Improving the Real Player Experience in PureSim

[Amaroq]

You stumble into a 'what's game-y about this?' problem... if viewed from the "Its a GM game" perspective (sorry, Steely Glint, I don't mean to get you started on that again!), there's "nothing to do" in a league where all of the player movement, progression, aging, retirement, and trades are pre-ordained by 'history'. (That's the logic behind why Shaun hasn't implemented it so far.)

Maybe the answer to that question is "It becomes a Manager/replay game, focusing on in-game management, chosing the starting lineup(s), substitutions, strategy, etc." Alternately, you could 'let it play' without 'owning' a team, learning about teams, players, and baseball history as you go.

In that sense, if Shaun were to add it, I would probably try it out, but it isn't something I'd clamour for personally.

[KG Erwin]

Amaroq, my viewpoint is different -- I have no desire to crunch numbers from year to year in the GM mode -- that seems too sterile. I may be in a minority, but I want to do it ALL, including being the manager in-game.

Pure Sim is getting very close to everything I ever wanted in a baseball sim -- more functionality for real players suits my personal preferences, as I think that the game SHOULD be an educational tool. The best wargames do that, and I extend this philosophy to sports games, especially those that want to get some depth into the worlds they create.

Recreating history "note for note" is NOT what we're after. We want to recreate the spirit and the feel of the given era, and then play with the alternatives. THIS is what is educational, as the player is given alternate paths within the context of the time period.

[Steely Glint]

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

Amaroq, my viewpoint is different -- I have no desire to crunch numbers from year to year in the GM mode -- that seems too sterile. I may be in a minority, but I want to do it ALL, including being the manager in-game.

Kampfgruppe, you're by no means in a minority; the GM-only crowd is the minority.

PureSim should sim all of the strategic aspects of the game - owner, GM, and manager - and one day it will.

[Steely Glint]

ORIGINAL: Amaroq
there's "nothing to do" in a league where all of the player movement, progression, aging, retirement, and trades are pre-ordained by 'history'.

We clearly live on different planets, because there's EVERYTHING to do - all the important stuff. Select and juggle lineups, select rotation, handle the pitching staff, make substiutions, make the vital in-game decisions (pinch hit or not? infield in or not? do I let him pitch one more inning or pull him now? give him the steal sign or not?), etc., etc., etc.

The GM only exists to hand the manager the tools with which he is to win games.

As Whitey Herzog would tell you, "You're missing a great game."

[BataBabys]

This game is all about being a Gm and Manager. For me its all about using real players starting in 1901 to present and seeing how many Championships i can win with the least amount of money spent. I just wish there was a screen that compared how associations did against each other. Like with any game the goal is trying to better your last score isnt it?

[Amaroq]

We clearly live on different planets, because there's EVERYTHING to do - all the important stuff. Select and juggle lineups, select rotation, handle the pitching staff, make substiutions, make the vital in-game decisions (pinch hit or not? infield in or not? do I let him pitch one more inning or pull him now? give him the steal sign or not?), etc., etc., etc.

The GM only exists to hand the manager the tools with which he is to win games.

As Whitey Herzog would tell you, "You're missing a great game."

Steely, I think you have me pigeonholed, and I feel like you respond to one or two lines out of my posts rather than viewing my post as a whole.

besbol asked "what about these 2 options?"

I explained why, if somebody were designing a GM-only game, they might consider there to be nothing to do, as the features he was inquiring about remove the things that a GM would control - and explained that that was the logic, dating from the origins of PureSim, when there were no in-game management options - behind why they aren't already in the game.

In the very next paragraph, I touched on all of the things you outlined in your post, as, SINCE that decision was made, PureSim has added in-game-management options.

In neither case was I espousing my personal belief or view - I did that in my third paragraph: I'd play it if it was implemented, to see if I enjoyed it, but it wouldn't be a seeling point or a fail-to-sell point for me, personally.

[Steely Glint]

Good lord, a perfectly logical response. Plus we actually agreed on something the other day.

The times they are a-changin'.

[Amaroq]

*busting up laughing*

They must be, at that!