|
|
Post by Oldtimer on Jul 20, 2016 19:49:10 GMT -5
Good to see you, catknight!!
As well as, all the newcomers!!
|
|
|
|
Post by mickaleenne on Jul 29, 2016 1:28:41 GMT -5
Shaun, I have a couple of questions about the reboot. As my previous notes explain I am going to play 8 (or 9) 30 team associations staffed with players from all of baseball's past seasons. Will the reboot accommodate my situation with only 1 reboot purchase? Will it unleash me from the internet connection and install all data on my system? What will I need for a CPU and storage to be able to play it? I know it is early in your process to ask this; but I thought floating this question to you might help your processes to determine what you want to produce.
Now a suggestion for you to consider incorporating in the reboot that includes a question for 6.11 (which I am using) and 6.12.
The question first. Fence heights variations in the current versions, I assume, are centered at the field dimension footage points. In other words, if straight-away cf is 10 foot, half that fence portion height is towards left field and half that height is towards right field before it goes to say 6 feet at Left center and 13 feet at right center. This of course would only make both foul-line heights extend out from the dimension point for only 1/2 the distance that the other 7 dimension heights cover in their section of fence. Am I correct in my assumption?
The suggestion for you to consider. Because of the oddball field dimensions of many parks, I would suggest the distance points be adjusted in this manner. Both Left & Right field should have 4 measurements and Center field should have 5. I think this would allow fence adjustments that would come closer to the actual dimensions of the oddball-corners in many parks. Also I would like to see a 30 degree? view that actually shows the dimension points with a 2d-view of the fence height that gives us a better perspective of what the outfield fence would look like. It would be nice if it had the approximate curve shown in the 1-d view now given; but even a straight view showing distance points from home plate and proportional changing 2-d fence heights would help a person visualize the field layout better and be able to make it more appropriately fit the baseball stadium picture you are using for that team.
Thank you very much for considering all our ideas, no matter how complicated (or foolish) they may be. And thank you again for all your past work on the game that we all enjoy so much (or hope to, in my case, when I get all my set-up work finished).
|
|
|
|
Post by mickaleenne on Jul 29, 2016 1:41:49 GMT -5
Shaun, I should have added this to the request for the 2-d fence. If the 2-d view is not curved but straight, please also keep the current 1-d view that shows the curvature of the fence. Even if you incorporate the 30 degree, curved 2-d view of the fence in the game; I believe the current 1-d view that adjusts the curvature of the fence as you change dimensions is of great help and value, it should not be discarded. I did not want to suggest, at all, that you replace the current diamond 1-d view with the new suggested 2-d fence layout view.
|
|
Frozen Stiffer
Junior Member
I am nothing but a human onion!
Posts: 90 
|
Post by Frozen Stiffer on Jul 29, 2016 6:24:28 GMT -5
Shaun, I have a couple of questions about the reboot. As my previous notes explain I am going to play 8 (or 9) 30 team associations staffed with players from all of baseball's past seasons. Will the reboot accommodate my situation with only 1 reboot purchase? Will it unleash me from the internet connection and install all data on my system? What will I need for a CPU and storage to be able to play it? I know it is early in your process to ask this; but I thought floating this question to you might help your processes to determine what you want to produce. mickaleenne, While I am not a representative of, nor a speaker for, Shaun, I would like to chime in on just the portion of your post shown above. Considering that with the present version of Puresim (and all past versions, to be fair) you can already do the two aforementioned tasks (having multiple associations available to play/choose from, playing "disconnected"), I can say with a good amount of confidence that any changes Shaun makes will not impact these established facts. I don't see him going down the path of EA Sports or XBox One where you must be connected to the internet to play. It's never been his style and I can't imagine that's changing with this latest update. Also, while I don't think I've created as many as 30, I can easily claim to have created and/or played several associations off a single install of PureSim, perhaps as many as 10. Sometimes you want to experience the game in different historical eras, sometimes it's real teams but with fictional players, sometimes it's fictional EVERYTHING! Even as our tastes and choices may vary, Puresim has always been able to step up t the plate (see what I did there?) and give us what we want. I'm pretty diggity-dog-gone sure that Shaun won't come along now, more than 10 years after this all began, and take that away. Lastly, I just wanted to add- while I don't know what the new System Requirements will be, I suspect that it will be mostly unchanged. PureSim has never been a "resource/power-greedy" program, allowing itself to run on an incredibly wide-ranging array of machines. From massive gaming powerhouses (which I happen to own for my personal joy) to simplistic hamster wheel-powered business computers (which I must regrettably endure at work), PureSim has performed ideally on either. I very much appreciate that versatility and 'freedom' that it has granted its players; and this too, I couldn't see Shaun ruining, or taking away. -FS |
|
|
|
Post by redfox000 on Aug 12, 2016 10:38:57 GMT -5
Personally I would like to see a focus on Single player fictional play. I usually start a fictional universe around say 2000 (nice even number) and then play on out. The financial aspect needs to be worked on a bit as does the AI in terms of signing/keeping free agents. I know I am the minority, but I don't play MP nor do I do a historical replay.
|
|
Frozen Stiffer
Junior Member
I am nothing but a human onion!
