Bowl Bound College Football Demo is out!

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by John Galt

21) Am I wrong or shouldn't conference rematches in bowls not occur? I played in the Poinsetta Bowl with New Mexico against TCU. That kind of sucked.

I have seen a *lot* of rematches in bowl games in bbcf, and I'm pretty sure that bowls avoid rematches if possible irl.

[wheels]

Originally Posted by kingnebwsu

Here's a few observations from my limited time with the demo...

On the depth chart, it'd be great to double click and see a player's card.

On the player's card, the player's year should be prominently featured (maybe up top with his number). This is a hugely important thing and shouldn't be hidden like it currently is.

1. You can double-click on a player's name in the depth chart to get his player card.

2. Immediately to the left of the player's photo, there are three pieces of information (in order from top to bottom): Position, uniform number, and class year.

Hope this helps.

[rexallllsc]

Originally Posted by Hell Atlantic

Icy:what does "3/-" or "4/-" mean? does that mean the player has reached their max potential?

Quick thought: Why do games have this? I like knowing that a guy has a lot of potential, but how do we know that a college player is tapped out?

[MizzouRah]

I think the 1-20 scale would be ideal for me.. darn SI.

[kingnebwsu]

Originally Posted by wheels

1. You can double-click on a player's name in the depth chart to get his player card.

2. Immediately to the left of the player's photo, there are three pieces of information (in order from top to bottom): Position, uniform number, and class year.

Hope this helps.

Thanks for the #1...thought I tried that, but apparently I hadn't

As for #2, I know where the class year is, but it should be more prominent. I'll know I'll get used to it after time, but it should be at the top of the player card (maybe colored too) cuz it's very important.

UPDATE: Apparently there are 2 kinds of player cards. One goes on the main game screen and the other is a pop-up that comes outside of the game. I'm talking about the latter. It's very clear on the in-game card, but the pop-up one the player's class is hidden. I didn't even notice this until now...lol

---

[Balldog]

Game definitely needs more plays! I want to run out of shotgun, I have only three plays to run. It shouldn't be hard to have at least 6 inside, 6 outside...and there is no option plays out of the shotgun?

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Balldog

Game definitely needs more plays! I want to run out of shotgun, I have only three plays to run. It shouldn't be hard to have at least 6 inside, 6 outside...and there is no option plays out of the shotgun?

If you've ever watched a UGA game in the Richt era, then you'd probably be of the opinion that having three different running plays out of the shotgun is too many.

[Ben E Lou]

Update on sim speed with latest build (3rd new one since beta)....

FIRST RUN--Bad Conditions
I auto-simmed a few seasons under some pretty bad conditions: Civ4 minimized, 4 instances of Firefox open (and did some surfing on that machine while game was running), one instance of Excel open...

Season One: 31 minues
Season Two: 31 minutes
SEason Three: 33 minutes

I've got a few more things to do before settling down for some serious testing/Beta Dynastying this evening, so I'm going to now "strip down" my system and let it go through 2-3 more seasons with anti-virus, firewall, everything turned off.

[Ben E Lou]

28 minutes
26 minutes
27 minutes

(These were subsequent seasons in the same sim....2010-2012.)

So, it is faster, but probably not enough of a speed-up to justify turning everything off for normal simming, like I do in OOTP. However, saving 5ish minutes a season is a good enough reason to strip down everything for overnight sims, I would say. For a 10pm-6am sim, that's around 3 extra seasons.

[st.cronin]

Ohio State (1-0) #8 in the country playing at unranked Fresno State (0-1).

Fresno State is favored by 23.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Ohio State (1-0) #8 in the country playing at unranked Fresno State (0-1).

Fresno State is favored by 23.

You sure that doesn't say +23?

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

You sure that doesn't say +23?

Positive.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Ohio State (1-0) #8 in the country playing at unranked Fresno State (0-1).

Fresno State is favored by 23.

Pat Hill is getting things done!!

Too bad the 'dogs couldn't take care of business in Reno last week.

