News Post

MLB 12 The Show Franchise Mode Improvements

01:20 PM - January 27, 2012 by tnixen

Playstation.Blog has posted some MLB 12 The Show franchise mode improvements.

Quote:


	One of our goals going into this development cycle was to enhance the trade logic for CPU teams to better mimic their real-life counterparts. In order to do so, we had to examine the current system and identify the faults to then build and improve upon it. This year we are considering more factors in each trade offer, with the end result being more realistic trades. Teams are valuing their rosters much higher this year, and they aren�t going to ship out prospects so easily, nor will they offer up too many players to fill a positional void. You�ll also see more trades that better suit the teams� current strategies (i.e. playoff push vs. rebuilding strategies).

Game: MLB 12 The ShowReader Score: 9/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS Vita / PS3Votes for game: 55 - View All

MLB 12 The Show Videos

Member Comments

# 81 Knight165 @ 01/27/12 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ty5oke


	Thanks Knight, thats what I thought. Has there ever been any talk of implementing that? Would people want that? Even if its a minimal improvement/downgrade, I think it would be cool to have the player improve based on stats.

We've had a discussion about this on the boards and some want it totally stat driven. I think that would be a huge error.
I wouldn't mind seeing something where stats gave a % chance of a better increase in progression in a certain area......but IMO stats driving progression solely would lead to laddering(runaway gains/losses) that would totally deride the game of realism in that area.

From what I gather.....potentials...and progression are getting a look at for '13(

)...so I'm itching to see what they come up with!

M.K.
Knight165

# 82 ty5oke @ 01/27/12 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tabarnes19


	I disagree. Does a player that has a career year automatically become a better player? Sometimes stats are anomalies. There are examples of players hitting .250 for a career then winning a batting title. Or hitting an avg of 10 homers a year then having a year they hit 50 does not necessarily mean that it is what they are. Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

Too me, stats show trends of players especially over large sample sizes. I also wouldn't make it a tremendous leap and would have random variation accountable to players could still have those monster years.

But it just seems like every player already has their attribute career already hard coded in the game, where I would prefer it to be dynamic. If Danny Hultzen, is a potential "A" and 23 years old, won't he progress a regardless for a certain amount of years until he reaches that age limit where it is coded for him to begin the decline. Using extreme cased, if Hultzen goes 0-20 7.99 era for 3 years straight, I would hope his overall attributes go down.

# 83 ty5oke @ 01/27/12 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knight165


	We've had a discussion about this on the boards and some want it totally stat driven. I think that would be a huge error. I wouldn't mind seeing something where stats gave a % chance of a better increase in progression in a certain area......but IMO stats driving progression solely would lead to laddering(runaway gains/losses) that would totally deride the game of realism in that area. From what I gather.....potentials...and progression are getting a look at for '13()...so I'm itching to see what they come up with! M.K. Knight165

Ya, I can definitely see where it would be hard to balance the progression with a mixture of both. I guess I just don't get why people care so much about the stats when it doesn't affect(effect, I never know) the game.

# 84 tabarnes19_SDS @ 01/27/12 09:53 PM

Yes progression is something that Knight and I asked for some tweaking. I would love to see busts and diamonds. I may be in the minority on this, but I would love to have potentials hidden inside franchise mode. Scouts and stats are your only guide.

# 85 ty5oke @ 01/27/12 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tabarnes19


	Yes progression is something that Knight and I asked for some tweaking. I would love to see busts and diamonds. I may be in the minority on this, but I would love to have potentials hidden inside franchise mode. Scouts and stats are your only guide.

You could count me in that minority too.

# 86 Marino @ 01/27/12 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knight165


	I'm a Mike. But on all the paperwork that I get from anywhere....it's Michael. My family calls me Michael. My friends and co-workers are lazy and call me Mike. His name is Michael Stanton. M.K. Knight165

So for Dee Gordon it will read Devarius Gordon?

Sent from Hayden Panettiere's #1 fan

# 87 MetsFan16 @ 01/27/12 09:59 PM

When you're at the player card and you're looking at the advanced stats, does it tell you what they mean? Because I remeber seeing a screenshot of the player card and there was a stat that I had no idea about.

