than "success on the pitch", but that's just me. Shaun's point gets a lot of support if you read the FM forum, because you will regularly see players complaining "This game is too easy" in a post adjacent to somebody else's complaint "This game is too hard". Well, no, honestly its neither, and it has all to do with what your starting conditions are and which team you chose to play - but the first-time user has a hard time seeing that.

Excellent explanation and well, now I understand. Like you, I think it's a mistake and has cost some $$$ as I know a lot of people who want to play a current real mlb setup league. Real 2005 player rosters are big for games like this and like most who want this type setup, I have a league which mimics the MLB to an extent, but it would be better to have a REAL MLB quick league setup.

I still like the game and create and play other leagues, but I like seeing my current Cardinals team in the game via roster maker and default setup - ala OOTP.

With what Amaroq said, now I see what Shaun was thinking and well, not a bad design by any means.

[KG Erwin]

ORIGINAL: Amaroq

...I've created a "Quick Start" for 1901, with the team names, ballparks, and financials that I want to play with; if I start a new game, I can pick up my "Quick Start" for that year, and go from there.

What a great idea! Thanks, Amaroq.[:)] Saving a league startup never occurred to me. I always started from scratch. [8|]

[Amaroq]

Thanks, guys - glad to help, both with the idea and the explanations. [:)]