Posts: 90
|
Post by Frozen Stiffer on Aug 15, 2016 16:56:42 GMT -5
Playing The All-Star Game
I would like the option to do this. 'Nuff said.
|
|
Frozen Stiffer
Junior Member
I am nothing but a human onion!
Posts: 90
|
Post by Frozen Stiffer on Aug 29, 2016 14:54:23 GMT -5
Some new ideas/requests/suggestions came to mind!On The Trades End- It would be nice if the AI would be willing to accept CASH CONSIDERATIONS in a trade. Sometimes I have more capital available for trade than I do raw talent.
- Also, there should be adjustments made to the AI so that it can better/accurately value multi-player trades. It seems that once you involve more than two players, except for some rare, blue moon occasions, the AI is unable to process the value of the trade and just loses interest.
- I would like it if we could either place a player "on the Trading Block" because you want to move him and you want other [potentially] interested teams to know it or switch your team's disposition to "Looking for Offers", "Seeking Improvements at SS", "Looking to get younger", etc. This would also require the AI being able to understand the significance of such a disposition where you would most likely be interested in trades offering a shortstop. On the same note, if they're looking for a player that fills the applicable role, the guy you've designated as "On The Trading Block" would be a good person to aim for since you're already motivated to move them.
On The System End- I would really like to be able to rename an association. While I understand the situation may not arise all that often, it can still be useful. For example, my MON Association (Marlins Of New) started off with me running the Miami Marlins, but then I moved onto another team (Texas Rangers) and now I'm on another team (Tampa Bay Rays), yet the association is still called MON. Now that I'm team-hopping, I would appreciate the option to name it something more generic, or something not as team-specific.
On The Contract End- I know there's a way to go into some config file and tweak one value into another value, but as the user, I shouldn't have to be doing that, I shouldn't have to be tinkering with files. I would like a way to offer contract terms greater than 5 years. I'd like to reward a franchise player with a Giancarlo Stanton-like contract; double-digit terms should not be impossible- rare, granted- but not impossible.
On The Player-Position End- I know that technically, a DH is whoever isn't a regular fielder but hits really, really well... but, it would be nice if we could assign that role to a player. So when your NL team has an interleague game at an AL park, instead of the game selecting the best-rated player for the DH slot, and then you have to go in and choose whomever you want to choose, it would instead select whomever YOU have chosen as your team's DH. Perhaps it wouldn't even be a "position" as much as a toggle box (i.e. this player should be the DH in applicable situations) in the Player Usage section or something.
- Also, while I know that technically, a Setup Man is basically a closer that doesn't close... I would also like to be able to select the SU role for the applicable hurler. Though, I feel this is more of a permanent position (excluding necessary restructuring due to injuries) which would be effective all year round (for NL and/or AL teams), so it would be used regularly.
That's all for now!
|
|
Frozen Stiffer
Junior Member
I am nothing but a human onion!
Posts: 90
|
Post by Frozen Stiffer on Sept 14, 2016 19:01:19 GMT -5
Just today I was playing and something happened, which reminded me of another fix/improvement that I would like to see:
An UNDO button or an "Are You Sure?" prompt
It was the bottom of the 9th and we were leading by 3. I went to call in my Closer and I accidentally selected the wrong pitcher. When I went to go and call up the Closer again, I received the "You cannot remove a pitcher you just brought in the game." pop-up. While I understand (and support) the logic behind this restriction, there must be some flexibility, some accounting for the possibility that the user accidentally selected the wrong pitcher. This is why I would suggest an UNDO button, or even an "Are You Sure?" prompt. This way, the user has the opportunity to realize their mistake and then select the correct pitcher. Otherwise, you're stuck forcing that pitcher to pitch to at least one batter- and if you choose the wrong pitcher (EXHAUSTED) that could lead to disastrous results- from the loss of the game to a serious injury.
