Is there a market any more for Games Like Strat-O-Matic and Diamond Mind?

Ben E Lou · 12-23-2003, 07:13 AM

For some reason, I just started thinking about this today. I used to be a loyal Strat-O-Matic Computer Baseball guy. I bought the newest version every year, (and yes, I managed every single game back then. That's all you could do with it.) However, since the day that Baseball Mogul gave me GM options for the first time, and then FOF1 did the same thing in football, I have had no desire whatsoever for a single-season text game. For baseball in particular, what is the draw now of Diamond Mind and Strat? Are they THAT much better than OOTP for in-game management options?

Before there was such a thing as Baseball Mogul, I wrote a letter every year to the Strat folks asking/begging them to make a career game with GM options. They wrote back each time, but made it clear that they were never going in that direction, and it appears that they still have no desire to do so. I honestly wonder how these two franchises are staying afloat, now that career sims with solid in-game options are available.

Is it simply that SOM and DMB both have long-time, loyal followings who will buy from them every year regardless, or is it that they don't know about OOTP5 and other career sims? I just can't imagine that people want to be limited to one season only.

JimboJ · 12-23-2003, 07:38 AM

It's not that they are limited to one season. It's just one season per year. There are still a lot of draft leagues for these games, where the owners make trades, sign free agents, etc. Then when the new player discs come out each year, you get to keep your players from last year, and you have a rookie draft for the new players. I believe both of the games you mentioned have utilities to facilitate this.

Then they just play out the season at a leisurely pace over the course of the year, until the next season disc comes out. Think fantasy baseball, only you get to manage each game. And these games both have many in-game strategy options.

Of course the basic problem with these is you are using players' stats from the previous year, so you know in advance how each player will perform. I think this limitation is what will eventually make these type of games extinct one day.

In football, Action PC Football is very popular for this style of play. It also has way more in-game coaching strategy options than any other game out there.

Peregrine · 12-23-2003, 07:40 AM

Quote:

Is it simply that SOM and DMB both have long-time, loyal followings who will buy from them every year regardless, or is it that they don't know about OOTP5 and other career sims?

I would say the former. I used to be a big fan of Diamond Mind (even back when it was Pursue the Pennant.) I still know people who buy the yearly versions of DMB and play them religiously. I think they are hooked on the idea of simming one year as "accurately" as possible. Personally the career sims are much more interesting to me now, and I've fallen away from baseball sims as my interest in baseball has waned over the last several years.

Ben E Lou · 12-23-2003, 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by JimboJ
It's not that they are limited to one season. It's just one season per year. There are still a lot of draft leagues for these games, where the owners make trades, sign free agents, etc. Then when the new player discs come out each year, you get to keep your players from last year, and you have a rookie draft for the new players. I believe both of the games you mentioned have utilities to facilitate this.

Then they just play out the season at a leisurely pace over the course of the year, until the next season disc comes out. Think fantasy baseball, only you get to manage each game. And these games both have many in-game strategy options.

Of course the basic problem with these is you are using players' stats from the previous year, so you know in advance how each player will perform. I think this limitation is what will eventually make these type of games extinct one day.

In football, Action PC Football is very popular for this style of play. It also has way more in-game coaching strategy options than any other game out there.

But can't you do all of that (plus a whole lot more) with OOTP, coupled with the Lahman database? (I don't play that way, so I don't really know.)

oykib · 12-23-2003, 08:08 AM

I've bought three versions of OOTP. But I cn't say that I care tht much for it. I feel that it is just too cumbersome. I really wish Jim would hurry up with Front Office Baseball.

Honestly, the biggest problem with OOTP as compared to DIamond Mind or Strat is the tie-in of ratings to performance.

It is just too likely in OOTP that you hve Barry Bonds have a line like .267-27-67 with 72 walks-- even if he plays 150 games. I suppose that's okay if that's a projection of aging. But it happens too often when you import one of his Ruthian/Ted Williams-eaque years also.

I like Puresim's interface better, but the reliability of the stats are even worse. Of course, I was playing the free version of it. But I've heard the same about the full version.

Ben E Lou · 12-23-2003, 08:14 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by oykib
Honestly, the biggest problem with OOTP as compared to DIamond Mind or Strat is the tie-in of ratings to performance.

It is just too likely in OOTP that you hve Barry Bonds have a line like .267-27-67 with 72 walks-- even if he plays 150 games. I suppose that's okay if that's a projection of aging. But it happens too often when you import one of his Ruthian/Ted Williams-eaque years also.

Ah! If that is the case, then it makes sense that these games can/will survive. There are definitely a significant number of people that want replay accuracy in their players. I didn't realize that the imported games don't do this well.

Isn't there a "single-season" option in OOTP though? I would assume that it would increase the statistical accuracy, but maybe not.

corbes · 12-23-2003, 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by oykib
It is just too likely in OOTP that you hve Barry Bonds have a line like .267-27-67 with 72 walks-- even if he plays 150 games.

I suppose that's one of the things I like about OOTP. I mean, I'm from Philadelphia -- I watched Pat Burrell all damn year.

If Barry Bonds had that line for me, I would interpret it as, "My player is unhappy and wants a change of scenery. I guess I have to trade him."

Maybe I just don't like realism. Or reality.

(edit: irrelevant anecdote deleted)

Scholes · 12-23-2003, 08:36 AM

I used to be a huge Pursue the Pennant/Dynasty League Baseball board gamer... until I figured out that if I played on the computer I wouldn't have to calculate all the stats out.

I am not in the statistical accuracy crowd. The way I see it, if one of those games does their job, then you'd have the real Major League Baseball, and everyone would do exactly as they did in real life, and I just don't see the fun in that.

I like the X factor. Maybe Bonds will bust, or Mike Maroth will win 17 games, that's why I prefer OOTP. I think that the ability to simulate the "alternate" history of baseball for free is a huge addition and the reason I bought OOTP in the first place. What if Kirby Puckett never got a shot, or Sam Horn did? All that stuff is why I play games, not to see if Fernando Vina can walk exactly 44 times in 2002.

That being said, I think what was mentioned earlier about the draft leagues is the appealing point of those games and what most people use them for now. I'm still in a play-by-e--mail Dynasty League Baseball league, though it looks like it may fold this year.

