With no Demo: ya or nay

[brianwiz]

Give me a rating 1-10

Big Postive or Negative

Trying to decide to buy or not.

In the middle of buying a house so im being a little rigid in purchasing games right now.

[canox82]

9.5

[Lex Logan]

Depends on what you want. I think the play-calling is very poor, both in the AI selections and the apparent lack of effect of defensive play-calling. If you enjoy team building and are content to simulate the games, it looks pretty good.

[MichelleWie]

As a hardcore football fan i don't like it. Maybe a casual fan will enjoy it more. Until someone makes rosters, the 2009 season is basically unplayable without alot of editing, due to the rosters being so inaccurate and the RTG's being terrible. Like I said if your a casual fan maybe the inaccuracies won't bother you. Their are also some bugs that are being worked out. The Historical seasons are better. But still have alot of issues with schedule,realistic rules, etc, etc. I can go for a 2point conversion in the 1985 super bowl for example. Once again maybe this won't bother you if your a casual fan. I'm not sure if there are other football sims out their or not. So this might be as it good as it gets if you really want a football sim. $9.99 I'd say an ok game. For $30 I expect more especially for the makers of Baseball mogul.

[mrbadguy]

As mentioned, unless you want to have fun building a team and simming games then its ok, but if you are into playing the games this game is going to frustrate you. They play calling is terrible, and unrealistic (ie I just played the 84 Rams with Dickerson yet they passed about 35 times and were quite effective with a crap QB) I call Pass Defense on every play yet im giving up 300 yards and about 80% completion most games.

If you could edit the game settings like Baseball Mogul it would be great.

I never played any version before so I dont know what they were like.
Id give it a 7 I guess because of the historic aspect of it.

[CatKnight]

On a scale of 1-10.....? I'll give it a 7, though it really depends on what you're looking for.

I discussed my early views in another thread. My current feelings are as follows:

I find play by play mode rather interesting actually. I don't think it's true that formations and such don't make a difference. It's worth remembering that any given Sunday anything can happen - great quarterbacks can have bad days, poor QBs can do well, and so forth. I'd like to be able to WATCH games to get a feel for what the AI is up to.

On the other hand, it's far, far too easy to build an invincible team without even trying. Free Agency is broken, especially in historical seasons where the overall quality of players seems to be higher. (Going from 1970-76 in a recent game there are 140 players rated 90+). The AI tends to dump its stars into FA without necessarily redressing their weaknesses. The lack of a transaction screen makes it much harder to track what the AI's doing and hurts immersion.

Historical play has other issues that need to be addressed, such as historical expansion and team movement.

The simming speed has increased significantly, which is nice when handling several seasons at once.

[galleyfan2005]

Well, I was really looking forward to this one.
I have the 2007 version & like that one.
But I think you all have talked me out of the 2010 one.
Will probably wait for some patches & fixes.

[Lex Logan]

I'd say 2K10 is a significant improvement over 2K7, where all OL ratings ballooned and all TE's tanked, along with various bugs in the play-by-play. If they PBP mode seemed to work correctly it'd be worth it. Clay responded at one point to my request for debug information (by including the offensive and defensive "A+" to "F" ratings in the game recap) and I'm disappointed he didn't provide that as an option in this version. Even without that silliness such as the AI calling "Goal Line Stand" on 1st-and-10 is obvious from the game recaps.

[jclark78235]

i agree the free agency is definetly broken. also i have found that during the season my team adds players on its own. i start the season with 58 or so and by the end of the season theres 66 and im not purchasing them. its kinda odd. overall id give it a 7.5 with a few improvements could be alot better. im sure they will get it fixed in time.

[daves]

If you are willing to pay $30, might as well check out Front Office Football or this one http://www.dksports.com/football.htm

I was excited about this one, but after the reviews and questions, I am going to pass for now.

[Arctic Blast]

If you are willing to pay $30, might as well check out Front Office Football or this one http://www.dksports.com/football.htm

I was excited about this one, but after the reviews and questions, I am going to pass for now.

Are the Action Sports guys the one who want me to pay for any season from the past? No thanks...

FOF is a nice sim but it does have a horrible user interface. If you can get past that, great game.

[Clay Dreslough]

On the other hand, it's far, far too easy to build an invincible team without even trying. Free Agency is broken, especially in historical seasons where the overall quality of players seems to be higher.

There is a serious problem with Free Agency in historical seasons. Because a team's revenue in 1980 might be 80% less than it is in 2009, the historical teams think they can't afford to sign players. I'm working on this right now. However, I've also done a lot of testing in 2009 and the AI there seems pretty smart. For example, at the start of the 2011 season in my current game, the highest-rated player on the Free Agent market is Jamaracus Russell. And he's only there because he's holding out for $13M+. Every other free agent is rated 78 or lower.

So, if you want to play in 2009, I think the game is pretty solid (especially 8.03 which has many roster improvements).

If you want to play historical seasons, it's fun and interesting to see all the older players. But it won't provide much of a challenge UNLESS you make some self-imposed rules about signing free agents. As soon as I have the historical free agent AI fixed, I will let you know.

Thanks,

Clay

[Zorro]

There is a serious problem with Free Agency in historical seasons. Because a team's revenue in 1980 might be 80% less than it is in 2009, the historical teams think they can't afford to sign players. I'm working on this right now. However, I've also done a lot of testing in 2009 and the AI there seems pretty smart. For example, at the start of the 2011 season in my current game, the highest-rated player on the Free Agent market is Jamaracus Russell. And he's only there because he's holding out for $13M+. Every other free agent is rated 78 or lower.

So, if you want to play in 2009, I think the game is pretty solid (especially 8.03 which has many roster improvements).

If you want to play historical seasons, it's fun and interesting to see all the older players. But it won't provide much of a challenge UNLESS you make some self-imposed rules about signing free agents. As soon as I have the historical free agent AI fixed, I will let you know.

Thanks,

Clay

Thanks for the info Clay.....................................Z

[daves]

Are the Action Sports guys the one who want me to pay for any season from the past? No thanks...

FOF is a nice sim but it does have a horrible user interface. If you can get past that, great game.

Some valid points.

[Arctic Blast]

Some valid points.

BTW, one of the guys on the FOF forums just finished a 2009 roster if you're interested, daves. I haven't had a chance to take a look at it yet.