Posted by oldresorter on 12/7/2010 8:09:00 PM (view original):
km - i find your ? funny - since I totally refuted the job process vs d1 demise issue, hit me up on the how great the change is vs d1's demise.
If the game were better, why are so many people leaving it? That is a ? - your comment that there is not doubt that the game is better - well - yes - there is doubt - my gosh - there is no doubt 2 + 2 is 4, but no doubt the game which is failing is better, yes there is doubt.
I felt the old game with the higher ratings, required a d1 skill that d2/d3 did not require. Now all three division sim pretty much the same.
But, that is irrelevant. The fail is other than the top 20 or so players at each position, there is very little differentiation between the next 200-250 players by position, hence the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
By the way, there are some fixes for the game, that would give you the d2/d3 game in d1, without totally ruining the game for all d1 coaches other than a handful, many of whom by the way are posting here - LOL. But I doubt seble is smart enough to figure it out, and I would never volunteer to tell him.
people are leaving because of human nature. i touched on it in my last post but since it appears to have been glossed over i'll elaborate. FWIW i brought up behavioral economics a few months ago as well...
many of us have heard of a
study that was performed at Duke not too long ago and published in the WSJ. students who won final four tickets were asked to put a price on their tickets; the average asking price was in the ballpark of $2,400. the students would explain that going to the game is a "once-in-a-lifetime" experience and was worth a great amount of money.
students who did not win final four tickets were asked how much they would be willing to pay for a ticket; they were willing to pay about $175. when asked to justify their offer, they claimed that "the money that would be spent on the tickets could be used on other things, like CDs" etc. the moral of the story is that we place more emphasis on what we might lose than what we might gain.
this relates to HD in that when recruiting is changed, you have some positive aspects (increased recruit realism) and negative aspects (lack of a pool in general). even if the positive aspects outweigh the negative ones, meaning that the game is BETTER, many players will FEEL like the game is worse simply because what they lose is valued more than what they gain.
i havent seen WIS's numbers for how many new users come to a game after an update, but without advertising to the masses i highly doubt the number is very high. improving the quality of HD does more to simply please the current players than attract new ones, as the new ones have still never heard of the game. what you get is every change that doesnt dramatically improve the game results in a lot of players leaving. incorporate a snowball effect of increased vacancy hurting the game and voila, our current situation.
also factoring in is the topic of baselines. without getting into examples, the fact that all the old players were used to players with 90+ core ratings makes 60-70 core ratings seem crappy (and it will take a very long time for the mental baseline to drop into the 60s, no matter what. in reality, if hakeem olajuwon is 99, i think quality big men in d1 are in the 60s). what you get here is a positive (more realistic ratings) feels like a negative to a LOT of people (because their baselines are set artificially high).
i think, to a certain extent, seble understands this. it is because of this that he doesnt follow the every wish and whim of the masses. the real issue is lack of advertising, as that's the ONLY WAY to repopulate these worlds, ESPECIALLY given the majors tweaks that have taken place and will take place.
12/7/2010 10:01 PM (edited)