All Forums > Gridiron Dynasty Football > Gridiron Dynasty > Gridiron Dynasty 3.1 - User Interface Upgrade
5/2/2014 3:27 AM
Posted by keith43 on 4/27/2014 4:21:00 PM (view original):
Congrats WIS on once again completely ignoring the issues that are costing you customers and expected growth/profit. 

Your current, much larger issues are the following: 
-     Improve what you have or perhaps just do it right the first time... Getting, and using, feedback from those of us who've fed this machine for years would be a good start.
-     Actually give coaches an incentive to move up and aspire to D1, don't force their hand. More credits, better competition, anything. Why would anyone take the time and effort to build a dynasty, not to mention the cash, for no reason. What, at a chance to coach at a better known school? Hell I'm a vet, not a great coach but decent, and I went to Notre Dame and would love to be the coach of that team. But with the way you have things set up now there's absolutely no way I have a legit shot at doing that. And how long would it take if I actually took a run at it? And how many "updates or engines" would I have to go through in the process?
-     Customer service. Maybe responding to people at all would be a start. Then perhaps actually listening to their ideas and implementing them would get you closer to solving your current problems.

Again, congrats on running your business into the ground - by not giving a damn about the people who've supported you for years for the chance of enticing new coaches to sample your product. If those who you lure stick around they'll find out the same thing, you care nothing about them and their time and effort, just their cash.
Very true.  


I also finally made it to a top school, and because of the way the system was set up, I literally had 11 open spots at the end of the first recruiting cycle. 

The thing that keeps people away is the fact that you can burn money and still have no idea why you win or lose at any aspect of this game.  You spend more time waiting for things to happen than playing, and when you get comfortable with the game it changes and destroys everything you worked at. There are people with 90% winning rates!  I don't think people like paying for a game called, you lose and I won't tell you why they always win. 

If you want this to be a thriving business model... go free.  Ad revenue will beat dwindling subscribers any day.   Then we could have multiple teams, never stop playing, and this would become another fantasy football instead of a pathetic sport for just a few elites to dominate and get free credits to keep playing forever.  

Have beginner leagues and don't force anyone to play dumbed down in the regular leagues. 
5/2/2014 1:48 PM
Beginner leagues would be a good idea. Tutorials and game guides would be awesome. Making changes to the interface to allow set up to be quicker and easier would be very welcome! Allowing less control over your team unless your willing to move to a new team simply because others don't understand the entire game on day one is ridiculous!
5/2/2014 7:41 PM
Posted by majsheppard on 5/2/2014 3:19:00 AM (view original):
Posted by vikesrule69 on 4/30/2014 3:30:00 PM (view original):
They better fix the SIM BS. Losing to a SIM that is 60+ points lower than a human is unacceptable. It would never happen if 2 humans played with that much difference in ratings!!!
Nope that happens to me way too much.  I have lost two games last year to ****** teams, because my QB decided to run too much even with 2% play call set to run and five fumbles in the two games by him... even though he is the best QB in the division. For whatever reason, only certain positions dominate with high skill sets.  OL, and DL don't dominate with high skills, but DBs and RB with high skills do. 
You should check your playbook. You might have a run wide formation but have it set to run inside or visa versa. If that is the case the QB will run all those.
5/3/2014 12:27 AM

First, I totally understand the frustration of coaches on this board.  While 3 of my 4 teams are at higher levels, I do have one D3 team that I've become quite partial to, and don't want to lose the advanced functionality.

However, it wasn't always like this.  When the Beta was rolled out, I was pretty ticked at the amount of effort to set up playbooks and formations.  But, I was "hooked" on this game, and over time, I was able to build out my offensive and defensive system over the course of a few weeks that I'm not pretty comfortable with.  But, it wasn't easy, and at least I had some game experience to draw from.  The vast amount of new users simply are not going to put that amount of effort into the game, which is why retention of new coaches was low when 3.0 was launched.

