PS4 Discussion (MLB The Show 14)

[@legendm0de]

Re: PS4 Discussion (MLB The Show 14)

I'm lovin the idea earlier in this thread about overhauling the player progression/regression. I do find myself getting into slumps with every other player, batting and sometimes pitching, but it would be nicer for it to translate into affecting attributes & ratings. There should be alot of other factors involved to. Hopefully MLB 14 will have a good formula that will make this idea happen. As long as they don't cripple a player, and are able to bounce back and even become better than they were before.

As for the energy over the course of a season, I actually love the way it is, and even minimized the sliders for pitcher stamina to place so much more importance on the management of your bullpen & starters. Fielders energy, is usually not 100% but why should it be, I don't think right now in August one baseball player feels the same way he felt at Spring Training lol. Therefore, their bar shouldn't quite be at 100% across the board.

I'm looking forward to also finding out if this PS4 version will finally overhaul the way players move around the field, and allow them to have chances for physical contact and punishment, like running into walls especially and colliding with teamates and opposition. I touched on this before but, I hope they mimmick NHL 13 & NBA 2K, with body part analysis and progressive injury updates for each individual player throughout the season. OH YEA AND REHAB ASSIGNMENTS WILL BE A MUST, we'd desparatly need that.

[Bobhead]

Re: PS4 Discussion (MLB The Show 14)

Leyland's not making decisions, Cabrera is. He refuses to come out of the lineup. He has injuries that won't get progressively worse...he's not jeopardizing his career to win the lousy AL Central.

And it's not that I lack the balls to rest a player in a video game for crying out loud - it's that I sim most of the games and act as a GM of my team in franchise. Because his energy level is low (along with the rest of the team) my lineup is out of wack about 90% of the time.

Leyland has the right to make decisions. If he allows Cabrera to stay in, that's Leyland's decision not Cabreras. As much as players like to pretend like they are in charge, they aren't.

And I'll just say again that I've given David Wright 3 days off thus far in my entire season (early August). He's doing just fine.

As for the second part of your post, so you're saying the CPU automatically replaces these players in the lineup every time they are tired? I literally never sim games, I play every single one, so that's something I've never encountered. If that's what you're saying, that's definitely a legitimate complaint.

[Rules]

Re: PS4 Discussion (MLB The Show 14)

Rain delays, double headers, cancellations. Stadium roofs opening and closing. Things they said they couldn't do finally be added as an option. It has been done successfully in other baseball games so maybe they can hire one of those guys to show them how.

[tabarnes19_SDS]

Re: PS4 Discussion (MLB The Show 14)

I'm lovin the idea earlier in this thread about overhauling the player progression/regression. I do find myself getting into slumps with every other player, batting and sometimes pitching, but it would be nicer for it to translate into affecting attributes & ratings. There should be alot of other factors involved to. Hopefully MLB 14 will have a good formula that will make this idea happen. As long as they don't cripple a player, and are able to bounce back and even become better than they were before.

My concern with tying progression and regression to player performance is that it is not realistic. Players do not get better or worst based on the statistics they put up.

Progression/regression is tied to age in real life. Men hit their peak at around age 25-27....it is no wonder players also seem to peak at that age in sports. Many factors of course come into play such as maturation, but ability(Hand eye coordination, speed, power etc...) drive a players progression, which in turn, allows the statistics to be better.

Regression occurs, because as we age, we lose muscle mass, agility, speed and power. Some lose it sooner than others.

I want to see the progression and regression be a little more dynamic. I would like to see true busts and break out stars, but I still think the majority of players should follow the trend of peaking between 25-29 and then beginning a decline. The rare exeption of 39-41 players should occur, but it should be very rare. Baseball is becoming a young man's game again as we leave the PED era.

[Bobhead]

Re: PS4 Discussion (MLB The Show 14)

My concern with tying progression and regression to player performance is that it is not realistic. Players do not get better or worst based on the statistics they put up.

Progression/regression is tied to age in real life. Men hit their peak at around age 25-27....it is no wonder players also seem to peak at that age in sports. Many factors of course come into play such as maturation, but ability(Hand eye coordination, speed, power etc...) drive a players progression, which in turn, allows the statistics to be better.

Regression occurs, because as we age, we lose muscle mass, agility, speed and power. Some lose it sooner than others.

