Posted by kas1007 on 2/7/2014 6:15:00 AM (view original):
its not fantastic but I think the guys are trying to make it better, and taken to I thought the possibility of like the how did that happen games. OFan not realizing my point that a running back in Gun formations was little off-putting but will leave that for another day.
No one is really saying this game isn't decent, but it is entering on its 3rd year of development. Engines 1.0 and 2.0 were decent but flawed, same with 3.0. The big question is do we get what we pay for in quality. If you are a gamer, would you pay $120 a year to play any other game if it was rated a 2.5 stars out of 5? Would you buy a game for $50 and then only get to play it 1 hour per day? What we are demanding from this game is a chance to be able to develop a team from players and gameplans and logically be able to play other humans or SIMS with simulations that are identifiable to their outcomes. When you submit a gameplan against another team and then win or lose and not know in either case why, or what to change to improve then we should just develop a dice game and roll every time.
Read the forums, most people really like playing this type of game. But the frustrations are cost for quality and illogical/random/unpredictable game simulation results given the observable inputs.