JonInMiddleGA · 12-23-2003, 08:37 AM

Just IMHO, I don't think the replay games are in too much danger of going away, their following is as loyal as the career sims, maybe moreso (since they've been around longer).

Personally, I don't really understand the attraction to an undeviated, no X-factor, replay. But hardcore replayers say the same thing about a fictional universe.

Plus, replay is still selling to the dice-and-chart/tabletop game crowd, something that career-mode doesn't really tap very much, at least not with a real-player starting point.

Honolulu Blue · 12-23-2003, 08:38 AM

I have to echo the sentiments in this thread that yes, there IS still a market for replay sports text sims, for all the reasons stated. There is just one thing I'd like to add - I'm not sure what percentage of SOM, Inc.'s sales is from their computer games, but I suspect it's significantly less than 50%. They still sell lots of board games and cards, and in the past I've found them in hobby stores and even in Toys-R-Us. I don't think that FOF will ever make it into Toys-R-Us.

JimboJ · 12-23-2003, 08:54 AM

Another big thing about these games is they allow you to play out a lot of what-if scenarios. For instance, what if the Phillies had gotten Urbina instead of the Marlins? What if they still had Scott Rolen last year? Could they have won the series?

Of course you could do this with OOTP, but in this case you wouldn't want the X-factor that goes along with it. You would want the players to perform the way they did in real life, only with different teams. I think baseball lends itself to this more than any other sport, since baseball is more of an individual than a team sport.

Huckleberry · 12-23-2003, 09:10 AM

Yeah, I'm one of those weird guys that likes my baseball simulation to be a good simulation of baseball.

Diamond Mind simply has a far superior simulation engine to OOTP. Not even close. As others have said, you can do career leagues with DMB, and you can also use their projection disk so that you don't use the previous season's stats if you don't want to.

The major advantage, as I said, that DMB continues to hold over OOTP is the simulation engine. OOTP5 is still relatively horrendous at producing consistently realistic L/R splits, and many other statistical realities of baseball.

I guess I just don't get the entire premise of this thread. I think it's quite obvious that there is still a market for these games. They're doing well, aren't they?

LastWhiteSoxFanStanding · 12-23-2003, 09:16 AM

And what if Grady Little didn't have his head up his ass and actually, I don't know, took out Pedro Martinez before he gave up ten billion runs.

I think people are overlooking the managing aspect of the game. The managing A.I. in ootp is just a hair above absolutely horrible. In Baseball for Windows (APBA) the managing A.I. is quite good and it is fun to manage every game.

Ben E Lou · 12-23-2003, 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Huckleberry
I guess I just don't get the entire premise of this thread. I think it's quite obvious that there is still a market for these games. They're doing well, aren't they?

Clearly, it wasn't obvious to me when I asked the question, or I wouldn't have asked it in the first place. I had no clue whether or not they've been doing well, as I no longer follow those series closely. I was operating under the assumption that they still even exist. For all any of us know (unless someone has insider knowledge that hasn't come forward), they could be near the point of shutting down.

Remember, I asked this question in the original post:

Quote:

Are they THAT much better than OOTP for in-game management options?

From the responses here, I have learned that apparently, they are. I really had no idea. I very rarely use the in-game stuff in any of the career games. I figured the "single-season" option in OOTP would make manager options better, and provide greater single-season accuracy in stats results. But once again, I don't know, since I've never used it.

JonInMiddleGA · 12-23-2003, 09:23 AM

Huckleberry - I agree that this style isn't going away any time soon, heck I imagine it's larger than the career-sim genre in the U.S. in terms of total sales (as long as you factor in table-top sales)

That said though, I think the basis for the question is pretty valid. From what I see online, the number of people who both styles is pretty small. That makes it easy for someone on either side of the aisle to underestimate the size of the other universe.

It's also why I find the notion of a "dual-purpose" Title Bout so interesting. It could be the first real effort at a game that tries to satisfy hard-core gamers of _both_ types.

FBPro · 12-23-2003, 09:27 AM

I just for the life of me don't see how (pretty much) knowing how a player is going to perform (ala DMB/SOM) for the "next" season is "much" (notice I didn't say any) of a challenge. I am still in a very small local DMB league and for those who "swear" by the game engine, etc...I have seen the same SP start 3 out of 5 games in a series with a full rotation and players rested. Also seen some pretty screwy lineups that the game comes up with. Though it is a pretty good stat generator it's far from "the holy grail".

I'm totally sold on "career" sims (not the kind where you create a career by purchasing 28 seasons disks though).

Leonidas · 12-23-2003, 12:54 PM

We've had this post before. Like many, I was a BIG DMB fan. I even had the old PTP board game the second year it was out. I stayed away from OOTP for a long time. My thing was statistical accuracy. So I understand why many people don't get into OOTP. Recreating history is not it's thing. Creating a new history is. And I like it because now I am into all the uncertainty a real-life GM faces. I don't want to know my guy is supposed to bat .330 and hit 28 HRs this year. I also don't want to know when my start is supposed to have a down year so I can cheat and bench him for some nobody who has his one career year.

All that said, I do agree with the DMB folks who say it has better game play. This is hands-down correct. But one could also say APBA computer football has better game play than FOF. You are missing the point of OOTP by making this assertion. OOTP is not a game day simulator. It is intended to be more like FOF, more of a front office simulator.

Another facet of OOTP I really like is minor leagues. I tried doing this with DMB, but always ran into the problem where guys who hit .400 in just 20 MLB at bats would rule your minors and you wound up with totally unrealistic stats.

Major differences: OOTP is about front office simulation, but just happens to include game play. DMB is mostly about excellent gameplay with very little front office play. OOTP is about player abilities and player growth. DMB is about recreating statistics or statistics based on statistical projections. It does not look one bit at player abilities. OOTP has a virtually unlimited ability to conduct whole new careers. DMB has a very limited ability to project a season ahead.

If you are a stat-head really into recreating baseball history, then DMB is your game. If you want uncertainty and the challenge of running a front office then OOTP is your game.

