Thoughts thus far...

[Dirk9827]

My thoughts on the game thus far are overwhelmingly positive, despite the quirks and bugs that will be eventually ironed out. Had he painted the Sistine Chapel, Arlie would have received a equal amount of dissatisfaction in the final work. "Too Biblical." "The figures aren't realistic enough." "Can you move the hand of God a little to the left...." That much said, I shall toss in my two cents after I had a little bit of time to play with this fine effort. 1) I enjoyed the interface but would like to have a more integrated access to team stats. It would also be helpful if there was a quick way to check the schedule, double-click on an opponent, and be able to look at his team (stats, depth charts, schedule, injuries). Perhaps it could be as easy as click on the schedule and bringing up that team's interface screen (just like the one your team has). 2) The play-by-play could use some more flushing out....When my return man takes the ball 84 yards to the opponent's 15 yard line, I would think it would merit more description than, "Johnson returns ball to the 15 yard line." (And below the kick return is listed as 84 yards). At first, I didn't notice the 84 and thought the player had returned it to our own 15. On more than one occasion, the a receiver caught a ball but stepped out on the "end line." I think you mean sideline. The end line is the back end of either end zone. My receiver caught the ball at midfield on a short out pattern. On the subject of sidelines, it seems the announcer either doesn't have good eyesight or I have just the luck of running into a preponderance of plays involving miscalls. A big gain is called back when the referee says the guy stepped out of bounds at the 34....A caught completion is waived off when another ref calls it incomplete. Obviously, this is part of the game and I am really glad to see this included. It's just that these calls seem to come up often when I play. Maybe too often? Or is it just a case of not playing enough games to see it even out? The long pass for a short game bug has been noted. Significant problems in the penalty area also are noted. 3) On the plays... I cannot imagine a team not having a play designed to attack every hole on the offensive line, even if it just a simple dive play. On that note, there is nothing to really clue you in too much about what the lead back or linemen are doing on a particular play. Surely, there is a difference between a power, a dive, the belly option, the veer, and pure option attacks. If I were to run a run-orientated offense, I would expect plays to include traps, flexes, double teams blocks, and counters. And I would have to recruit players appropriately. For example, in an offense that utilizes the power sweep, I would expect at least one guard to pull, maybe both. This requires quick guards. In a veer offense, the blocking ability of the tight end is paramount to its success. Perhaps I am a tad sensitive to this as I played on the offensive line, but it's not just the case of a bunch of big guys relying entirely upon size and strength. It's about quickness, agility, recognizing the defense (and in the case of the center) calling out any adjustments. The ability of an offense to trap effectively is based upon speed and agility of the linemen, and countered by the ability of a defensive end or tackle to recognize the trap and close down the hole. The end can be positively huge and incredibly strong, but if he can't recognize a trap he is going to be a sitting duck. The reason I make this request is simply it would aid in play calling. Let's say No. 1 guard is out and the replacement isn't too fleet footed. I might not call as many sweeps if it relies upon his ability to get outside and lead the train of blockers. Surely, I will call one or two to keep the other team honest, but that's about it. And if there is no way to really know what the assignments of the offensive linemen are on a particular play, it’s going to be tough to figure out what factors weight on its ultimate success of failure. Does that make sense? What do others think? Thanks for the game, Arlie. Dirk

[BYU 14]

I agree, though a large portion of teams now run zone blocking and stretch schemes designed to open up cutback lanes there are still usually traps, Power sweeps and the like in the offense. Also the veer has made a bit of a comeback as a lot of teams now run it out of shotgun in the spread offense. It also would be nice to run a legit Wing-T scheme with the Trap, Buck Sweep and Boot. Even though that scheme hasn't been popular in College ball for 20 odd years it is still used heavily at the High School level and a great offense :) I kind of invision Play calling becoming more robust down the road in the form of Mods perhaps, or as something Arlie can incorporate in a future update......It would definitely be fun to open that area up for the users to contribute to. I would be happy to share plays/ideas on the Wing-T and Veer.

[SkyDog]

[QUOTE=BYU 14]I agree, though a large portion of teams now run zone blocking and stretch schemes designed to open up cutback lanes there are still usually traps, Power sweeps and the like in the offense. Also the veer has made a bit of a comeback as a lot of teams now run it out of shotgun in the spread offense. It also would be nice to run a legit Wing-T scheme with the Trap, Buck Sweep and Boot. Even though that scheme hasn't been popular in College ball for 20 odd years it is still used heavily at the High School level and a great offense :) I kind of invision Play calling becoming more robust down the road in the form of Mods perhaps, or as something Arlie can incorporate in a future update......It would definitely be fun to open that area up for the users to contribute to. I would be happy to share plays/ideas on the Wing-T and Veer.[/QUOTE]Yeah. The Wing-T definitely needs an upgrade eventually.

