Too many worlds/too many sims/not enoughcompetitio Topic

jayhawks2130
Posts: 60 (0)
All Star
31 5 4
Prospect
Can we fix this and not have the solution be waiting for the economy to get better/ "better-marketing"?
6/23/2011 1:11 AM
dahsdebater
Posts: 10046 (3)
Hall of Famer
284 293 18
Pro
No.  Nobody's going to want to give up their programs.  Not so simple to just close worlds when people have spent literally years of their lives building up their programs.
6/23/2011 1:28 AM
girt25
Posts: 2136 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 122 1 1
Rookie
Sure -- fix the game.

Oh ... and some better marketing.
6/23/2011 6:38 AM
tkimble
Posts: 1347 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 335 1 1
Rookie
Ok, so what if Seble decided to shut down wooden? How would you feel about that?
6/23/2011 9:00 AM
bbunch
Posts: 1303 (0)
Hall of Famer
683 3 1
Pro
I find DII very fun and  competitive. I never felt that way about DI. Without an obvious fix on the way, and without wanting to bore myself to death coaching D1 mid-majors, i'm just enjoying the heck out of playing DII only. 
6/23/2011 3:41 PM
jayhawks2130
Posts: 60 (0)
All Star
31 5 4
Prospect
i would gladly give up my team in wooden to make the game better for all
6/23/2011 4:31 PM
carlnault
Posts: 200 (0)
Hall of Famer
263 5 1 82 13
Prospect
If they where to compartmentalize worlds, a solution would be to give the displaced a free season as appeasment, whatever your prestige was in closed world is what you'd use for next team sign up so those in d1 can find a team at their level. I remember when fox bought the company, we all where looking forward to marketing,ads on radio....crickets.
6/23/2011 5:41 PM (edited)
isack24
Posts: 1566 (0)
Hall of Famer
81 19
Prospect
I think the only way to do it would be to allow you to essentially transfer your exact team/prestige to the new world, but I don't see that as feasible.  Frankly, if they shut down Wooden or Allen, I wouldn't pick up a new team in a new world.  Maybe that would be good for competition over time, but they would lose a lot of customers.
6/23/2011 5:54 PM
edw1225
Posts: 207 (0)
Hall of Famer
234 150 38 11
Prospect
As soon as the worlds started getting fairly full people would start asking for a new world. 
6/23/2011 6:37 PM
FW_Kekionga
Posts: 279 (0)
Hall of Famer
5 1 272 1 146 11
Rookie
Problem is all the programmers are working on something else other then the core games (like FOX fantasy football if what I hear on the rumor mill is correct).  I don't think we will see an update in HD, HBD, or any other game within the next six months.   Which is a shame because these games are the core business, and are gradually losing customers who aren't being replaced.  Word of mouth only goes so far, and FOX only seems to take from this site and not give back.  I get sick of seeing dream matchups or college football fantasy tournaments on the front page of the site when we used to see ads for these games, developer chats, and updates.  I've spent the better part of the last seven years dumping time and money into this site and the return seems to be diminishing.  Which is a shame because these games are great.  This problem could easily be fixed if the programmers/marketing staff could actually work on their games.  (OK, rant over for that particular issue).

At one point there were waitlists to get into all the worlds, no reason why it can't get back to that, even with Allen and Wooden.  And when it does it will be good to have established teams to build rivalries with, show newbies the ropes, and help recruit for conferences and the site in general.  There just needs to be more commitment from WIS to their games I think. 
6/23/2011 6:42 PM
rsvphr
Posts: 298 (0)
Hall of Famer
136
Rookie

The system needs attention to two issues that will help maximize population. DIII is simply a marketing issue. The best bets are active promotion of the game and trial. Free first seasons bring us volume and since DIII feeds the rest of the game, it should be a standard, volume of one year users notwithstanding.

DII is the most competitive due to the built in level playing field. Any team in DII can rise to chanpionship levels.

DI has a unique set of dynamics put in place to approximate real life. BCS schools are dominant and low mid majors are going to hit a ceiling. The rise through DI includes seasons where you play 20 sims, go one and out in the NT and need to do that for 5,6,7,8 seasons to get a  shot at a better program. Boring.
It needs to be easier (not easy) to get to DI. More human opponents is a must. The criteria for advancemnet needs to be overhauled. 

DI programs rated D+ or less would be cheaper to buy than C- to C+ and be signifcantly easier to get hired for. By easier, won/lost records should receive more weight, as should Conference and Conference Tournament championships and deep runs in the PI.

Please add to this, comment, endorse what sounds feasible and reject any premises that don't make sense. 



 

6/23/2011 10:50 PM
car_crazy_v2
Posts: 619 (0)
All Star
32 3
Rookie
Until the job process if fixed, there is no reason to merge worlds. 
6/23/2011 11:32 PM
girt25
Posts: 2136 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 122 1 1
Rookie
Getting rid of or merging worlds: Worst. Idea. Ever.
6/24/2011 12:38 AM
jamespastine
Posts: 74 (0)
Hall of Famer
126
Prospect

Why are Allen and Wooden the two worlds mentioned (if only hypothetically) as candidates for contraction? Are they the least populated?

6/24/2011 2:09 PM
mullycj
Posts: 2737 (0)
Hall of Famer
214 1
Prospect
Posted by girt25 on 6/24/2011 12:38:00 AM (view original):
Getting rid of or merging worlds: Worst. Idea. Ever.
I thought opening up a new world was the worst idea ever?
6/24/2011 4:13 PM
12 Next ▸
Too many worlds/too many sims/not enoughcompetitio Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 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.