Creating the basic version will allow new users to come into the game, and not be overwhelmed at the work that advanced requires.  As they grow in their knowledge and desire to move up, they'll have a foundation and enjoyment for the game, where the increased work won't be such a burden. 

The bottom line is we need new coaches to fill worlds.  We all want that and the game is more fun as conferences expand with more humans.  If WIS creates "basic worlds", we don't solve the problem of near-empty worlds, because new users won't choose the advanced worlds, nor would we want them to because they'll get fed up and leave. 

Yes, it absolutely does stink what is happening to those D3 coaches who want to stay at their programs they built.  But, we need change and we need an influx of new coaches to fill worlds and stay around.  I'm not saying this is the answer to bringing growth to the game, but doing more of the same isn't either.

As Yoda said, "patience, Jedi".

5/3/2014 7:25 AM
Posted by chetty1963 on 5/3/2014 12:27:00 AM (view original):

First, I totally understand the frustration of coaches on this board.  While 3 of my 4 teams are at higher levels, I do have one D3 team that I've become quite partial to, and don't want to lose the advanced functionality.

However, it wasn't always like this.  When the Beta was rolled out, I was pretty ticked at the amount of effort to set up playbooks and formations.  But, I was "hooked" on this game, and over time, I was able to build out my offensive and defensive system over the course of a few weeks that I'm not pretty comfortable with.  But, it wasn't easy, and at least I had some game experience to draw from.  The vast amount of new users simply are not going to put that amount of effort into the game, which is why retention of new coaches was low when 3.0 was launched.

Creating the basic version will allow new users to come into the game, and not be overwhelmed at the work that advanced requires.  As they grow in their knowledge and desire to move up, they'll have a foundation and enjoyment for the game, where the increased work won't be such a burden. 

The bottom line is we need new coaches to fill worlds.  We all want that and the game is more fun as conferences expand with more humans.  If WIS creates "basic worlds", we don't solve the problem of near-empty worlds, because new users won't choose the advanced worlds, nor would we want them to because they'll get fed up and leave. 

Yes, it absolutely does stink what is happening to those D3 coaches who want to stay at their programs they built.  But, we need change and we need an influx of new coaches to fill worlds and stay around.  I'm not saying this is the answer to bringing growth to the game, but doing more of the same isn't either.

As Yoda said, "patience, Jedi".

I think we all agree that a set of interface improvements would be a welcome change. It WAS a pain in the *** to get set up in 3.0.

We also agree that retaining new coaches is a worthwhile goal.

Nowhere in here (and certainly nowhere is any of oriole's comments), though, is there an articulation or what benefit is served by imposing "beginner mode" on all DIII coaches. Wouldn't we achieve your aims by forcing new users to try "beginner mode" for a season or two and then encouraging (not forcing) them to take off the wraps and expand their coaching in advanced mode, while still in DIII?
5/3/2014 11:40 AM
The following makes sense:

- Gridion Dynasty is more fun and more profitable with more users
- New users quit because they don't understand the game
*Therefor, making the game easier to understand should improve retention and improve the Gridiron Dynasty experience.  

The following makes far less sense:

- Gridiron Dynasty is more fun and more profitable with more users
- New users quit because they lose
- Therefore, if we make it less likely they lose, we will improve retention and the Gridiron Dynasty experience.  


A game guide and WIS representative in the forums answering questions would address the first set of circumstances.  The improved setup options announced for 3.1 should also help.  Making the engine more transparent has to be a goal for the future.  I think everyone supports all of this!!!  

The second goal is faulty though because no matter what, someone has to lose.  If you have a world with 100% new coaches, 50% of them will lose each week.  You can't take a game like Football which is built around winning and losing and try to impose restrictions to make it less likely losses occur to improve retention.  No matter if it is old coaches or new coaches, each and every game will have a loss.  