Capital · 12-23-2003, 01:15 PM

It's interesting you mention that because it wasn't all that long ago, probably 10 years ago, that I would be waiting by the door for the UPS man to deliver my new SOM Baseball and Hockey cards each year. Now, I don't think that I would have the patience to reply a short season and playoffs with all MLB and NHL teams. It appears that I had more patience in my teens than I do in my 30s. I still have fond memories of Strat-O-Matic. In my mind, nothing will ever beat their Hockey board game.

Philliesfan980 · 12-23-2003, 01:43 PM

To really simplify this issue:

OOTP : "Hey, I can do a better job than Billy Beane"

SOM/DMB : "Hey, I can do a better job than Tony Larussa".

I know it sounds simplistic, but its a simple as that. I don't think anyone can argue that OOTP is even close to projecting stats. For that matter, I think OOTP is maybe slightly above console games as far as stat engines go.

Huckleberry · 12-23-2003, 01:47 PM

That is a pretty good simplification. DMB can get boring as a single-player engine, although I still like to play through the upcoming season a few times with the projection disks. It's more enjoyable for me in multiplayer leagues where GM decisions become important based on what everyone else is doing.

It does require more work from the commissioner both continuously and in league setup, there's no doubt about that. And it's obviously much slower-paced with one season per year unless you all get together and do a bunch of historical seasons.

Ben E Lou · 12-23-2003, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Philliesfan980
I know it sounds simplistic, but its a simple as that. I don't think anyone can argue that OOTP is even close to projecting stats. For that matter, I think OOTP is maybe slightly above console games as far as stat engines go.

That makes sense. I haven't given OOTP's ability to project stats even a passing glance. (As I said, I haven't even tried to play in "single-season" mode.

RawIsDan · 12-23-2003, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SkyDog
What is the draw now of Strat?

Well, from running a Strat forum, it seems to be a strong lure to the cards and dice. Their games are just computerized versions of the board game and these guys don't need a career, GM type sim when they play.

They are hardcore and loyal.

Fouts · 12-23-2003, 02:54 PM

I still play APBA Baseball for Windows. They have a program to import players from any season, similar to the lahman database. I continue to play it because the stats produced are good and I'm familiar with their ratings (having grown up with the card/dice version).

I have OOTP5, but some things like Jimmie Foxx importing as a catcher and staying that way his entire career bugs me. In APBA, I would import Jimmie Foxx every season.

rkmsuf · 12-23-2003, 02:57 PM

what's the appeal of simulating something that has already happened and being disappointed when the simulated season fails to mirror the actual season?

Fouts · 12-23-2003, 03:06 PM

I'm not disappointed. I consider that there will be variations, but Gary Sheffield will hit home runs, Pedro will dominate hitters, etc etc.

A big part of it is, I can watch MLB during the year, while pulling for my players in my APBA league. Same deal as fantasy baseball at yahoo, except I can manage those players in home games. That doesn't happen with OOTP leagues.

Huckleberry · 12-23-2003, 03:16 PM

rkmsuf -

Um, because you can put the players on different teams and with different league setups and all of these things mean that the stats will necessarily be different? That and the fact that changing players around will affect the team performance, which is what team sports are all about, right?

edit - I now realize I probably misinterpreted the intent of your question. If that's the case, then nevermind. If not, then "so there".

rkmsuf · 12-23-2003, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Huckleberry
rkmsuf -

Um, because you can put the players on different teams and with different league setups and all of these things mean that the stats will necessarily be different? That and the fact that changing players around will affect the team performance, which is what team sports are all about, right?

I guess but it seems dumb since most factors in that scenario are largely ignored.

Can a west coast guy be happy on the east coast. Do the player and manager have issues. All the non stat stuff is irrelevant in sim world...

Heck just put Manny, Everett and all the wackos out there...they'll get it done...

Huckleberry · 12-23-2003, 03:29 PM

What I find dumbfounding is how anyone can expect a simulation to accurately account for those types of issues. I play with FOF's chemistry off and I'm happier for it.

You'll also be happy to know that baseball studies have shown that the wackos do, in fact, get the job done.

rkmsuf · 12-23-2003, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Huckleberry
What I find dumbfounding is how anyone can expect a simulation to accurately account for those types of issues. I play with FOF's chemistry off and I'm happier for it.

You'll also be happy to know that baseball studies have shown that the wackos do, in fact, get the job done.

So why has Everett been on so many teams and Boston dying to dump Manny if they get it done? In sim world you'd kill for these guys...

Killebrew · 12-23-2003, 03:36 PM

Assuming a FOF quality baseball sim comes out in the next few years I think SOM, DMB, and APBA etc. will die out along with their core user group of aged 50+ simulation replay fans. These games have struggled to keep up with the times and with their user base gradually moving on to more versatile sim engines since Baseball Mogul came on the scene. I don't believe they will be able to continue producing the games as this user base declines, but I hope I am wrong.

Philliesfan980 · 12-23-2003, 03:39 PM

Wow, So you can import any season with APBA?

From what I heard APBA produces just as realistic stats as strat-o-matic. That might be the perfect medium.

Ksyrup · 12-23-2003, 03:45 PM

I'm one of those who played SOM religiously, then dropped it when that Tony LaRussa game came out in the early/mid-90's. Even though the LaRussa game didn't do a career league even moderately well, the thought was enough to stop me from playing SOM (similar to how I dropped BBM when I found FOF). I always longed for the "next step" once a season was finished.

I think (or thought, back then) that one of the most intriguing aspects of replaying a season is the opportunity to try to "do it better" than the manager of the team did it. You take the same players, performing at their same stat levels, and see if you can out-perform the real-life manager - whether it's using a different lineup, playing more "small ball", or running the pitching staff differently.

I can remember taking the 1983 Cleveland Indians, recognizing how awful their starting pitching was, and deciding to start 6 or 7 guys on a 3-5 inning rotation, pulling them as soon as (or before) they got into trouble, and doing the same with the relievers. Basically, every box score looked like an all-star game, with 4-7 pitchers, none going more than 3 or 4 innings. Shawn Hillegas, pitching mostly the 4th through 6th innings, won 17 games for me, and I won 90+ games with a team that IRL probably didn't win more than 70. There's something to be said for that, and at one point, I found that to be a lot of fun. But not anymore.

rkmsuf · 12-23-2003, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ksyrup
I'm one of those who played SOM religiously, then dropped it when that Tony LaRussa game came out in the early/mid-90's. Even though the LaRussa game didn't do a career league even moderately well, the thought was enough to stop me from playing SOM (similar to how I dropped BBM when I found FOF). I always longed for the "next step" once a season was finished.