[Hoos]

Along the lines of the option attack- It would be nice if the AI knew to put a rb in the wing back depth chart slot if you are running an option offense as well as allow you to assign a % of the carries to the wing back position.

[SkyDog]

[QUOTE=Hoos]Along the lines of the option attack- It would be nice if the AI knew to put a rb in the wing back depth chart slot if you are running an option offense as well as allow you to assign a % of the carries to the wing back position.[/QUOTE]I mentioned this to Arlie this morning. There won't be a % carries in the 'bone, but he is creating some ways to get the WB the football.

[Jason Warholic]

[QUOTE=Dirk9827]My thoughts on the game thus far are overwhelmingly positive, despite the quirks and bugs that will be eventually ironed out. 1) I enjoyed the interface but would like to have a more integrated access to team stats. It would also be helpful if there was a quick way to check the schedule, double-click on an opponent, and be able to look at his team (stats, depth charts, schedule, injuries). Perhaps it could be as easy as click on the schedule and bringing up that team's interface screen (just like the one your team has).[/QUOTE] Your first question might be answered by using the team tabs at the bottom of the screen, which basically serve this purpose. Your team is listed by default, and all the teams on your schedule in order appear in the team tabs after yours. If you click on a team tab, the team summary area at the bottom changes to that team, and then if you use the control panel options on the left of the screen, you can access any information about that team. When you want to return to your team, just click the first black tab with the return arrow on it.

[Dirk9827]

Thanks Jason! Will do! I appreciate the feedback of everyone. Your comments are appreciated!

[gambler1650]

Most of the comments you made are ones I agree with. At the very least, on kickoffs, punts or turnover returns of any kind, a simple "returned to the opponent's 30 yard line" instead of just giving the yard line would be appreciated. An interface issue that bugs me is changes aren't saved inside a menu option, especially the 'Depth Chart'. It's a pain to have to click 'Save' for the offense, defense and special teams separately. The 'usual' way most programs work is to hold onto any changes made until you leave the option and then it asks if you want to save. Having it done this way seems counter-intuitive. Ideally it would work like this: Make changes to offense. Make changes to defense. Offensive changes stay in place. Make changes to special teams. Defensive and offensive changes stay in place. Remember to change something else on offense, go back and fix it. All changes so far stay in place. Either click on a save button, or click on 'Yes' when you try to leave the Depth Chart screen and it asks if you want to save (it shouldn't do this if you've made no changes or clicked 'save' and made no changes since that point). Something that might be nice might be a 'Suggest' button for Study Hours. Anyhow, good comments... I think the game is very solid although in some areas not very polished yet.

[Tim Plum]

I like the save button versus the pop-up reminder, I can't stand making changes thinking I'm done and having a pop-up remind to save.

[gambler1650]

Well, it wouldn't pop up if you remembered to save beforehand. :)

[Dirk9827]

BYU, you make a good point about zone blocking schemes. I hadn't really thought that way, but of course, you are absolutely correct. Zone blocking is popular, although I would expect it a technique that places a premium on experience on the line. (This would, of course, generally punish those teams with freshmen on the line). The veer and option derivatives have been run successfully by the University of Washington in the recent past. During the past four years they have moved away from this, unfortunately. (Although a less-than-stellar offensive line has a lot to do with it). Actually, they have moved away from winning football games, period. Gambler, I agree with your solution, it would make things a lot clearer. I liked your other ideas as well. I would add that my thoughts on play by play extends to a little more commentary to build the excitement....a kick return is like going on a blind date...you never know how it is going to turn out. The date is mundane most of the time but every once in a while it’s a whole lot of excitement. To me, it would be great if the game would make more of an effort to give a little color during kicks..."Jenkins takes the punt at the 12, makes the first man miss and finds a seam on the right. Franklin makes a terrific block that springs Jenkins! He crosses into BYU territory and cuts to the inside, one man to beat....and the punter, Anderson, manages to trip up the return man. Jenkins nearly took that one to the house. A 44 yard punt with a 53 yard return!" If there was the option (and I know this could be asking a ton) to allow the game play by play to be modded, that would be fantastic. Or if there was a way to submit play-by-play for consideration for inclusion, I would love to work on such a project. Any self-respecting college football game could use a little color, whether it be Keith Jackson's "Whoa Nelly!" or the occasional wry observation, "Oh my, that's meaner than a Georgia Bulldog looking at a yard full of kitties." I can think of a ton of regional announcers, most of whom the average sports fan will never hear, who have a couple of signature phrases....The trick is to use these sparingly while dedicating the 99.9 percent toward play by play that really paints a picture of what is going on the field....Certainly, the key statistics about mental errors, pancake blocks, and great grabs can be used to trigger play by play worthy of the action on the field. It would also be great (okay, I am hoping for the entire ball of wax) if the announcer would make reference to things that are germane to the locale of the game...For example, you have Touchdown Jesus, Knute Rockne and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse at Notre Dame, the terrific Badger band playing "On Wisconsin", Alabama fans clad in Crimson or the midshipmen of Navy and the cadets of Army in the stands of the Army-Navy game. At the very least the play by play could include relevant information such as, “Bush lined up in the I, with that last run the senior now has 143 yards on 23 carries and a touchdown.” Or, “Gibbs completes his twelfth straight attempt; he is now 15 of 18 for 198 yards.” And then there is the team aspect. “Auburn stuffs another run. Through three quarter Vanderbilt has just 17 yards rushing on 23 carries.” Or “Nebraska hasn’t thrown a pass since the six minute mark of the second quarter.” Or “The last five drives of Arizona have ended in punt, interception, fumble, fumble, interception.” To me, the joy of college football is in the descriptions of the plays, players and the history of the game. The 1960s and 70s USC teams didn’t run the sweep; they ran the “Student Body Left.” Ohio State is Script Ohio, the Sousaphone player running out to dot the ‘I”. Texas A&M has the student section that stands the entire game, and the corps of cadets. The NFL is a largely devoid of these things, save for a few instances. Play by play commentary is tough and arduous to write sometimes. In Diamond Mind Baseball, there is an option to turn off all of the unnecessary “fluff” and just settle for the strict play by play without the color. Obviously the same could be done here. I am an enthusiastic proponent of expanded play by play, and honestly, perhaps most people don’t care. Like most people, I think the demo has provided us with a glimpse into the possibilities, that for once there is a college football simulation that could do justice to the college football experience. I would argue that the play by play would go a long way to fulfill that promise, to capture the excitement of a crisp autumn day.