[st.cronin]

Final Score:

Fresno State 3
Ohio State 0

[Buccaneer]

Nah, that can never happen in real life. A team ranked high in the pre-season polls losing to an unranked team.

[sovereignstar]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

Nah, that can never happen in real life. A team ranked high in the pre-season polls losing to an unranked team.

I think the odds are more of a concern than the final score.

[gtmarc]

Originally Posted by rexallllsc

Quick thought: Why do games have this? I like knowing that a guy has a lot of potential, but how do we know that a college player is tapped out?

My original thought was that I was sure the position coach could tell you whether a player is going to get any better.

Then I stopped and thought for a second. For a COLLEGE football game, this is a very strange concept. Think about it for a second. A COLLEGE player 'taps out'????

Except, if I'm playing a combo of games like TCY and FOF, that 'tapped out' senior will then suddenly become a rookie with potential in the pros.

If you think of the life of an athlete, the very notion of a player 'tapping out' during college seems really strange. No matter how in shape they are in college, don't they usually get in better shape in the pros? If the know the game in college, don't they usually know the game better as a pro?

If anyone 'taps out' in college, it would seem to be players that either have a physique that is so bad that it reaches its potential as a scrawny teenager, or is just so dumb they simply just can't learn the game. So I could see those sorts of player 'tapping out'.

But for anyone who's got any game at all, the question is how much of their talent do they realize while they are in college? Its not 'tapping out', its how far up the ladder can I climb in this rather young section of an athletic life?

So I don't have any problem with the fact that I can find out from my position coaches just exactly how good someone is today and how good they think they'll be in the future. Its just that as I think about it, the whole idea of a decent athlete completely tapping out physically and mentally by say age 22 seems rather bizarre.

Plus shouldn't the concepts of physically tapping out and mentally tapping out be completely separate? While I can see that you say that a player has gotten his body in as good as shape as possible, does it make any sense at all to say that mentally a player has learned everything about the game and can't learn anything else?

Picture Brent Farve and some DB in the same division that's been around about as long. Do you think that they ever quit trying to learn new tricks mentally to beat each other? And that they then don't file away the same trick to later pull on some second year guy who's just starting to thing he knows how to play the game?

[jbmagic]

Originally Posted by Icy

Good stuff John. Some of that points are already fixed in the last beta but Arlie will read this for sure.

how the end of game decisions by the AI now?

[j51]

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by j51

Again, polls have been tweaked at least twice since the demo.

[Easy Mac]

Texas @ Pitt after 10 games? And those are some low SOS for that late in the season, at least for major conference teams.

[CraigSca]

Of course, it's the big Texas-Pitt rivalry game.

[Ben E Lou]

I must say that I'm thrilled that the high schools in the game are pretty accurate, and are editable. It drove me nuts in TCY to see a perrenial loser team show up with 95 Athletic Prep. It is just plain fun to see big-time players come out of places I know not just in Georgia, but all over the South like Shades Valley in B'hm, Tampa Hillsborough, Memphis Catholic, Charlotte Independence, etc. It's a very nice touch, and adds tremendously to the game's realism factor.

Georgia residents will be happy to see more prospects comign from Camden, Stephenson, Tucker, Lowndes, Parkview, Brookwood, Peach County, Washington, Northside and Lovejoy. Somehow Calhoun got in that mix, though. I'll be replacing them with Warner Robins, and adding LaGrange to that group upon release. Buford might be worthy of some love, too.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

Texas @ Pitt after 10 games? And those are some low SOS for that late in the season, at least for major conference teams.

Based on every bit of commentary and evidence we've gotten from developers, it seems that scheduling is one of the more difficult tasks in programming these games. OOTP requires the stickware program for anything resembling a real-life schedule. FOF removed expansion, primarily due to scheduling. TCY added the SC8, to help make schedules work, etc. etc. etc. While I'd love to see more-accurate scheduling, this is something I've grown to expect and maybe even accept.