I think (or thought, back then) that one of the most intriguing aspects of replaying a season is the opportunity to try to "do it better" than the manager of the team did it. You take the same players, performing at their same stat levels, and see if you can out-perform the real-life manager - whether it's using a different lineup, playing more "small ball", or running the pitching staff differently.

I can remember taking the 1983 Cleveland Indians, recognizing how awful their starting pitching was, and deciding to start 6 or 7 guys on a 3-5 inning rotation, pulling them as soon as (or before) they got into trouble, and doing the same with the relievers. Basically, every box score looked like an all-star game, with 4-7 pitchers, none going more than 3 or 4 innings. Shawn Hillegas, pitching mostly the 4th through 6th innings, won 17 games for me, and I won 90+ games with a team that IRL probably didn't win more than 70. There's something to be said for that, and at one point, I found that to be a lot of fun. But not anymore.

I can see that back in the day. I did the same with various football and baseball sims.

Nowdays it seems like a gigantic waste of time and I'd rather watch and second guess the reality version of the sport.

Now an empty cupboard fof game is much more engaging and interesting...

bbo · 12-23-2003, 03:53 PM

I for one love strat. I play baseball,hockey, and football.
I have a wierd thing for those cards, always have since I was 14.
I have been playing every year since then (16yrs) and still enjoy the hell out of it. I like the detail that goes into each player for each sport. I don't care about getting close to real life stats, I care about feeling like the player I am using is as close a replication to the "real" player himself. If he underperforms I trust it's not because of his card (well, not always), it could be that I used him incorrectly.
In OOTP they all feel (well, are) just computer generated names with assigned ratings which mean nothing to me. Anyone with decent programming knowledge can whip something like that up.
Just my own opinion. To each his own.

rkmsuf · 12-23-2003, 03:54 PM

This isn't just b o, it's b b o...

Ksyrup · 12-23-2003, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bbo
I for one love strat. I play baseball,hockey, and football.
I have a wierd thing for those cards, always have since I was 14.
I have been playing every year since then (16yrs) and still enjoy the hell out of it. I like the detail that goes into each player for each sport. I don't care about getting close to real life stats, I care about feeling like the player I am using is as close a replication to the "real" player himself. If he underperforms I trust it's not because of his card (well, not always), it could be that I used him incorrectly.
In OOTP they all feel (well, are) just computer generated names with assigned ratings which mean nothing to me. Anyone with decent programming knowledge can whip something like that up.
Just my own opinion. To each his own.

I suppose one could put as much time into crafting the initial set of "real" players for an OOTP-type game as SOM does, but the point of the game is to make a career, so having an ultra-realistic set of initial players will mean nothing 15 years down the road. The opportunity cost for developing "real, breathing players" for 2003 or 2004 is wasted, when the point of the game is a career-oriented sim. Also - and this is particularly true with baseball -there are far too many games to play each one individually over the span of 20+ years. With SOM, I could see devoting time to playing all 162 games, because that was the end of it. With OOTP, I never play any of the games, I just sim a week at a time. So that attention to detail I don't really see on a game-by-game basis like I would expect to see in an SOM-type game.

Fouts · 12-23-2003, 04:00 PM

Yes, APBA sold an encyclopedia seperate from the game, which allowed importing of individual seasons. I don't believe it is still sold by the company, but you can grab it on ebay.

Ben E Lou · 12-23-2003, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ksyrup
I'm one of those who played SOM religiously, then dropped it when that Tony LaRussa game came out in the early/mid-90's. Even though the LaRussa game didn't do a career league even moderately well, the thought was enough to stop me from playing SOM (similar to how I dropped BBM when I found FOF). I always longed for the "next step" once a season was finished.

I think (or thought, back then) that one of the most intriguing aspects of replaying a season is the opportunity to try to "do it better" than the manager of the team did it. You take the same players, performing at their same stat levels, and see if you can out-perform the real-life manager - whether it's using a different lineup, playing more "small ball", or running the pitching staff differently.

I can remember taking the 1983 Cleveland Indians, recognizing how awful their starting pitching was, and deciding to start 6 or 7 guys on a 3-5 inning rotation, pulling them as soon as (or before) they got into trouble, and doing the same with the relievers. Basically, every box score looked like an all-star game, with 4-7 pitchers, none going more than 3 or 4 innings. Shawn Hillegas, pitching mostly the 4th through 6th innings, won 17 games for me, and I won 90+ games with a team that IRL probably didn't win more than 70. There's something to be said for that, and at one point, I found that to be a lot of fun. But not anymore.

I did that kind of stuff too with SOM. I'm not, by any means, saying I didn't enjoy it. (There's no doubt that if you ranked by hours the games I've played in my lifetime, SOM would be in the top 5.) I'm just like you in that i've moved on.

rkmsuf · 12-23-2003, 04:09 PM

It's kind of odd these companies haven't attempted to branch out into career sims...

Philliesfan980 · 12-23-2003, 04:15 PM

I think it would hamper their sales of career disks.

RawIsDan · 12-23-2003, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by rkmsuf
It's kind of odd these companies haven't attempted to branch out into career sims...

Strat has a small niche in the market and appears satisfied with that. Considering they've been putting out a board game since the 60's and still suriviving tells me they're doing something right and don't want to change it.

JonInMiddleGA · 12-23-2003, 04:22 PM

Quote:

I'm just like you in that i've moved on.

I could have said that at some point, but now I find myself being drawn back to dice/chart/tabletop, actually moreso now than I was 10-20 years ago.

Heck, counting the two packages I'm expecting in the mail soon, 3 of the last 4 game purchases I've made have been tabletop, with only FOF2k4 being computer.

Of my current wish list, there's possibly TBCB on the computer side (and the eventual next-gen of EHM & EWR) but there's probably closer to a half-dozen tabletoppers.

I guess my point is that is appears possible that these preferences could be cyclical rather than permanent.

Huckleberry · 12-23-2003, 04:26 PM

It's all opinions then, which we all knew before the thread even started. Unlike lots of you, I simply find no entertainment in lengthy careers where you just trade one fictitious player for the next fictitious player who's really the same thing with a new made-up name and some slight tweakings to the ratings. To me, that's boring. To you, it's not.