I see some established coaches saying "something needs to be done about empty worlds so I support these changes".  I think we all agree more coaches is more fun.  However, there is no proof limiting current coaches will actually improve new coach retention.  At best this is a hunch.  Most of the coaches who currently play started out losing afterall, yet we remain.  Something has to be done and should be done about empty worlds and new coach retention.  Many of us just don't think *part* of what is being done makes sense.   





5/3/2014 1:59 PM
Exerpt from samson75 - The second goal is faulty though because no matter what, someone has to lose.  If you have a world with 100% new coaches, 50% of them will lose each week.  You can't take a game like Football which is built around winning and losing and try to impose restrictions to make it less likely losses occur to improve retention.  No matter if it is old coaches or new coaches, each and every game will have a loss.  

The biggest thing about this statement that WIS could do is make it much easier to understand WHY you have won or lost. You will lose more coaches if they become frustrated because they have no idea on how to improve so they can win, rather than just by losing some games at first.
5/3/2014 2:06 PM
I don't think coaches quit because they lose. I think they quit because it's too much effort to play the advanced mode. You gotta get them hooked first and then they'll be more likely to stay and be willing to invest more time. That's my opinion, and certainly what WIS is banking on. Time will tell...
5/3/2014 5:52 PM (edited)
Posted by katzphang88 on 5/3/2014 1:59:00 PM (view original):
Exerpt from samson75 - The second goal is faulty though because no matter what, someone has to lose.  If you have a world with 100% new coaches, 50% of them will lose each week.  You can't take a game like Football which is built around winning and losing and try to impose restrictions to make it less likely losses occur to improve retention.  No matter if it is old coaches or new coaches, each and every game will have a loss.  

The biggest thing about this statement that WIS could do is make it much easier to understand WHY you have won or lost. You will lose more coaches if they become frustrated because they have no idea on how to improve so they can win, rather than just by losing some games at first.
I totally agree which fits under the first goal.  Making the game more transparent and easier to understand and providing clear and comprehensive guides and/or places to get answers will increase retention and is something that many coaches have been asking for.  Making the setup easier will certainly help as well as Chetty pointed out.  Again, this is also something coaches have been asking for since Beta.  I guess I agree with Helgi though that the setup can be made easier without limiting established coaches.  The change to div 3 idea just seems out of left field.  It is great to get feedback from one and done coaches who may or may not have stayed and popped in for a free season, but what about all the feedback from paying coaches who are already here?  Regardless, at this point, it is a waste of time to continue discussing this.  Soooooooo, guess time will tell if it works.   

 
5/3/2014 4:30 PM
As a longtime D3 coach in Hayes I worry the D3 level will be destroyed. I have already read where several of the longtime good coaches in this level will move on (either up or out). I for one will not move up. I already have a D2 team and don't desire to have 2 at that level. Moving up in Hayes and moving up in Warner would leave me with 2 rebuilds at the same time. That does not excite me. So what affect will the changes moving forward have on D3. Is WIS doing anything to entice new customers? I recall when WIS provided a free season for those part of there fantasy football challenge. Warner was completely full at the D3 level and Hayes was either full or nearly so. That was during 2.0. How did that work out? The retention rate wasn't great. Some did stay and I see names of coaches that were hooked on the game and accumulated more than one team so it was not an utter failure. So now here we are and what is the plan to attract the new coaches? Did WIS do there due diligence and try to find out why coaches stay at the D3 level? Are they telling new coaches stay at D3 level for only a few seasons as this is a beginner level and then move to a dramatically new game, one in which you are going to find many more experienced coaches who have established teams making it more difficult to build a winning team? I could be wrong but this just doesn't seem well thought out. I for one thought retraction of worlds may be desirable allowing coaches to take their rosters to a different world. Most could probably have done so getting the same school. It would have seemed prudent to me to at least have put out a questionnaire to each of their customers requesting feedback rather than springing this on us with very short notice creating a tremendous amount of animosity. It certainly seems to have caught WIS off guard and now I guess we all live with the consequences.
5/3/2014 9:45 PM
WIS is given an A+ on this update- an A+ in screwing over the D3 coaches! Once again, all they care about is attracting new customers and NOT taking care of its current ones. I remember the rewards points system that WIS lowered and drove several long-time coaches away. This looks like it will drive away tons of D3 coaches in the hopes that new customers will come into the fold- don't plan on it WIS. This is a terrible business decision!!
What needs to happen is WIS should offer free seasons to current D3 coaches. Maybe one free season for every 2 seasons a current D3 coach has been there up to a maximum of 5 seasons. Heck, I think if they handed out 2 free season that would pacify a fair amount of the coaches.