Specifically regarding BBCF, what I've noticed is that usually there's only one game pre-scheduled in Weeks 13-15--usually the rivalry game. With two of the other weeks normally being "OPEN", it is fairly common for the scheduling algorithm to have a non-conference game placed in one of the two remaining late-season weeks. Like I said, considering the preponderance of evidence of the difficulty of scheduling, this doesn't bother me all that much (although I'd much rather see Texas-Pitt in Weeks 1-4.)

[GreenMonster]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

I must say that I'm thrilled that the high schools in the game are pretty accurate, and are editable. It drove me nuts in TCY to see a perrenial loser team show up with 95 Athletic Prep. It is just plain fun to see big-time players come out of places I know not just in Georgia, but all over the South like Shades Valley in B'hm, Tampa Hillsborough, Memphis Catholic, Charlotte Independence, etc. It's a very nice touch, and adds tremendously to the game's realism factor.

Georgia residents will be happy to see more prospects comign from Camden, Stephenson, Tucker, Lowndes, Parkview, Brookwood, Peach County, Washington, Northside and Lovejoy. Somehow Calhoun got in that mix, though. I'll be replacing them with Warner Robins, and adding LaGrange to that group upon release. Buford might be worthy of some love, too.

Don't forget about some love for East Cobb, Walton is doing well no that I left school..

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by GreenMonster

Don't forget about some love for East Cobb, Walton is doing well no that I left school..

They're doing just fine, but they're still not exactly a recruiting hotbed.

My plan is to go through all of the Georgia schools and drop some (like, say, Stewart-Quitman, Cross Keys and Druid Hills come to mind immediately) down a level or two, and compensate by increasing a few "Average" schools to "High." I'd like to see Marietta, Shaw and Southwest DeKalb in particular produce a few more recruits.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by gtmarc

My original thought was that I was sure the position coach could tell you whether a player is going to get any better.

Then I stopped and thought for a second. For a COLLEGE football game, this is a very strange concept. Think about it for a second. A COLLEGE player 'taps out'????

Except, if I'm playing a combo of games like TCY and FOF, that 'tapped out' senior will then suddenly become a rookie with potential in the pros.

If you think of the life of an athlete, the very notion of a player 'tapping out' during college seems really strange. No matter how in shape they are in college, don't they usually get in better shape in the pros? If the know the game in college, don't they usually know the game better as a pro?

If anyone 'taps out' in college, it would seem to be players that either have a physique that is so bad that it reaches its potential as a scrawny teenager, or is just so dumb they simply just can't learn the game. So I could see those sorts of player 'tapping out'.

But for anyone who's got any game at all, the question is how much of their talent do they realize while they are in college? Its not 'tapping out', its how far up the ladder can I climb in this rather young section of an athletic life?

So I don't have any problem with the fact that I can find out from my position coaches just exactly how good someone is today and how good they think they'll be in the future. Its just that as I think about it, the whole idea of a decent athlete completely tapping out physically and mentally by say age 22 seems rather bizarre.

Plus shouldn't the concepts of physically tapping out and mentally tapping out be completely separate? While I can see that you say that a player has gotten his body in as good as shape as possible, does it make any sense at all to say that mentally a player has learned everything about the game and can't learn anything else?

Picture Brent Farve and some DB in the same division that's been around about as long. Do you think that they ever quit trying to learn new tricks mentally to beat each other? And that they then don't file away the same trick to later pull on some second year guy who's just starting to thing he knows how to play the game?

You know, there are plenty of players that "peak" in college, and not just bad players. I know when you read pro-draft notes, they have many players that they say "reached potential," "little upside," etc. Sometimes it is physical, sometimes it is mental, and sometimes it is work ethic (which is why some get labeled as such, and do end up developing into good pro's). But for any player, there is a level that he is not going to improve playing college, or playing in this system, etc.

Ok, I used etc. twice in one paragraph. Quicksand will now come and smash my fingers.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

You know, there are plenty of players that "peak" in college, and not just bad players. I know when you read pro-draft notes, they have many players that they say "reached potential," "little upside," etc. Sometimes it is physical, sometimes it is mental, and sometimes it is work ethic (which is why some get labeled as such, and do end up developing into good pro's). But for any player, there is a level that he is not going to improve playing college, or playing in this system, etc.

