INDOOR Game wish (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Sports] >> Maximum-Football 2.0 >> Suggestions / Wishlist



Message

Yo Dwg -> INDOOR Game wish (4/7/2006 3:37:45 AM)

I would like to know by any chance could you make the field goal posts have nets like in the real indoor game? Suggestion/Wish.

Yo Dwg



Breeze -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (4/7/2006 3:57:48 AM)

No chance. The AFL has a patent on those nets.



walkerws -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (4/7/2006 4:05:37 AM)

Would it be possible to put a wall then, and set rules so if it fell back in the the field, the ball would be in play? I know with the patent it might be difficult to have any kind of a rebound play.



Magnum357 -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (4/7/2006 11:33:17 AM)

Hmmm... a wall... might... be a possibility, but I think it would look rather strange in the game personally. I don't know what it is with Arena Fans that love the Rebound Net system. Personally, I like Indoor Football much more then arena Football, partly because I think the Rebound System is totally useless.



firebirds -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (4/7/2006 3:50:16 PM)

If I remember correctly, on the previous MB David addressed the question about a wall and/or any other type of rebound system. I think the answer was no because regardless of what was used, the end result was a bit too close to the patented nets.

I haven't watched any other indoor football other than Arena. My daughter and I were season ticket holders for 2 1/2 years when we had a team here. I really like the net and the excitement it adds to the game.

Just an idea for David here. Can't have the nets and/or any type of rebound system has been ruled out to be on the safe side of the lawyers. I don't know how the computer handles the steps in a fieldgoal attempt in the game, but from my experience it starts with a good snap and hold (haven't read a report of a bad snap or hold) then there is the kick. It might be blocked (read of the happening) or not, then the ball is on the way. The kick is either good or bad, but there are those very rare times when the missed kick is returned and I'm talking NFL rules here.

Being computer dumb, I'm guessing the computer figures the odds of each step of the process to determine the outcome. What if the odds show that the kick will be missed (again assuming the computer knows the end result prior to the attempt), and that being the case the computer makes the kick come up short so the return man can field it?? You would get the same net result (no pun intended) as having a rebound system in place, that being a live returnable ball on a missed fieldgoal. Again I have no clue how hard that would be to program and it is an AFL specific situation, just a thought.



Magnum357 -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (4/8/2006 3:13:50 AM)

As much as that could be a good "solution" to add some sort of Rebound system to MaxFB (albeit, not exactly like Arenas Rebound Net system), I vote against it just because that would take away for Fans of the Indoor Game. In Indoor Football, Feildgoal Returns are possible, but they usually only occur with very long Place kick attempts. Most short yardarge Feildgoal Attempts don't have a return because if the Kicker misses the uprights, the ball goes out of bounds and the other team gets the ball at there own 5 yard line.

My philosophy on this is that Kickers have enough to worry about just making a Feildgoal in an upright roughly half the Width of an NFL Goal Post. Arena Football's Rebound System just seems silly to me because it really only accomplishes a return on Place Kicks. Indoor Football can do that aswell and not give the Kicker so much of a hard time with Short Yardarge Feildgoal attempts. Heck, I think even the AFL realized this aswell with its PAT's. If people don't remember, the AFL use to have it where PAT's that miss the uprights could be returned and the Defense could get 2 points if they ran it back. It happened way too many times in an AFL game and the league made a new rule a couple of years ago that all PAT Kicks that miss result in a "dead ball" like the NFL.

Like I said above, those Rebound nets in the Arens system are useless, and Indoor Football style of play proves you can still play without them.



Yo Dwg -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (4/8/2006 5:38:22 AM)

or if no nets then what about have the field playable, where if you miss it and even if it does hit the game its still in play. I'm sure itll be no but worth a shot lol



Magnum357 -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (4/8/2006 10:30:20 AM)

??????

I'm not sure I follow.



Yo Dwg -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (4/9/2006 3:17:34 AM)

like if the kicker kicks a field goal short the ball is still in play.



Magnum357 -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (4/9/2006 10:49:33 AM)

Thats already in the game. If you choose "Live Feildgoals" in the rules section, all Place kicks are live and must be returned. Maybe I don't understand your idea.



