How do you prefer to play your sims?

[Guest IrishHand]

When you play sports sims, regardless of the sport, do you prefer fictional teams/players or real teams/players? To be perfectly clear: Fictional teams/players - usually sports sims come with default fictional teams and rosters. CM is the only game that I can think of offhand that doesn't do this. Basically, you play in a totally fictional world with fictional teams and players which are created by the game every time you begin a new league. Real teams/players - frequently, these are user-created modules. For an American football game (FOF, TPF) this would be an NFL simulation, for basketball, the NBA, etc.

[Danny]

I usually use both. If I had to only pick one, probably fictional, if the players are randomly created each time you start a new game.

[Guest IrishHand]

Yeah...I probably should have had "use both equally" as an option. Oh well - it'll be like an election - need to pick one candidate or the other. :)

[Maximus]

I voted *Primarily fictional, I sometimes use the real teams/rosters*. I use real teams but with fictional players. I do this because with real players the ratings are already determined and its easy to say "I want that guy because he's good in real life". If that makes any sense. :)

[Paul]

Fictional is the only way I play. I love to create my own little universe. :)

[Ja7482]

[QUOTE=Paul]Fictional is the only way I play. I love to create my own little universe. :)[/QUOTE] I agree with Paul, having a game create it's own universe is much more fun for me. It really pays off once you get 2 to 3 years into the sim universe and you begin to recognize and relate to the fictional players like you would real life athletes. Also the mystery factor [B]at the beginning[/B] really can't be reproduced with real life rosters, just cause sports fanatics that use real data already know who the best athletes are in the sim world and know more or less what to expect out of each team depending on the athletes on the team (if your playing a team based sim).

[Dean]

Fictional, although I have only ever played wrestling sims the real updates are never as well rounded or 100% finished whereas fictional is rounded, finished and IMO more interesting. Dean

[Powerguy]

I usually start out playing with real life data until I get a good grip of the game. Then I go on to fictional.

[Wranglers110]

It's easier for me to get attached when familiar names and teams are present...

[Arlie Rahn]

I like fictional as it allows a fresh look at the universe. Having known players often gives me biases that may not be accurate in the game.

[TC Dale]

Fictional for me. I have always rated players differently than the creators, and sometimes it is a homer factor, or a beloved player that I felt never got the props for his career. I love the fictional side, because so much more can be done and created with it, there are no "that isn't how Low Ki or Shaq would play the game". I tend to make historical/fictional worlds, smaller than the game today. I like creating the whole premise, from towns/cities, to other things, like logos and banners, team histories, etc, and real rosters aren't going to give me the same feel as a fictional one. We all have prejudices about players, yesterday and today's. Arlie and Gary might see Labron James higher than I would, where Vibert might see a east coast player stronger than I would since I live in a different part of the country. With fictional, you don't have these prejudices. :) I love the real rosters for multiplayer mode, but for me it is fictional that grabs my attention.

[Guest IrishHand]