It gets old fast after the first long career. The only joy in simulation games on any level, to me, is in multiplayer. If not for that, then I get burned out on the game after about 3 weeks, tops. Except for CM, if only because it takes forever to sim seasosn, etc. So I guess that's why I lean towards DMB. Once the novelty of the fictitious universe wears off, games like OOTP are completely dead to me except for multiplayer. Whereas with DMB I can make a different trade the next time with real players, set the lineup a little different another time, see what kind of numbers Mark McGwire would put up in Coors Field, or whatever, all based on real players and their real performances. I obviously lean to that side of the equation. Many are with me, many are not. No biggie.

Ben E Lou · 12-23-2003, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by rkmsuf
It's kind of odd these companies haven't attempted to branch out into career sims...

I wrote letters to Strat-O-Matic every single year from around '92-'97 begging for a career sim. Each time, I got a response that they weren't interested in going that direction.

Leonidas · 12-23-2003, 08:09 PM

It's clear everyone has different motivations for playing these games. Funny because it doesn't seem to apply to football. There are no really great historic football games and everyone here seems really happy with FOF (for the most part).

One bottom line factor most will likely agree with though is that DMB and APBA are friggin expensive compared to OOTP. I have spent well over $500 over the years on DMB and only 34.95 on OOTP. I think this is where it will eventually bite those companies in the butt.

lynchjm24 · 12-23-2003, 08:55 PM

Here's a thread on a free dice game I came across today.
Sure looks good on their site.

http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/~fof/for...threadid=19101

Buccaneer · 12-23-2003, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Scholes
I used to be a huge Pursue the Pennant/Dynasty League Baseball board gamer... until I figured out that if I played on the computer I wouldn't have to calculate all the stats out.

I am not in the statistical accuracy crowd. The way I see it, if one of those games does their job, then you'd have the real Major League Baseball, and everyone would do exactly as they did in real life, and I just don't see the fun in that.

I like the X factor. Maybe Bonds will bust, or Mike Maroth will win 17 games, that's why I prefer OOTP. I think that the ability to simulate the "alternate" history of baseball for free is a huge addition and the reason I bought OOTP in the first place. What if Kirby Puckett never got a shot, or Sam Horn did? All that stuff is why I play games, not to see if Fernando Vina can walk exactly 44 times in 2002.

I agree with this. The decisions that Billy Beane faces are far, far more interesting and fun to me than those that Tony LaRussa faces. Additionally, as a lover of history, I am very interesting in 'what if's' and no sports sim ever gave me as much joy as playing the 60s Cardinals or 70s Reds and seeing how things would have been different over time. A game without off-seasons or GM decision-making has no appeal to me whatsoever.

As far as marketability, I think that more gamers love the strategic-level decision making since they are hyped and well publicized. Most of it has to do with dollar and cents - which we all can relate to. Add to that the widespread popularity of trades, free agent signings and of course, the draft, the actual results of a particular game is viewed as simply serving as feedback and validation of your decisions. There are things you can do to enhance your success game to game but I feel GM-level decision making offers much more in the way of results (good or bad). For example, take a look at the interest in the ARod trade negotiations. Or in the NFL draft day analysis and results. Or in deadline baseball trades. People will remember the different ARod trade scenarios (and the domino effect) and would love to see if, as a GM, they could have pulled it off. That's exciting stuff.

PilotMan · 12-24-2003, 08:50 AM

SOM is making huge money off their game at TSN. A fun,but outrageously overpriced game based off their cards.

I played SOM since I was 9, all of the games, basketball, football, baseball, hockey, even have all the college football teams, but when I found the career sim, my playing days were done.

I still love it and it has a place in my heart, but it is just not the thing that holds me any more.

OldGiants · 12-24-2003, 03:02 PM

Much of the appeal of SOM and APBA is the collectability of the old cards. There's a certain appeal to holding the Roger Maris 61 HR card in your hand that is lacking from the computer sim games. OOTP tries for this effect with the player picture, and that is a solid effect, but there's still nothing to put your hands on but the keyboard.

Having dice, cards and the APBA shaker cup made those games tactile in a way OOTP can't.

In addition, the OOTP seasons evaporate when you delete the season, while the reality of the player cards is always there. Plus, there is a commonality of everyone playing the season and comparing results.

Do I play APBA and SOM anymore? No.

Will I go back to playing them? No.

Am I about to tell my wife I'm going up to attic to look for more Christmas ornaments? Yes.

Will I instead actually pull out my boxes of SOM cards and renew acquaintances with old friends? You bet.

Bye. Have a Merry Christmas, y'all.

FargoFreez aka fof playa · 12-24-2003, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by OldGiants
Will I instead actually pull out my boxes of SOM cards and renew acquaintances with old friends? You bet.

Dare I say yet another Festivus miracle!

12-23-2003, 07:38 AM	#2
JimboJ High School Varsity Join Date: Aug 2003	It's not that they are limited to one season. It's just one season per year. There are still a lot of draft leagues for these games, where the owners make trades, sign free agents, etc. Then when the new player discs come out each year, you get to keep your players from last year, and you have a rookie draft for the new players. I believe both of the games you mentioned have utilities to facilitate this. Then they just play out the season at a leisurely pace over the course of the year, until the next season disc comes out. Think fantasy baseball, only you get to manage each game. And these games both have many in-game strategy options. Of course the basic problem with these is you are using players' stats from the previous year, so you know in advance how each player will perform. I think this limitation is what will eventually make these type of games extinct one day. In football, Action PC Football is very popular for this style of play. It also has way more in-game coaching strategy options than any other game out there. Last edited by JimboJ : 12-23-2003 at 07:42 AM.