[Tim Plum]

Remember this is version 1 so making that tremendous of addition/changes would probably not be possible.

[Dirk9827]

Tim, understood. I work in IT, participate in software development and completely agree with your statement. Software changes are rarely trivial. Most changes sound easy, but are akin to moving an aircraft carrier two feet to the left. There are design limiations, database limitations and sometimes choices that are made for very sound reasons that limit what can be done at any given time. My hope for change rests more or less with a future release. Thanks for the consideration.

[Tim Plum]

Knowing Arlie and the steps forward from the PbP of TPF, bbcf is light years ahead so I expect more of bbcf 2.

[Dirk9827]

That's great to hear. Don't get me wrong, I am happy with the current Play by Play, it's just that Bowl Bound holds (and has delivered upon) so much promise. Hey, if the stats were completely disjointed or game play felt completely ridiculous, I wouldn't even be suggesting changes to the Play by Play. It's just that what we got here is a classic car, and (with the exception of few bugs and details that require attention) the Play by Play is the polish to make that thing one fine automobile. Again, thanks for the feedback. It is appreciated. Keep up the good work!

[Tim Plum]

np, as Arlie's chief PbP antagonist I can say this is truly only the beginning.

[uktaurusbulba]

in bb2 Alot of these suggestions and complaints are valid but I guess you have to be realistic. This is the 1st version and the focus should be on gameplay. By this I mean it shouldnt be too easy to pick up top recruits or outcoach teams and hopefully there are no major blunders with computer playcalling, like being behind 2 and going for it when he could kick a field goal, etc. If the statistical engine or AI is screwed up, I cant see anyone staying interested for very long, but if those things are fine, I think version one is a great success. To me, alot of these other things are "extra." I would be happy withvery good AI in terms of gameplay and recruiting. (not making it easy to build a rutgers into miami in a few seasons)

[GridironGamer]

Great post Dirk, and how refreshing to hear such a passion and knowledge for College Football. You should consider designing your own game some day. With your knowledge and love for the game, i'd buy it in a heart beat.

[Arlie Rahn]

Thanks for the feedback, guys. Like Tim said, we are pretty much locking down features now and finalizing testing. Still, I will take note of the different ideas brought up here for future versions.

[Dirk9827]

Thanks Arlie, you have a great game on your hands and again, it's a tremendous advance in sports simulations. All any of us can ask if for consideration of the ideas presented in these forums. Obviously, you have to prioritize what truly is important and what can wait until future releases. I agree with uktaurusbulba, gameplay is the number one consideration (at least in my mind) at this point. Play by Play improvements can wait. GridironGame, thank you for the kind words. I am a lot better at making suggestions than I am at writing code, unfortunately. College football is one of my favorite sports and if it weren't for alumni who felt that it was their right to have a good football team, it would be the perfect sport. Unfortunately, there are a boatload of 45-year-olds in this country who foster all their hopes and dreams upon the shoulders of 20-year-old kids. Forgive me for getting upon my soapbox, but it would be nice if the alumni gave as much a damn about the quality of education as they did about the ranking of recruiting class. You ever read the message boards frequented by the alumini of traditional football powers? The venom aimed at the coaches and players is, uh, scary. I mean, I want my university to win, too, but crimminy, we are talking football here, not the atomic bomb. OK. Rant over. Go team. Thanks again everybody for participating in this thread!