5/4/2014 12:45 AM
Posted by oriole_fan on 4/23/2014 10:04:00 AM (view original):
Thanks for all the input and the well wishes everyone :)

When we heard the idea for a tutorial we knew that it was a great idea, in fact we had been contemplating something similar for a long time. In response we constructed the new interface to guide you though the pages like a tutorial might, easing the pain points and creating a much easier flow to construct the game plan that is desired. I know that there will be a some veteran users will see this thread and immediately be off-put by the creation of a new interface. I also know that some of our longest tenured veterans have been longing for a interface that will allow them to control their team like they want. Our first goal in this change was to ease pain points, and this we have done well. The second was to give as much control while reducing the complexity, this we have also done quite well. While you are reading this thread you will think the sky is falling, that much is already clear. Just remember, at What If we are striving to create a game that will not only keep the veterans happy, but also update a game that will make it fun to play. Before you give up on this, try the new features. I actually think that you will like them. Perhaps that's just me being optimistic and enjoying playing this game again, but as a veteran who has been with a while, I implore you to give this new interface a try before you condemn the unknown.  




If you don't want long-time D-III coaches to think the "sky is falling" then don't use a phrase like "you're going to have to move to D-II".
5/7/2014 11:36 AM
If they do not attract new owners this place is dead.  We cant even fill a league, a GOOD league in Hardball dynasty probably because there are not enough players.  I would say that to many worlds is a problem.  perhaps a retraction of worlds would benefit all by having more human owners to fill leagues. Playing sim teams is boring in Gridiron dynasty and not filling worlds in Hardball really is making it hard to invest in that game any longer.
5/12/2014 1:57 AM
Posted by katzphang88 on 4/25/2014 12:08:00 PM (view original):
The interface was never the real problem - the poorly designed game engine is the problem.
while I would agree that the engine has its flaw. The current interface for advanced really is not good. I also don't believe that the newbies are that lazy.. the bottom line is that you have to give the newbies to put their best team on the field all the time without feeling that they need an MIT degree to figure advanced out.

I signed up for a D3 team because I want to see what they are doing first hand. this may work in WIS favor and it maybe WIS's version of "New Coke"

The real question is will they stop at D3? In 6 months will they do the same thing or something similar to this at D2? Once the veteran coaches have moved up and now have a decent team wherever there at.
5/12/2014 2:44 PM
If getting a degree at MIT is as easy as it was for me to figure out the advanced settings for this game, I need to enroll at MIT. The walk through's and information in the forums explained most things relatively well. I believe it took about 2 or 3 hours to read posts and then go back to set things up for my team. I spend more time reading directions and playing tutorials in strategy games than I did my initial team set up. It's not that difficult to set it up. It is difficult to see the effects of what you do in your game plan. I would be nice if WIS explained that you will likely have to experience a few losing seasons on a rebuild before you will have the recruits to improve and compete. That would also be helped if they didn't make SIMs hard to beat even with a lesser team. If they want new coaches to have success let them have a better chance of beating the sims and they'll likely have a winning season based on how few people are in DIII most of the time. If they want to change the interface to make it easier or quicker to set things up great, but taking away control and options shouldn't be happening. 
of 9
All Forums > Gridiron Dynasty Football > Gridiron Dynasty > Gridiron Dynasty 3.1 - User Interface Upgrade

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.