Yo Dwg -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (4/9/2006 10:44:42 PM)

o im just a little new to Maximum football so If I say something stupid or already in the game feel free to call me what ever you want lol. I havent been able to afford the game yet but I saved up 25 bucks so Ill be in the loop soon!



Magnum357 -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (4/10/2006 2:37:00 AM)

No problem. If you do buy the game, I think you will be satisified by the amount of features it has. Ya, its not Madden in graphics and has some bugs, but its still not a bad game with all the things you can do with it.



firebirds -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (4/10/2006 3:43:22 PM)

Magnum, to each their own. I respect your opinion. I agree that making PAT's a dead ball was a good decision. My question/suggestion might be a solution to the lack of a rebound system for Arena style, maybe it could be added as an option to the indoor game. That way those that prefer it could use it and those who don't won't.



Magnum357 -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (4/11/2006 1:01:55 AM)

I can understand what you mean firebirds. There are probably more Arena Fans on this board then Indoor Football Fans (I consider myself the later) and although you can get MaxFB to mimick many Rules in Arena and Indoor leagues, the lack of Rebound nets is probably the only rules now that can't really be duplicated.

Ya, I think its entirely possible David could add some sort of system or option to have a Rebound system, but I think David just doesn't want to take the risk of legal lawsuits from the AFL. From my experience, the powers that be are very picky when it comes to there Patent on the Rebound system (and I guess why have it if you don't enforce it) and have tried to sue a couple other Real Indoor Leagues in the past (the late IPFL and IFL for example). Hey, blame the Arena System not David. [:D]



firebirds -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (4/13/2006 5:34:01 PM)

I agree, I'll blame David Baker (AFL commishiner) not David Winter [;)]



MB Sports Net -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (1/17/2007 3:33:02 AM)

Just as a note, because I apparently like to spend my team researching this stuff... the patent expires this year on the rebound nets.

Would hope to see it, but not counting on it, seems like it'd be difficult to implement. Shrug... will just have to port and hack the PS2 version for that LOL.



Marauders -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (1/17/2007 4:00:39 AM)

Is the rebound net patent in an extention, or is it in the original patent?

The application date was September 30, 1987.

Here is the original patent:

AFL Football Patent




MB Sports Net -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (1/18/2007 4:55:40 AM)

Hey Marauders,

Been researching a little bit and the original patent expires this year. I also checked to see if I could find any status of an extension application or processing and neither appears to be the case. While I understand the AFL not wanting competition in the formative stages of the league I think eventually it would be in the best interests to have as many people as possible playing/watching their form of football.

Of course lawyers and marketers<that's me> and advertisers and all of that will get involved and it will all end in tears and whiney people<also me> will beg others to put their buts on the line for no apparent reason other then it's what I want.

That date is 9/30/07 that it expires at this time. I'd expect some nonsense to go down though!

[:)]



Tbird -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (1/18/2007 6:38:20 AM)

Can they renew the patent if they wanted to

If they can then I wouldn't do it.



MB Sports Net -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (1/19/2007 2:32:24 AM)

Yeah obviously if they end up renewing it, creating the ability to simulate it would be sketchy at best, IE stupid. No one wants any international incidents with David heading to jail. Of course it's also covered in Canadian patent law too. I have to admit that this is something that I know very little about. I expect we'll know whether it was renewed or not on 9/1/07...even at that point they have a 6 month grace period. Gotta love US Gov. regulations. They're faaaaaaaaantastic.



Marauders -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (1/19/2007 6:00:41 AM)

quote:

I would like to know by any chance could you make the field goal posts have nets like in the real indoor game?


By the way, only one real indoor games has the nets.  All of the others do not.



mudrick -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (1/19/2007 8:20:21 AM)

I'm no expert in this, but how do you patent a tight net?  Or is it the rebound?  Is there a goal post patent?  What about a chalk patent?  If you put a rebound sponge up there, would that violate anything?  Maybe someone should look into a patent on onside kicks.  Oh no, can't duplicate that.   There has to be a way around it.



Marauders -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (1/19/2007 9:12:49 AM)

Games cannot be patented.  