In today's example, by calling on the wrong pitcher, I had to allow them to pitch to a batter, and they struck that batter out. Then I chose my closer, who sat down the next two batters, but then he didn't earn the save, because he didn't record the final three outs. That really annoyed me.
|
|
|
|
Post by username on Sept 15, 2016 7:28:51 GMT -5
Shaun have you ever thought about selling it on GOG.com? That would be great!
|
|
|
|
Post by JB44 on Oct 7, 2016 17:53:18 GMT -5
Personally I would like to see a focus on Single player fictional play. Absolutely friggin' NOT. PSB is a masterpiece of historical replay. There are enough games out there already serving all the CEO-groupies who like to twiddle their thumbs regarding ticket prices and Class-A farm teams and contract extensions and building new ballparks and similar crud. PSB 7.0 should move toward an expansion of the historical simulation not toward a greater bizness simulation. JB |
|
Frozen Stiffer
Junior Member
I am nothing but a human onion!
Posts: 90
|
Post by Frozen Stiffer on Oct 7, 2016 18:09:33 GMT -5
Personally I would like to see a focus on Single player fictional play. Absolutely friggin' NOT. PSB is a masterpiece of historical replay. There are enough games out there already serving all the CEO-groupies who like to twiddle their thumbs regarding ticket prices and Class-A farm teams and contract extensions and building new ballparks and similar crud. PSB 7.0 should move toward an expansion of the historical simulation not toward a greater bizness simulation. While we're all entitled to our input and our opinion, I must say that I agree wholeheartedly with JB44 on this one. While a single-player-focused baseball game is a great idea on its own, that's not Puresim. You can't make ONE type of game into ANOTHER type of game. It's like making Monopoly into an FPS. It isn't an FPS. If you want to play an FPS, you buy an FPS. If I remember correctly, I think the OOTP company put out a game that is exactly what you are describing; you follow and control the life of a unique player, instead of that of a team/association. I think it's called "Inside The Park" or something catchy like that. If you're interested in something focused on a single person, you might want to look into that instead. -FS |
|
|
|
Post by donbraswell on Oct 8, 2016 14:53:48 GMT -5
I think you miss read redfox000's comments. PureSim stated life as a fictional only game. Most of the improvements over the years were devoted to the historical side of the game. For us fictional players improvements need to be made on how the game handles players and rosters. There is a need for the fictional side of this game to perform more realistically. Just my 2 cents.
Don
|
|
Frozen Stiffer
Junior Member
I am nothing but a human onion!
Posts: 90
|
Post by Frozen Stiffer on Oct 8, 2016 19:34:48 GMT -5
I think you miss read redfox000's comments. PureSim stated life as a fictional only game. Most of the improvements over the years were devoted to the historical side of the game. For us fictional players improvements need to be made on how the game handles players and rosters. There is a need for the fictional side of this game to perform more realistically. Just my 2 cents. Don Oh, Don- I assure you, I feel the exact same way. I do enjoy a few historical replays, but the base of my gaming is the fictional world. I enjoy the ease and control with which you can build, manage, enjoy and sustain a long-term fictional-world association. Though what you've pointed out is true; there is still room for improvement as in the later years, finances get very much out of hand, salaries, while high, don't make sense (top-dollar for a bench-warmer), etc. I thought that redfox was suggesting the game should have an option to be played from the perspective of a specific, individual player- a concept that I am wholeheartedly against. If this isn't what he meant, then I'd happily back-track my comments as they simply wouldn't apply. -FS |
|
|
|
Post by legs37 on Oct 12, 2016 12:35:36 GMT -5
Now that I am fully immersed in playing PureSim again, I found myself wanting to be able to select the pitches thrown when playing in Managerial mode.
Simple selections like; SI, SL, CU, CB FB, etc., and if even remotely possible, the ability to select 'location' (low inside, high outside, brush back...). What made me think of this was the incident with Rougned Odor and José Bautista. As a Jays fan, I was hoping that there was a way I could throw a high fastball inside, and brush him back from the plate. Maybe the computer would be inclined to hit him, which of course would be perfectly fine with me. :-)
That may be asking a lot, but it would be an awesome feature to have at your fingertips! :-)
|
|
Frozen Stiffer
Junior Member
I am nothing but a human onion!
Posts: 90
|
Post by Frozen Stiffer on Oct 12, 2016 13:11:08 GMT -5
Now that I am fully immersed in playing PureSim again, I found myself wanting to be able to select the pitches thrown when playing in Managerial mode. Simple selections like; SI, SL, CU, CB FB, etc., and if even remotely possible, the ability to select 'location' (low inside, high outside, brush back...). What made me think of this was the incident with Rougned Odor and José Bautista. As a Jays fan, I was hoping that there was a way I could throw a high fastball inside, and brush him back from the plate. Maybe the computer would be inclined to hit him, which of course would be perfectly fine with me. :-) That may be asking a lot, but it would be an awesome feature to have at your fingertips! :-) Methinks somebody isn't a Blue Jays fan....?  |
|