12-23-2003, 08:37 AM	#9
JonInMiddleGA Hall Of Famer Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Behind Enemy Lines in Athens, GA	Just IMHO, I don't think the replay games are in too much danger of going away, their following is as loyal as the career sims, maybe moreso (since they've been around longer). Personally, I don't really understand the attraction to an undeviated, no X-factor, replay. But hardcore replayers say the same thing about a fictional universe. Plus, replay is still selling to the dice-and-chart/tabletop game crowd, something that career-mode doesn't really tap very much, at least not with a real-player starting point. __________________ "I lit another cigarette. Unless I specifically inform you to the contrary, I am always lighting another cigarette." - from a novel by Martin Amis

12-23-2003, 09:10 AM	#12
Huckleberry College Starter Join Date: Dec 2001	Yeah, I'm one of those weird guys that likes my baseball simulation to be a good simulation of baseball. Diamond Mind simply has a far superior simulation engine to OOTP. Not even close. As others have said, you can do career leagues with DMB, and you can also use their projection disk so that you don't use the previous season's stats if you don't want to. The major advantage, as I said, that DMB continues to hold over OOTP is the simulation engine. OOTP5 is still relatively horrendous at producing consistently realistic L/R splits, and many other statistical realities of baseball. I guess I just don't get the entire premise of this thread. I think it's quite obvious that there is still a market for these games. They're doing well, aren't they? __________________ The one thing all your failed relationships have in common is you. The Barking Carnival (Longhorn-centered sports blog) College Football Adjusted Stats and Ratings

12-23-2003, 09:23 AM	#15
JonInMiddleGA Hall Of Famer Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Behind Enemy Lines in Athens, GA	Huckleberry - I agree that this style isn't going away any time soon, heck I imagine it's larger than the career-sim genre in the U.S. in terms of total sales (as long as you factor in table-top sales) That said though, I think the basis for the question is pretty valid. From what I see online, the number of people who both styles is pretty small. That makes it easy for someone on either side of the aisle to underestimate the size of the other universe. It's also why I find the notion of a "dual-purpose" Title Bout so interesting. It could be the first real effort at a game that tries to satisfy hard-core gamers of _both_ types. __________________ "I lit another cigarette. Unless I specifically inform you to the contrary, I am always lighting another cigarette." - from a novel by Martin Amis

12-23-2003, 09:27 AM	#16
FBPro College Starter Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: SE	I just for the life of me don't see how (pretty much) knowing how a player is going to perform (ala DMB/SOM) for the "next" season is "much" (notice I didn't say any) of a challenge. I am still in a very small local DMB league and for those who "swear" by the game engine, etc...I have seen the same SP start 3 out of 5 games in a series with a full rotation and players rested. Also seen some pretty screwy lineups that the game comes up with. Though it is a pretty good stat generator it's far from "the holy grail". I'm totally sold on "career" sims (not the kind where you create a career by purchasing 28 seasons disks though). __________________ GM RayCo Raiders-est. 2004-2012 Charter member of the IHOF-RayCo GM GM Tennessee Titans PFL 2011-2014 GM Tennessee Titans FOWL 2020-2025

12-23-2003, 08:08 AM	#5
oykib College Starter Join Date: Oct 2000	I've bought three versions of OOTP. But I cn't say that I care tht much for it. I feel that it is just too cumbersome. I really wish Jim would hurry up with Front Office Baseball. Honestly, the biggest problem with OOTP as compared to DIamond Mind or Strat is the tie-in of ratings to performance. It is just too likely in OOTP that you hve Barry Bonds have a line like .267-27-67 with 72 walks-- even if he plays 150 games. I suppose that's okay if that's a projection of aging. But it happens too often when you import one of his Ruthian/Ted Williams-eaque years also. I like Puresim's interface better, but the reliability of the stats are even worse. Of course, I was playing the free version of it. But I've heard the same about the full version.

12-23-2003, 08:36 AM	#8
Scholes High School Varsity Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: St. Paul, MN	I used to be a huge Pursue the Pennant/Dynasty League Baseball board gamer... until I figured out that if I played on the computer I wouldn't have to calculate all the stats out. I am not in the statistical accuracy crowd. The way I see it, if one of those games does their job, then you'd have the real Major League Baseball, and everyone would do exactly as they did in real life, and I just don't see the fun in that. I like the X factor. Maybe Bonds will bust, or Mike Maroth will win 17 games, that's why I prefer OOTP. I think that the ability to simulate the "alternate" history of baseball for free is a huge addition and the reason I bought OOTP in the first place. What if Kirby Puckett never got a shot, or Sam Horn did? All that stuff is why I play games, not to see if Fernando Vina can walk exactly 44 times in 2002. That being said, I think what was mentioned earlier about the draft leagues is the appealing point of those games and what most people use them for now. I'm still in a play-by-e--mail Dynasty League Baseball league, though it looks like it may fold this year.

12-23-2003, 08:38 AM	#10
Honolulu Blue Dynasty Boy Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Michigan	I have to echo the sentiments in this thread that yes, there IS still a market for replay sports text sims, for all the reasons stated. There is just one thing I'd like to add - I'm not sure what percentage of SOM, Inc.'s sales is from their computer games, but I suspect it's significantly less than 50%. They still sell lots of board games and cards, and in the past I've found them in hobby stores and even in Toys-R-Us. I don't think that FOF will ever make it into Toys-R-Us.

12-23-2003, 08:54 AM	#11
JimboJ High School Varsity Join Date: Aug 2003	Another big thing about these games is they allow you to play out a lot of what-if scenarios. For instance, what if the Phillies had gotten Urbina instead of the Marlins? What if they still had Scott Rolen last year? Could they have won the series? Of course you could do this with OOTP, but in this case you wouldn't want the X-factor that goes along with it. You would want the players to perform the way they did in real life, only with different teams. I think baseball lends itself to this more than any other sport, since baseball is more of an individual than a team sport.

12-23-2003, 09:16 AM	#13
LastWhiteSoxFanStanding College Starter Join Date: Jun 2003	And what if Grady Little didn't have his head up his ass and actually, I don't know, took out Pedro Martinez before he gave up ten billion runs. I think people are overlooking the managing aspect of the game. The managing A.I. in ootp is just a hair above absolutely horrible. In Baseball for Windows (APBA) the managing A.I. is quite good and it is fun to manage every game.

