Re: Scripted Innings!
I personally have not felt the effects of a comeback code or scripted inning (though, like all sports real and virtual, I sometimes feel like when things "aren't my day" or "aren't going my way"), and I read developers coming in here saying what they're saying as well. Since The Show '09, they would be hard-pressed to come out and actually put in a hidden comeback code with all of the controversy of the option "being reversed" in years past. I don't think they would ever do such a thing.
That said, I applaud and appreciate what azstdogg has put together. These are hard numbers. I really, really do feel like that the numbers could say 90% of runs coming from innings 7-9 over 10,000 half innings recorded though, and there would still be people saying that those don't at the very least look weird, much less say that there might be something suspicious about that. I'll admit those are very, very interesting numbers and I am glad for what he has done: taken on HustlinOwl's challenge in his own way that actually has some merit.
However, if the developers say there is no "code" or "boost," I have to go by that. I will say there is one time when a developer once said something that was false (this was about 7 years ago now), but it doesn't happen very often. Then again, when I used to code things didn't always happen the way I intended it to either. Maybe there are unintentional effects, or maybe people try and pound the strike zone late in the game and screw things up, don't warm up their pitchers, see a bigger slew of sacrifices and pinch hitters, sandbag when they're far ahead, etc.
If you're up to it azstdogg, what you should really do (if you still have the numbers, hopefully on a spread sheet) is do a t-test to calculate the effect size so we can determine whether these numbers are even statistically significant. They are eye-opening, but who knows if this is even something that people would actually... notice on their own? I don't know. Just a thought.
Granted, this is for online play... a mode that I don't play. I don't really care either way, but I am glad somebody actually did something in a way to try and provide evidence for something that might be a wee bit more than just "all in your head." Those numbers are clearly not in somebody's head.
I personally have not felt the effects of a comeback code or scripted inning (though, like all sports real and virtual, I sometimes feel like when things "aren't my day" or "aren't going my way"), and I read developers coming in here saying what they're saying as well. Since The Show '09, they would be hard-pressed to come out and actually put in a hidden comeback code with all of the controversy of the option "being reversed" in years past. I don't think they would ever do such a thing.
That said, I applaud and appreciate what azstdogg has put together. These are hard numbers. I really, really do feel like that the numbers could say 90% of runs coming from innings 7-9 over 10,000 half innings recorded though, and there would still be people saying that those don't at the very least look weird, much less say that there might be something suspicious about that. I'll admit those are very, very interesting numbers and I am glad for what he has done: taken on HustlinOwl's challenge in his own way that actually has some merit.
However, if the developers say there is no "code" or "boost," I have to go by that. I will say there is one time when a developer once said something that was false (this was about 7 years ago now), but it doesn't happen very often. Then again, when I used to code things didn't always happen the way I intended it to either. Maybe there are unintentional effects, or maybe people try and pound the strike zone late in the game and screw things up, don't warm up their pitchers, see a bigger slew of sacrifices and pinch hitters, sandbag when they're far ahead, etc.
If you're up to it azstdogg, what you should really do (if you still have the numbers, hopefully on a spread sheet) is do a t-test to calculate the effect size so we can determine whether these numbers are even statistically significant. They are eye-opening, but who knows if this is even something that people would actually... notice on their own? I don't know. Just a thought.
Granted, this is for online play... a mode that I don't play. I don't really care either way, but I am glad somebody actually did something in a way to try and provide evidence for something that might be a wee bit more than just "all in your head." Those numbers are clearly not in somebody's head.
Comment