James Foster tried to patent indoor football, but football is a game, so they could only patent the rebound net.



MB Sports Net -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (1/20/2007 2:17:01 AM)

Exactly. The only suggestion I could add would be different goal post size. That would seem to work out, however you couldn't do the nets then. HOWEVER some striking person could figure out high walls behind the goal that the ball bounces off of. Silly idea as it still isn't a simulated action in any football league. Also would rule out selling seats, which we know isn't plausible in business. We shall see the way that the ball turns in the future.



Marauders -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (1/20/2007 9:23:48 AM)

As I recall, some indoor leagues allow balls that bounce off the back hockey rink wall into the endzone to be in play.

I think that David has much to do already before he considers adding bouncing balls and the rules that go with them to the game at this time.



dreamtheatervt -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (1/20/2007 8:36:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marauders

As I recall, some indoor leagues allow balls that bounce off the back hockey rink wall into the endzone to be in play.

I think that David has much to do already before he considers adding bouncing balls and the rules that go with them to the game at this time.



I agree with Marauders, but for a slightly different reason. If there was no chance of DW/Wintervalley/Matrix getting hit with a Cease and Desist order (or worse), then I wouldn't mind having "rebound technology" being a high priority. But the fact that adding "reboound technology" could be immidiately recalled or even essentially end MF updates makes this upgrade a non-issue in my mind. It would be great if they could be included in a perfectly legal matter, but that is not the case, and it is not something that is going to change overnight.

Please, let's not waste any more time on this subject until everything else is right with the game and the issue of the rebound net patent is settled in a definative matter.



David Winter -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (1/20/2007 10:35:26 PM)

"rebound technology" isn't terribly difficult. It is in fact already in the game simply as a side effect of how I've built the engine. On more than one occasion I have had to fix a "bug" that would not have been considered as such had I used a full set of AFL rules. There has has already been one public bug report of kick offs 'bouncing off the net' on the far goal and being caught for a TD by the kicking team. If Maximum-Football held an AFL license, that would have been fine. However as it doesn't it actually required me to write more code to remove that 'feature'.

I also purposefully absorb a lot more of the energy of the ball when it hits the net to give the feel of a slack net with no elastic qualities. I think AFL rebound nets have more spring back to them allowing the ball to bounce back further. Again, not terribly difficult to implement.

That all being said, at this time, I have no plans to implement any rule that makes use of rebound nets. I've already spoken to councel here in Vancouver and he told me what I basically already knew. Stay away. The only reason I even spoke to him at all was that it struck me that the patent was created for a real world game and not a computer game. A grey area, that was just deemed best not to get into.

And you can patent games by the way. The only reason the AFL game in full isn't patentable is because it's a derivative of an existing game (outdoor football). If it were something completely new, it could have been patented. It would be like me inventing a computer mouse that uses sonar technology to track the movement. I can patent the sonar technology (if it hadn't been already), but I couldn't patent the whole mouse.



Marauders -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (2/12/2007 9:29:56 PM)

As far as I know, complete games are not really patented, but a "method of play" can be.  The AFL rebound nets are "a method of play".

Board games are usually copyrighted and trademarked to protect them, as are computer games.

When I was in high school and college, I was an avid gamer.  My firends and I invented many games.  It's too bad I didn't patent "tapping cards" back in 1984, because Wizards of the Coast would owe me a lot of money.  Then again, it costs $4-5 thousand dollars to gain a patent and maintain it over the life of the patent.  That is too expensive for most of us creating simple games for fun.

I guess the guy who "invented" the blinking cursor made out pretty well in the end.  In my opinion, the governement should never have granted him a patent for that.



Magnum357 -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (2/13/2007 11:27:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marauders

I guess the guy who "invented" the blinking cursor mad out pretty well in the end.  In my opinion, the governement should never have granted him a patent for that.



Marauder, I agree with much of what you said above, but I'm a little confused by this statement. What do you mean by "blinking cursor mad"? Not sure I understand that.



Marauders -> RE: INDOOR Game wish (2/13/2007 11:44:28 PM)

[X(] He made out pretty well.

He may have been some sort of mad man as well, but I just don't know.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.328125