12-23-2003, 12:54 PM	#17
Leonidas College Benchwarmer Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: East Anglia	We've had this post before. Like many, I was a BIG DMB fan. I even had the old PTP board game the second year it was out. I stayed away from OOTP for a long time. My thing was statistical accuracy. So I understand why many people don't get into OOTP. Recreating history is not it's thing. Creating a new history is. And I like it because now I am into all the uncertainty a real-life GM faces. I don't want to know my guy is supposed to bat .330 and hit 28 HRs this year. I also don't want to know when my start is supposed to have a down year so I can cheat and bench him for some nobody who has his one career year. All that said, I do agree with the DMB folks who say it has better game play. This is hands-down correct. But one could also say APBA computer football has better game play than FOF. You are missing the point of OOTP by making this assertion. OOTP is not a game day simulator. It is intended to be more like FOF, more of a front office simulator. Another facet of OOTP I really like is minor leagues. I tried doing this with DMB, but always ran into the problem where guys who hit .400 in just 20 MLB at bats would rule your minors and you wound up with totally unrealistic stats. Major differences: OOTP is about front office simulation, but just happens to include game play. DMB is mostly about excellent gameplay with very little front office play. OOTP is about player abilities and player growth. DMB is about recreating statistics or statistics based on statistical projections. It does not look one bit at player abilities. OOTP has a virtually unlimited ability to conduct whole new careers. DMB has a very limited ability to project a season ahead. If you are a stat-head really into recreating baseball history, then DMB is your game. If you want uncertainty and the challenge of running a front office then OOTP is your game. __________________ Molon labe

12-23-2003, 01:15 PM	#18
Capital High School Varsity Join Date: Oct 2000	It's interesting you mention that because it wasn't all that long ago, probably 10 years ago, that I would be waiting by the door for the UPS man to deliver my new SOM Baseball and Hockey cards each year. Now, I don't think that I would have the patience to reply a short season and playoffs with all MLB and NHL teams. It appears that I had more patience in my teens than I do in my 30s. I still have fond memories of Strat-O-Matic. In my mind, nothing will ever beat their Hockey board game.

12-23-2003, 01:43 PM	#19
Philliesfan980 Banned Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Exton, PA	To really simplify this issue: OOTP : "Hey, I can do a better job than Billy Beane" SOM/DMB : "Hey, I can do a better job than Tony Larussa". I know it sounds simplistic, but its a simple as that. I don't think anyone can argue that OOTP is even close to projecting stats. For that matter, I think OOTP is maybe slightly above console games as far as stat engines go. Last edited by Philliesfan980 : 12-23-2003 at 01:44 PM.

12-23-2003, 01:47 PM	#20
Huckleberry College Starter Join Date: Dec 2001	That is a pretty good simplification. DMB can get boring as a single-player engine, although I still like to play through the upcoming season a few times with the projection disks. It's more enjoyable for me in multiplayer leagues where GM decisions become important based on what everyone else is doing. It does require more work from the commissioner both continuously and in league setup, there's no doubt about that. And it's obviously much slower-paced with one season per year unless you all get together and do a bunch of historical seasons. __________________ The one thing all your failed relationships have in common is you. The Barking Carnival (Longhorn-centered sports blog) College Football Adjusted Stats and Ratings

12-23-2003, 02:54 PM	#23
Fouts College Starter Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: California	I still play APBA Baseball for Windows. They have a program to import players from any season, similar to the lahman database. I continue to play it because the stats produced are good and I'm familiar with their ratings (having grown up with the card/dice version). I have OOTP5, but some things like Jimmie Foxx importing as a catcher and staying that way his entire career bugs me. In APBA, I would import Jimmie Foxx every season.

12-23-2003, 02:57 PM	#24
rkmsuf Head Coach Join Date: Dec 2001	what's the appeal of simulating something that has already happened and being disappointed when the simulated season fails to mirror the actual season? __________________ "Don't you have homes?" -- Judge Smales

12-23-2003, 03:06 PM	#25
Fouts College Starter Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: California	I'm not disappointed. I consider that there will be variations, but Gary Sheffield will hit home runs, Pedro will dominate hitters, etc etc. A big part of it is, I can watch MLB during the year, while pulling for my players in my APBA league. Same deal as fantasy baseball at yahoo, except I can manage those players in home games. That doesn't happen with OOTP leagues.

12-23-2003, 03:16 PM	#26
Huckleberry College Starter Join Date: Dec 2001	rkmsuf - Um, because you can put the players on different teams and with different league setups and all of these things mean that the stats will necessarily be different? That and the fact that changing players around will affect the team performance, which is what team sports are all about, right? edit - I now realize I probably misinterpreted the intent of your question. If that's the case, then nevermind. If not, then "so there". __________________ The one thing all your failed relationships have in common is you. The Barking Carnival (Longhorn-centered sports blog) College Football Adjusted Stats and Ratings Last edited by Huckleberry : 12-23-2003 at 03:20 PM.

12-23-2003, 03:29 PM	#28
Huckleberry College Starter Join Date: Dec 2001	What I find dumbfounding is how anyone can expect a simulation to accurately account for those types of issues. I play with FOF's chemistry off and I'm happier for it. You'll also be happy to know that baseball studies have shown that the wackos do, in fact, get the job done. __________________ The one thing all your failed relationships have in common is you. The Barking Carnival (Longhorn-centered sports blog) College Football Adjusted Stats and Ratings

12-23-2003, 03:36 PM	#30
Killebrew H.S. Freshman Team Join Date: Feb 2003	Assuming a FOF quality baseball sim comes out in the next few years I think SOM, DMB, and APBA etc. will die out along with their core user group of aged 50+ simulation replay fans. These games have struggled to keep up with the times and with their user base gradually moving on to more versatile sim engines since Baseball Mogul came on the scene. I don't believe they will be able to continue producing the games as this user base declines, but I hope I am wrong.

12-23-2003, 03:39 PM	#31
Philliesfan980 Banned Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Exton, PA	Wow, So you can import any season with APBA? From what I heard APBA produces just as realistic stats as strat-o-matic. That might be the perfect medium.