Ok, I used etc. twice in one paragraph. Quicksand will now come and smash my fingers.

I've viewed the "potential rating" in TCY, FBCB, and now in BBCF as "this is how good I think he's gonna get while he's in college." Further, in both TCY and FBCB, even when a guy reaches that "potential" number, he can continue to improve in ratings. I've noticed the same thing in BBCF, too, I'm pretty sure. I'll be able to examine it much better when HTML reporting is activated, but if one guy is rated 52/68, gets to 68/68 as a Junior, then rises to 70/74 as a Senior, while another gets to 68/68 and stays there, then I think we have a decent setup for a game.

[HoosFan]

skydog- have you taken any athletes that you've recruited and changed their position. how has it worked out.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by HoosFan

skydog- have you taken any athletes that you've recruited and changed their position. how has it worked out.

I haven't yet, but I have 22 schollies in the current offseason, so I plan to play around with it some as soon as I get this class in (probably tomorrow morning).

[GreenMonster]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

They're doing just fine, but they're still not exactly a recruiting hotbed.

My plan is to go through all of the Georgia schools and drop some (like, say, Stewart-Quitman, Cross Keys and Druid Hills come to mind immediately) down a level or two, and compensate by increasing a few "Average" schools to "High." I'd like to see Marietta, Shaw and Southwest DeKalb in particular produce a few more recruits.

Agreed, let me know what levels you dropped schools to.. Since I only went to Walton my senior year and moved from CT, I didn't understand the importance of highschool football. I now follow all the playoffs, and find myself listening to the 790, and 680 Friday night football shows on the AM. This is one of the high points of any college game..

[Jaguars]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Positive.

There are serious spread issues with the BETA demo.

I was ranked #5 and playing at #2 LSU and LSU was favored by 24.

I lost by 4.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by Jaguars

There are serious spread issues with the BETA demo.

I was ranked #5 and playing at #2 LSU and LSU was favored by 24.

I lost by 4.

Not to belittle your point, but USC is favored by 21 over UCLA this Saturday.

Serious question though: do people care about the spread feature? I've looked at it in FOF only since joining GEFL where we have a betting function on the league site, but other than that, I could really care less what the spread in my game is.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by digamma

Not to belittle your point, but USC is favored by 21 over UCLA this Saturday.

Serious question though: do people care about the spread feature? I've looked at it in FOF only since joining GEFL where we have a betting function on the league site, but other than that, I could really care less what the spread in my game is.

I see it as a nice little feature when I'm writing dynasties, but I don't pay that much attention to it otherwise. It would be nice for it to work well, though.

[Wasabiak]

Question.......Sorry if this has been asked. Will the final version of the game be a download? And will I be able to have it installed on multiple computers without jumping though license hoops?

[kingnebwsu]

I think the spread feature is vital to increase the immersion of the game. I don't pay a lot of attention to all the other teams around (how they're doing and stuff), but the spread feature gives me an idea of how I stand talent-wise vs my conference opponents.

[sovereignstar]

Originally Posted by Wasabiak

Question.......Sorry if this has been asked. Will the final version of the game be a download? And will I be able to have it installed on multiple computers without jumping though license hoops?

Yes. And I would assume yes, since ViaTech is probably involved (good thing).

[digamma]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

I see it as a nice little feature when I'm writing dynasties, but I don't pay that much attention to it otherwise. It would be nice for it to work well, though.

Oh, that's a good point, and one I hadn't thought of. I agree that if it is in the game, it should work well.

[Airhog]

Can you see power shifts over the course of a long game? What I mean is, can a conference that starts out as a mid-major, rise to become a great conference? Or even the opposite?

[Mountain]

A couple of more minor things I have noticed.

On kickoffs that go into the endzone for touchbakcs time runs off the clock.

On defensive facemask penalties (the five yard kind) the offense accepts the penalty but the down still advances. Ex. 1st and ten play is run for no gain. Defense gets called for the penalty offense accepts and it is now 2nd and five.