I want to see the progression and regression be a little more dynamic. I would like to see true busts and break out stars, but I still think the majority of players should follow the trend of peaking between 25-29 and then beginning a decline. The rare exeption of 39-41 players should occur, but it should be very rare. Baseball is becoming a young man's game again as we leave the PED era.

I don't know if I agree with all of that. What about guys like Jason Bay, Adam Dunn, Josh Hamilton, Ryan Howard? etc... that just hit walls and die? None of those players were at "the age" when their declines began. Sometimes all it takes is one bad season to shake your confidence, or one weird injury to get you into bad habits, and you immediately end up on downhill spirals.

I think tying progression to performance is the best way to emulate such runaway train career paths. It should NOT be absolute, of course, but there should definitely be some small chance of a "career crash," if you will.

As for the young man's game thing... CHipper Jones? Todd Helton? We have old hitters all over the place. Defensive stats (and of course, speed), should definitely see sharp declines... but I'm not so sure there is any evidence to suggest that good hitters cannot still be good hitters at 38 and over.

[Knight165]

Re: PS4 Discussion (MLB The Show 14)

I don't know if I agree with all of that. What about guys like Jason Bay, Adam Dunn, Josh Hamilton, Ryan Howard? etc... that just hit walls and die? None of those players were at "the age" when their declines began. Sometimes all it takes is one bad season to shake your confidence, or one weird injury to get you into bad habits, and you immediately end up on downhill spirals.

I think tying progression to performance is the best way to emulate such runaway train career paths. It should NOT be absolute, of course, but there should definitely be some small chance of a "career crash," if you will.

As for the young man's game thing... CHipper Jones? Todd Helton? We have old hitters all over the place. Defensive stats (and of course, speed), should definitely see sharp declines... but I'm not so sure there is any evidence to suggest that good hitters cannot still be good hitters at 38 and over.

I believe that's why he stated this....
"I want to see the progression and regression be a little more dynamic. I would like to see true busts and break out stars, but I still think the majority of players should follow the trend of peaking between 25-29 and then beginning a decline."

I can't speak for tabarnes...but I think he meant you would have most players follow an up and down but somewhat linear path as they get older but you would always have the possibility of having players have breakout/breakdown year(s) at any time in their career.

I agree wholeheartedly that it's not stats that propel progression, but the other way around(along with a little luck ....good and bad).
You're asking for trouble if you bring stats into driving progression/regression IMO....and in a stat driven system...how would a player like Hamilton do anything but hit the moon in attributes after a .304/32/130(2008) and a .352/30/100 season?(not that his following season was bad after that....)

I think we need to see a much more dynamic system first....and then move from there.


M.K.
Knight165

[Knight165]

Re: PS4 Discussion (MLB The Show 14)

I believe it's the scouting system used to evaluate prospects.

It's for player tools really....rather than a 0-99 attribute system....you would have hidden attributes and see the scouts 20-80 number when seeing his arm/contact/power/speed/fielding.
(I believe you would still need the 0-99 under the hood though to drive the game engine unless they totally rewrite the sim and game engines to work off the 20-80 scale as well)

M.K.
Knight165

[tabarnes19_SDS]

Re: PS4 Discussion (MLB The Show 14)

I don't know if I agree with all of that. What about guys like Jason Bay, Adam Dunn, Josh Hamilton, Ryan Howard? etc... that just hit walls and die? None of those players were at "the age" when their declines began. Sometimes all it takes is one bad season to shake your confidence, or one weird injury to get you into bad habits, and you immediately end up on downhill spirals.

I think tying progression to performance is the best way to emulate such runaway train career paths. It should NOT be absolute, of course, but there should definitely be some small chance of a "career crash," if you will.

As for the young man's game thing... CHipper Jones? Todd Helton? We have old hitters all over the place. Defensive stats (and of course, speed), should definitely see sharp declines... but I'm not so sure there is any evidence to suggest that good hitters cannot still be good hitters at 38 and over.

I agree there should be busts and breakouts and Some players that play above average later in their career, like I stated, but many sharp declines I think should be tied into a more dynamic injury mechanic. Pitchers and position players tend to see their careers take a nose dive after major injuries I would like to see that in the game. Progressive injuries where velocity is impacted, speed, power etc..