12-23-2003, 03:45 PM	#32
Ksyrup This guy has posted so much, his fingers are about to fall off. Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: In Absentia	I'm one of those who played SOM religiously, then dropped it when that Tony LaRussa game came out in the early/mid-90's. Even though the LaRussa game didn't do a career league even moderately well, the thought was enough to stop me from playing SOM (similar to how I dropped BBM when I found FOF). I always longed for the "next step" once a season was finished. I think (or thought, back then) that one of the most intriguing aspects of replaying a season is the opportunity to try to "do it better" than the manager of the team did it. You take the same players, performing at their same stat levels, and see if you can out-perform the real-life manager - whether it's using a different lineup, playing more "small ball", or running the pitching staff differently. I can remember taking the 1983 Cleveland Indians, recognizing how awful their starting pitching was, and deciding to start 6 or 7 guys on a 3-5 inning rotation, pulling them as soon as (or before) they got into trouble, and doing the same with the relievers. Basically, every box score looked like an all-star game, with 4-7 pitchers, none going more than 3 or 4 innings. Shawn Hillegas, pitching mostly the 4th through 6th innings, won 17 games for me, and I won 90+ games with a team that IRL probably didn't win more than 70. There's something to be said for that, and at one point, I found that to be a lot of fun. But not anymore. __________________ M's pitcher Miguel Batista: "Now, I feel like I've had everything. I've talked pitching with Sandy Koufax, had Kenny G play for me. Maybe if I could have an interview with God, then I'd be served. I'd be complete."

12-23-2003, 03:53 PM	#34
bbo n00b Join Date: Oct 2002	I for one love strat. I play baseball,hockey, and football. I have a wierd thing for those cards, always have since I was 14. I have been playing every year since then (16yrs) and still enjoy the hell out of it. I like the detail that goes into each player for each sport. I don't care about getting close to real life stats, I care about feeling like the player I am using is as close a replication to the "real" player himself. If he underperforms I trust it's not because of his card (well, not always), it could be that I used him incorrectly. In OOTP they all feel (well, are) just computer generated names with assigned ratings which mean nothing to me. Anyone with decent programming knowledge can whip something like that up. Just my own opinion. To each his own. __________________ Brian http://home.comcast.net/~dicegames/

12-23-2003, 03:54 PM	#35
rkmsuf Head Coach Join Date: Dec 2001	This isn't just b o, it's b b o... __________________ "Don't you have homes?" -- Judge Smales

12-23-2003, 04:00 PM	#37
Fouts College Starter Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: California	Yes, APBA sold an encyclopedia seperate from the game, which allowed importing of individual seasons. I don't believe it is still sold by the company, but you can grab it on ebay.

12-23-2003, 04:09 PM	#39
rkmsuf Head Coach Join Date: Dec 2001	It's kind of odd these companies haven't attempted to branch out into career sims... __________________ "Don't you have homes?" -- Judge Smales

12-23-2003, 04:15 PM	#40
Philliesfan980 Banned Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Exton, PA	I think it would hamper their sales of career disks.

12-23-2003, 04:26 PM	#43
Huckleberry College Starter Join Date: Dec 2001	It's all opinions then, which we all knew before the thread even started. Unlike lots of you, I simply find no entertainment in lengthy careers where you just trade one fictitious player for the next fictitious player who's really the same thing with a new made-up name and some slight tweakings to the ratings. To me, that's boring. To you, it's not. It gets old fast after the first long career. The only joy in simulation games on any level, to me, is in multiplayer. If not for that, then I get burned out on the game after about 3 weeks, tops. Except for CM, if only because it takes forever to sim seasosn, etc. So I guess that's why I lean towards DMB. Once the novelty of the fictitious universe wears off, games like OOTP are completely dead to me except for multiplayer. Whereas with DMB I can make a different trade the next time with real players, set the lineup a little different another time, see what kind of numbers Mark McGwire would put up in Coors Field, or whatever, all based on real players and their real performances. I obviously lean to that side of the equation. Many are with me, many are not. No biggie. __________________ The one thing all your failed relationships have in common is you. The Barking Carnival (Longhorn-centered sports blog) College Football Adjusted Stats and Ratings

12-23-2003, 08:09 PM	#45
Leonidas College Benchwarmer Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: East Anglia	It's clear everyone has different motivations for playing these games. Funny because it doesn't seem to apply to football. There are no really great historic football games and everyone here seems really happy with FOF (for the most part). One bottom line factor most will likely agree with though is that DMB and APBA are friggin expensive compared to OOTP. I have spent well over $500 over the years on DMB and only 34.95 on OOTP. I think this is where it will eventually bite those companies in the butt. __________________ Molon labe

12-23-2003, 08:55 PM	#46
lynchjm24 College Benchwarmer Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Hartford	Here's a thread on a free dice game I came across today. Sure looks good on their site. http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/~fof/for...threadid=19101

12-24-2003, 08:50 AM	#48
PilotMan Head Coach Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Seven miles up	SOM is making huge money off their game at TSN. A fun,but outrageously overpriced game based off their cards. I played SOM since I was 9, all of the games, basketball, football, baseball, hockey, even have all the college football teams, but when I found the career sim, my playing days were done. I still love it and it has a place in my heart, but it is just not the thing that holds me any more. __________________ He's just like if Snow White was competitive, horny, and capable of beating the shit out of anyone that called her Pops. Like Steam? Join the FOFC Steam group here: http://steamcommunity.com/groups/FOFConSteam

12-24-2003, 03:02 PM	#49
OldGiants College Benchwarmer Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Location, Location, Location	Much of the appeal of SOM and APBA is the collectability of the old cards. There's a certain appeal to holding the Roger Maris 61 HR card in your hand that is lacking from the computer sim games. OOTP tries for this effect with the player picture, and that is a solid effect, but there's still nothing to put your hands on but the keyboard. Having dice, cards and the APBA shaker cup made those games tactile in a way OOTP can't. In addition, the OOTP seasons evaporate when you delete the season, while the reality of the player cards is always there. Plus, there is a commonality of everyone playing the season and comparing results. Do I play APBA and SOM anymore? No. Will I go back to playing them? No. Am I about to tell my wife I'm going up to attic to look for more Christmas ornaments? Yes. Will I instead actually pull out my boxes of SOM cards and renew acquaintances with old friends? You bet. Bye. Have a Merry Christmas, y'all. __________________ "The case of Great Britain is the most astonishing in this matter of inequality of rights in world soccer championships. The way they explained it to me as a child, God is one but He's three: Father, Son and Holy Ghost. I could never understand it. And I still don't understand why Great Britain is one but she's four....while [others] continue to be no more than one despite the diverse nationalities that make them up." Eduardo Galeano, SOCCER IN SUN AND SHADOW

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)