# 88 tabarnes19_SDS @ 01/27/12 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eucharist79


	Thanks for your kind, diligent, and super-appropriate responses to my initial post, Mr. Tbarnes and Mr. Knight. I hope that I am wrong about my comment in regards to statistics. I would like to know if within the League Leaders section of the game, if Sabermetrics are included? Do we have a Top 50 listing for those stats like we do for HR and ERA? Do they inform us in the Manual what the Sabermetrics statistics mean? I also want to say that the overall sim stats for Runners-In-Scoring-Position per team is .30 to .40 points low per team, which results in overall teams runs scored during the season to be 40 to 60 runs short per team. I have messaged Russell many times about this, and hopefully he chose to fix this glaring problem. I may be on the way to being banned by simply being honest, if I fail to kiss butt like those who always defend this game.

I am not 100% sure...but I believe league leaders have same stats as 11.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

# 89 metal134 @ 01/27/12 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tabarnes19


	I disagree. Does a player that has a career year automatically become a better player? Sometimes stats are anomalies. There are examples of players hitting .250 for a career then winning a batting title. Or hitting an avg of 10 homers a year then having a year they hit 50 does not necessarily mean that it is what they are. Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

But sometimes, they DO become a better player. Sometimes, you do have a guy who hits .250 every year till he's 30 and then goes on to win MULTIPLE batting titles. Sometimes a guy averages 10 homeruns a year, suddenly hits 50 and goes on to hit 30-40 every year. So it does happen occasionally and I would like to see video games reflect that fact a bit better. Not just the Show, but all sports games need to do a better job in this department.

# 90 Knight165 @ 01/27/12 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marino


	So for Dee Gordon it will read Devarius Gordon? Sent from Hayden Panettiere's #1 fan

I'll bet you it does on his check!

M.K.
Knight165

# 91 Knight165 @ 01/27/12 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by metal134


	But sometimes, they DO become a better player. Sometimes, you do have a guy who hits .250 every year till he's 30 and then goes on to win MULTIPLE batting titles. Sometimes a guy averages 10 homeruns a year, suddenly hits 50 and goes on to hit 30-40 every year. So it does happen occasionally and I would like to see video games reflect that fact a bit better. Not just the Show, but all sports games need to do a better job in this department.

Yes....but wouldn't this be handled better by a big progression increase one or maybe two times...then leveling....resulting in better attributes and therefore ratings rather than a guy hitting .290....big increase.... .310....big increase..... .330...big increase...... .350.......big increase to max. If his stats drive progression....how do you make it stop at some point....reach max?

Plus.....that would make being a GM rather mundane.
Look at the league leader boards..."oh look....there is my next big point gainer"......ho hum

M.K.
Knight165

# 92 tabarnes19_SDS @ 01/27/12 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by metal134


	But sometimes, they DO become a better player. Sometimes, you do have a guy who hits .250 every year till he's 30 and then goes on to win MULTIPLE batting titles. Sometimes a guy averages 10 homeruns a year, suddenly hits 50 and goes on to hit 30-40 every year. So it does happen occasionally and I would like to see video games reflect that fact a bit better. Not just the Show, but all sports games need to do a better job in this department.

Ideally this would be nice, but what would the ai use to determine which player to do that to?

Computer ai has to have definitive logic. Things humans do in real life sometimes defy that logic.

If they make it completely random how many guys would complain when a Fielder drops 30 ovl points because he had a bad year or the randomness kicked in.

Or the human controlled team gets better and better because the user is a great stick jockey??

I don't know the right way to do it. That's why I'd like potential hidden.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

# 93 nomo17k @ 01/27/12 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by metal134


	But sometimes, they DO become a better player. Sometimes, you do have a guy who hits .250 every year till he's 30 and then goes on to win MULTIPLE batting titles. Sometimes a guy averages 10 homeruns a year, suddenly hits 50 and goes on to hit 30-40 every year. So it does happen occasionally and I would like to see video games reflect that fact a bit better. Not just the Show, but all sports games need to do a better job in this department.

One thing you shouldn't confuse is this:

(1) The guy got suddenly better. He happened to perform in that breakout year by accident, and for some reason having that great year affected his ability to perform in subsequent years.

(2) The guy got suddenly better. He just worked on his skills off-season (or whatever that could improve him), and his stats in that breakout year and subsequent seasons just reflect that.

Think Bautista.... He performed better not because he happened to have a good year by chance and felt good about it. His ability actually made a sudden jump for some reason. The stats merely reflect that. (1) is not likely to happen unless having good stats have such a profound and staggering effect on the psychology and ability of players.