Here is a nice link that was research based baseball prospectus

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=9933

You can see that Bill James says peak performance occurs...
"If you must assign a five-year peak period to all players regardless of description, the best shot would be 25 to 29."

Take out the steroid era in that research and you would see the average age drop even more, players played longer in that era. As far as Todd Helton he has not preformed at a peak in a long time...and players like Hamilton, Bay, Dunn, and Howard were all on the wrong side of 29.

Edit: Also stats are not always indicative of the year a player had. I player may have a great BA because he had extreme luck on balls in play and conversely a great hitter can have a poor average due to hitting the ball right at someone all season.

ERA and wins to a large extent are team dependent.

[@legendm0de]

Re: PS4 Discussion (MLB The Show 14)

My concern with tying progression and regression to player performance is that it is not realistic. Players do not get better or worst based on the statistics they put up.

Progression/regression is tied to age in real life. Men hit their peak at around age 25-27....it is no wonder players also seem to peak at that age in sports. Many factors of course come into play such as maturation, but ability(Hand eye coordination, speed, power etc...) drive a players progression, which in turn, allows the statistics to be better.

Regression occurs, because as we age, we lose muscle mass, agility, speed and power. Some lose it sooner than others.

I want to see the progression and regression be a little more dynamic. I would like to see true busts and break out stars, but I still think the majority of players should follow the trend of peaking between 25-29 and then beginning a decline. The rare exeption of 39-41 players should occur, but it should be very rare. Baseball is becoming a young man's game again as we leave the PED era.

That's why I would say at the end of a season to only make the most significant changes, but hopefully they should allow them to be significant and not minor like it currently is. In midseason the changes should be minor, no more than +/- 5 points.

Athleticism definitely declines, in all sports as players age. Mentality in baseball seems to be the most responsible factor for a player not performing up to his ability. They would have to take alot of care implementing these sort of changes, but it's definitely something that seems like it could be done.

The reason this is an issue, is because a player who ends the season hitting below .240 shouldn't be looked at as a top FA because he still has high ratings. At the end of the season, whichever statistics the player went through should correlate to the proper attributes that dip or rise. So major injury, should dip ratings, low avg vs LHP should dip contact vs LHP. Low power numbers should dip, vision or Power ratings. Major injuries, should dip athleticism regarding whatever body part was injured & how. Injuries that are smaller will also be important, I think that's why Rehab Assignments is definitely going to be needed assuming Sony is even going this direction in making player health even matter in the game.

[Bobhead]

Re: PS4 Discussion (MLB The Show 14)

You're asking for trouble if you bring stats into driving progression/regression IMO....and in a stat driven system...how would a player like Hamilton do anything but hit the moon in attributes after a .304/32/130(2008) and a .352/30/100 season?(not that his following season was bad after that....)

Just like any other system there would be ceilings and floors in place. A player that already has A potential couldn't then "hit the moon" after a few good seasons. ANd those "good seasons" would in turn be defined by their potential.

.320 is amazing for a D potential player, but it's nothing ********* for a player that is already known to be the best hitter in baseball. So with a system that incorporates stats, the D player would have a small chance of progressing more than expected, while the A potential player would be business as usual, and nothing special would happen.

Also I didn't say or describe a "stats-driven system". There's a big difference between stats being involved in calculations, and stats being the prime determinant. I'm talking about the former.

Is it realistic in principle? Probably not, I agree it isn't... but how else does a video game mimic the human element of real life? How else could a video game give me a career path like that of Oliver Perez, BJ Upton, Jason Bay, Ryan Howard, or conversely: Carlos Beltran, Lance Berkman, Ben Zobrist, Matt Joyce? I just don't see another way.

[Bobhead]

Re: PS4 Discussion (MLB The Show 14)

I agree there should be busts and breakouts and Some players that play above average later in their career, like I stated, but many sharp declines I think should be tied into a more dynamic injury mechanic. Pitchers and position players tend to see their careers take a nose dive after major injuries I would like to see that in the game. Progressive injuries where velocity is impacted, speed, power etc..

I agree about the injury system 100%

[@legendm0de]

Re: PS4 Discussion (MLB The Show 14)

I believe that's why he stated this....
"I want to see the progression and regression be a little more dynamic. I would like to see true busts and break out stars, but I still think the majority of players should follow the trend of peaking between 25-29 and then beginning a decline."