[Arles]

One thing on the potentials, SD is right - the frame of reference is while a player is in college and it's only for seniors. So, if your assistants view a senior QB as a "68" potential while in college and he currently is a 68 - he is at his max in their opinion. Certainly if he was "theoretically" exported into a pro league, he may come out at 55/70 on that level.

So, viewing a player that is 4.0/- as "tapped out" isn't really accurate. A better description would be "reached his potential according to your coaches". It's also a way to quickly view players in season for playing time for development and identify seniors. Also, if a player is a senior, any future development after his final game would be irrelevant for the college game anyway.

[Arles]

We will be releasing an updated demo before the final version with numerous bug fixes and feature tweaks based on feedback. The only negative is that you will have to start a new career as some changes have been made to the game structure (allow you to set the AI to handle academics, among others) with the next demo version.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by Arles

We will be releasing an updated demo before the final version with numerous bug fixes and feature tweaks based on feedback. The only negative is that you will have to start a new career as some changes have been made to the game structure (allow you to set the AI to handle academics, among others) with the next demo version.

Looking foward to it.

[Passacaglia]

Here's one I don't think I've seen. In BBCF, I was sacked in the endzone for a safety. Then I kicked off from the 25. It should be the 20, right?

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

28 minutes
26 minutes
27 minutes

(These were subsequent seasons in the same sim....2010-2012.)

So, it is faster, but probably not enough of a speed-up to justify turning everything off for normal simming, like I do in OOTP. However, saving 5ish minutes a season is a good enough reason to strip down everything for overnight sims, I would say. For a 10pm-6am sim, that's around 3 extra seasons.

What I never checked, though, was how it would do with antivirus/firewall/etc. turn ON, but without a resource hog like Civ4 loaded in the background, which is how I let it run during the day today:

25 minutes
25 minutes
25 minutes
26 minutes
30 minutes
28 minutes
27 minutes
30 minutes
28 minutes
30 minutes

So, I'd now say that there really no reason to go through the hassle of disabling everything while running BBCF. It doesn't make enough of a difference.

[Ben E Lou]

FWIW, I've realized that I have about zero interest in starting in "Training Camp." Definitely the way to go for me is to sim through the first postseason, ignore any Job Offers, and begin in Week 2 of the Offseason with hiring and firing staff, then proceeding to transfers and recruiting. It must be G-Dawg's bad influence on me.

[dubb93]

Skydog, did you ever test changing positions, and if so how did it turn out?

I'm about to enter recruiting in a few game weeks and the top 2 RB recruits in the country are both blue in interest for coming to notre dame.

I have interest in going after both of them, but I would imagine playing one at FS. Here are the stats of the 2....

#1 RB(A)-- 5-11 180lbs 1,340 yds 5.6 ypc 15 td, 72 tackles 8 sacks
#2 RA(A)-- 5-10 207lbs 2017 yds 5.8 ypc 15 TD, 92 tackles 3 sacks

I have interest in getting RB #1 and starting him from day 1 as I have no depth at the RB position, while #2 would start from day 1 from FS based on his defensive stats and size. Is there anyway of telling him while I'm recruiting him that he would have a chance to start at FS, or would one lose interest as soon as the other commited? B/C if I can only have 1 of the 2, RB #2 looks like the better option to me.

I know I can't advance past this season, but I can imagine what would happen couldn't I?

[dubb93]

Another question, how much of my budget should I have not allocated at the start of the season? I used it all and now seem to be going over budget after the coach hiring phase.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by dubb93

Skydog, did you ever test changing positions, and if so how did it turn out?

No, I didn't. I was in recruiting at that point, but encountered the bug that caused me to have to abandon my original beta dynasty. (No worries, that bug is now dealt with.) I'm starting in on a new dynasty this evening, though, starting in the offeason, so recruiting should be done by tomorrow morning at the latest.

[bhlloy]

Arlie, any chance of making the new demo so we can play one week into the new season? Training camp is a bit pointless if you can't see any results, and see how your new recruits are looking. It would also give people a chance to experiment with changing positions.