I never, ever use fictional teams or players. My reason for playing sports sims is simple - I would love, as many fans would, to be the GM of my favorite team. I share the common delusion of most sports fans that given the opportunity, I could do it better than the real-life GM. I want to step into his shoes, take over his situation, and see what I can do. I read people above noting they don't want to be prejudiced by their pre-conceptions of real players. Isn't that precisely what real-world GMs deal with every day of their lives? Everyone's opinion is just that - an opinion. There's no absolute "value" for any player in any sport. I have a certain idea in my mind of what kind of player Shaq is and what he can add to a team. You may have a different idea. The Laker's GM has yet another perspective, as does the Miami GM. When you start a sports sim league using "real" rosters, you are doing just that - stepping into the shoes of the real-world GM. You have certain pre-conceptions of guys which you promptly compare to your initial scouting reports. Perhaps you discover that your coaching staff doesn't think that Shaq is as good a passer as you think he is. Such is life - after half a season, you'll have an even better idea of how good a passer he is. Maybe you notice that most of his turnovers come when he drives to the hoop and gets stripped. You also notice that he's among the top 5 centers in terms of assists per game. You rightly conclude that despite your coach's scouted ratings, Shaq is indeed a very good passer for a center. Or maybe you discover that he's not as good as you suspected. That's no different than the real world. (Shaq's probably not the best example since he's played so many years and people's opinions of him are pretty uniform. I real also that some people don't like real rosters because the rosters might not reflect their views on players. Well, if the roster set is crappy that's one thing - but if you have a roster set which is based 99% on past performance, meaning statistics, it's tough to win on this point. You think Antoine Walker is a great 3-point shooter? Good for you. He's a career 32.6% shooter from behind the arc - and in any half-decent roster set, his 3P% rating will be 33%. Some years he'll shoot 30% others 36% - but he'll always be in the right ballpark. Players are what they are...there isn't a ton of subjectivity to them, or at least their pasts. If it's potential and future development that you're concerned with, then I would argue that those elements lie in the game's design. An effective, dynamic and immersive game will ensure that a given group of players (meaning that real roster set) develops differently every time you play. Dwight Howard might turn into Kevin Garnett one time and Kwame Brown the next. LeBron James might turn into a mini-Jordan, or he might just be a mini-Penny (Hardaway). To me, starting with fictional players and teams is totally contrived and unrealistic. If you were ever to take over as the GM of a pro sports team, you would take over a roster full of players you thought you knew in a league with teams you thought you understood. Certainly, you would learn that perhaps not all your players are precisely what you expected. The notion of starting with a "fictional" league would be like getting hired to be the GM of a team in the Uzbekistan regional league. Sure, you have no idea about any team or any player - but where's the realism in that? You have to spend a big chunk of time right off the bat just getting familiar with your squad. Furthermore, you can't control the challenge level. With "real" rosters, just like in the real world, you can embrace an extreme challenge by taking over a downtrodden team (think the Clippers, Hawks in the NBA, the Bengals, Chargers in the NFL, etc) and doing all that you can to rebuild them. Each to their own, of course - I play sports sims to pretend I'm the GM of a pro sports team. Others evidently play for different reasons... Irish

[Guest [Icy]]

Exactly my thoughts Irishhand, i only play with real rosters, apart of the fun of trying to be a real GM, i like a lot how much i learn about real players/teams, for example, from years playing the CM series, i know tons of players and teams around the world and i like to follow their careers also in real life. The same for the NFL and NBA.

[DannyDemon]

[QUOTE=Paul]Fictional is the only way I play. I love to create my own little universe. :)[/QUOTE] im the same i love to be in control just ask my gir........& ill stop there lol :p

[Tiger Fan]

I prefer real-life but historical rather than modern day. Although with my 1940's allsports replay I found a hybrid league, combining real-life greats that I rated myself along with some fictional players has been my preferred method of play.

[andjbock]

I have always done fictional with the exception of the roster set you made for last year's game and one online league in OOTP. I'll be creating a roster set of the fictional league I used to track on my Apple IIGS while playing the games out via nerf ball.

[Dan Theman]

Hmm - "nerf ball." What system does that run on? :D I'm a fictional man myself. I used to do historical & current rosters, but I hated the fact that I kept comparing the differences to real life, and it bothered me internally so I made the conversion several years back.

[Bryan Swartz]

I used to use fictional rosters because the differences between real life and the best game representation of real life were too dramatic. With TPB 03 I found the differences to be significant but tolerable in Irish's set -- mostly because of game mechanics, not any fault on his part. I agree with his logic and will use his 05 rosters, worshipping profusely along the way.

[Payne]

I didn't vote, because my option wasn't there. I always mix the real with the fictional

[andjbock]

Someone has to say it... I play them buck ass naked!

[Guest IrishHand]

[QUOTE=Zorromorph]With TPB 03 I found the differences to be significant but tolerable in Irish's set -- mostly because of game mechanics, not any fault on his part.[/quote] Thanks - and I agree - you can never go wrong blaming Gary for any statistical inaccuracies. :D