I can't speak for tabarnes...but I think he meant you would have most players follow an up and down but somewhat linear path as they get older but you would always have the possibility of having players have breakout/breakdown year(s) at any time in their career.

I agree wholeheartedly that it's not stats that propel progression, but the other way around(along with a little luck ....good and bad).
You're asking for trouble if you bring stats into driving progression/regression IMO....and in a stat driven system...how would a player like Hamilton do anything but hit the moon in attributes after a .304/32/130(2008) and a .352/30/100 season?(not that his following season was bad after that....)

I think we need to see a much more dynamic system first....and then move from there.


M.K.
Knight165

That's a great point, about statistics not driving the progression/regression. But following Josh Hamiltons career, I'd say that clutch is not his strength either, ie: playoff chases & postseason numbers, by evidence of his last 3 seasons. And it's seemed that his career is tailspinning a bit with the expectations in Anaheim/LA. We have clutch ratings in the game already, and perhaps failing miserably in clutch stretch of games or postseason could slightly dip some ratings like discipline, vision, contact v ?HP.

I think they have a lot of things in place to make a significant dip/upside in ratings possible in a responsible way. I would say, at least be conservative in what they publish for us. I'd love to be a tester for this system to show them what they think they should do about getting it right

[braves_94]

Re: PS4 Discussion (MLB The Show 14)

I just wish teams like Astros, Twins, and Marlins didn't part with their best prospects during a down season to acquire someone like Rajai Davis.

Maybe just build in some code that limits the CPU's want from shipping off Top 50 prospects? It seems like in every franchise, teams get hosed when dealing their top guys for average Joes. When in real life those teams are incredibly protective of them. Seems like the only players that get dealt now are mid-range prospects close to the major leagues, and their path is blocked by an established player.

[Knight165]

Re: PS4 Discussion (MLB The Show 14)

Just like any other system there would be ceilings and floors in place. A player that already has A potential couldn't then "hit the moon" after a few good seasons. ANd those "good seasons" would in turn be defined by their potential.

.320 is amazing for a D potential player, but it's nothing ********* for a player that is already known to be the best hitter in baseball. So with a system that incorporates stats, the D player would have a small chance of progressing more than expected, while the A potential player would be business as usual, and nothing special would happen.

Also I didn't say or describe a "stats-driven system". There's a big difference between stats being involved in calculations, and stats being the prime determinant. I'm talking about the former.

Is it realistic in principle? Probably not, I agree it isn't... but how else does a video game mimic the human element of real life? How else could a video game give me a career path like that of Oliver Perez, BJ Upton, Jason Bay, Ryan Howard, or conversely: Carlos Beltran, Lance Berkman, Ben Zobrist, Matt Joyce? I just don't see another way.

Well....age...injury....those were brought up(and one is in)
Another is just pure chance.
I want to see my young player who had a phenomenal year tank the next and maybe pick himself back up to be dominant a year or two later....regardless of stats sometimes.
I think that's a little "annoying" thing with the game right now.....My A guy...he's growing....my D guy....not so much.
IMO it wouldn't be much better if I saw my A/great year guy never tank or my A/not so great year guy not bust out.

Here is my thing....IRL.....does a player hit .340/40/120 because he hit .330/35/110 the year before?.....or because he got better and THEN hit .340/40/120?...and did he get better because he hit .330/35/110?
Should stats have THE CHANCE to be a factor in progression? I could see that to some extent....
...I know I quoted you when talking about a stat driven progression/regression system, but it wasn't directed at you really...just in general....

I think we all agree we do want some changes to the system....and certainly hashing out ideas to show to SCEA is ALL good.

M.K.
Knight165

[G3no_11]

Re: PS4 Discussion (MLB The Show 14)

Not sure what other people would think about this, but this is something I've thought of for the PS4:

Being able to plug in our own box scores for franchise simming. Starting out with a blank slate and going through each player and giving him the stats we want for that game. This way you could shape the franchise however you want.. extremely realistic, or whatever else you want.

I generally only play one season and play majority of the games. I like to have players having similar seasons to real life. Being able to plug in my own box scores I could get stats close to real life, or identical if I really wanted to.

This way we could have guys like Puig and Hanley hit .340, Chris Davis hit 40+ bombs, Miggy Cabrera hit .350.. or pitchers like Max Scherzer go 18-1, Kershaw have a sub 2 ERA, ect.