# 94 MetsFan16 @ 01/27/12 10:16 PM

# 95 Knight165 @ 01/27/12 10:23 PM

Well...I've proposed(to Kolbe...so I'll resend it to Aaron) a system that would be something like this.....
(it's "stolen" from Minor League Analyst....but I think it's perfect for gaming)

Potential would be....
10. Hall of Famer(VERY few would get this rating)
9. Elite Player
8. Solid regular
7. Average player
6. Platoon player
5. MLB reserve
4. Top Minor Leaguer
3. Average Minor Leaguer
2. Minor League Reserve
1. Roster Filler

Then there would be a probability rating of that potential and how likely a player would be to reach it. This would drive his range of growth as well(better rating...better the likely jump)
A. 90% chance of reaching potential
B. 70% chance of reaching potential
C. 50% chance of reaching potential
D. 30% chance of reaching potential
E. 10% chance of reaching potential

There would also be a +/- to that letter to fill in between chances.

This would make every aspect of player evaluation much more intriguing.

At draft....Draft the 9C player....who might be the next Verlander....the next Hamilton
or go with the 8A guy who is a "lock" to get to the MLB level and contribute solidly to your ballclub

It could be dynamic.....and also be dependent on how good your scout is too see such a rating.

So...I still think that progression should be programmed in ......but how that progression/regression is handed out should be dependent on some new criteria.

M.K.
Knight165

# 96 tabarnes19_SDS @ 01/27/12 10:26 PM

I like it!!!

# 97 Marino @ 01/27/12 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knight165


	I'll bet you it does on his check! M.K. Knight165

Oh I bet, haha.

Sent from Hayden Panettiere's #1 fan

# 98 MetsFan16 @ 01/27/12 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knight165


	Well...I've proposed(to Kolbe...so I'll resend it to Aaron) a system that would be something like this..... (it's "stolen" from Minor League Analyst....but I think it's perfect for gaming) Potential would be.... 10. Hall of Famer(VERY few would get this rating) 9. Elite Player 8. Solid regular 7. Average player 6. Platoon player 5. MLB reserve 4. Top Minor Leaguer 3. Average Minor Leaguer 2. Minor League Reserve 1. Roster Filler Then there would be a probability rating of that potential and how likely a player would be to reach it. This would drive his range of growth as well(better rating...better the likely jump) A. 90% chance of reaching potential B. 70% chance of reaching potential C. 50% chance of reaching potential D. 30% chance of reaching potential E. 10% chance of reaching potential There would also be a +/- to that letter to fill in between chances. This would make every aspect of player evaluation much more intriguing. At draft....Draft the 9C player....who might be the next Verlander....the next Hamilton or go with the 8A guy who is a "lock" to get to the MLB level and contribute solidly to your ballclub It could be dynamic.....and also be dependent on how good your scout is too see such a rating. So...I still think that progression should be programmed in ......but how that progression/regression is handed out should be dependent on some new criteria. M.K. Knight165

I really like this idea. For the scouting aspect. Depending on how good your scout is you'll see a range of numbers and letters. If you have a bad scout you might get a 4B-9C. If you have an average scout you'll see a range like 6B-9A and if your scout is very good you could get a range of 2 numbers or one number.

# 99 ty5oke @ 01/27/12 10:32 PM

What I certainly wouldn't have it coded to drop 30 overall in 1 year. I'm thinking more of a +3 or +5. It would be nice to have an above average player like Adam Jones, rated 80 overall and...

Scenario 1:
Year 1: .350 40 HR 120 RBI (+ 3, 83 overall)
Year 2: .360 45 HR 125 RBI (+5, 88 overall)

Scenario 2:
Year 1: .210 15 HR 80 RBI (-2, 78 overall)
Year 2: .205 14 HR 75 RBI (-3, 75 overall)

Scenario 1, we saw an above average player put together 2 great seasons and is now rated close to superstar status and in scenario 2, we see him regress due to 2 bad years in a row. I would have multiple factors with overall progression, the original thought was more for specific attributes. I also understand Knights point and can see how this could be difficult to implement. It would be the way I would try and program it though, I prefer my franchise to be more dynamic than static.

# 100 Knight165 @ 01/27/12 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetsFan16


	I really like this idea. For the scouting aspect. Depending on how good your scout is you'll see a range of numbers and letters. If you have a bad scout you might get a 4B-9C. If you have an average scout you'll see a range like 6B-9A and if your scout is very good you could get a range of 2 numbers or one number.

Exactly.....or just one set.....but if he's not that good a 7C player he might rate as 9B or vice versa .......

For scouts....just go to the 20-80 scale for ratings at each skill

80.....39+ HR...... .320+ BA..... 3.9 Speed
70.....32-38...... .300-319....... 4.0
etc.....

M.K.
Knight165

« Previous 1 2 3 456 7 8 9 Next »

More Links

MLB 12 The Show Franchise Mode Improvements