The hitting in this game is off...

[BegBy]

Re: The hitting in this game is off...

You want proof that zone is better to use online than directional?

All the top players use zone. None of them use directional.

Unless I misread your quote and you were asking something else.

I am the one saying zone is better. I am aware. The post you liked above mine, that you wished you could like twice...yeah he says there is no difference.

Awkward...

[bcruise]

Re: The hitting in this game is off...

Not sure if you'll accept this as proof, but here's another take on it from one of the top players.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/R8pRHYJZbnY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Video is from '16, but it still applies. Except that, on occasion in '17 I've seen the PCI go slightly up or slightly down on an opponent's swing analysis. That can be attributed to timing (early = high, low = late). It only moves on the Y-axis though - no left or right.

[underdog13]

Re: The hitting in this game is off...

I am the one saying zone is better. I am aware. The post you liked above mine, that you wished you could like twice...yeah he says there is no difference.

Awkward...

Zone is better as for reaching your top in game potential. But as for realism it isn't any better, just a different process to get the same results.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[fanofbaseball]

Re: The hitting in this game is off...

I'm not sure which input method is easier, and I should also state I am speaking offline exclusively. I fully realize the issues with directional hitting online vs another person. Watching videos or live streams clearly show that directional vs other people is absurd. PCI placement and timing seem to mean little and DD games are basically moonshots all day. If I had to say a method is easier I suppose I would say zone, and only because when I use it I do not move the PCI and net much greater results. Not easier in theory, but seemingly in practice.


I get what you're saying and would normally agree, but show me how these 2 input methods are absolutely equal. Show me how they were 'balanced out'. I don't think they are at all. I can see and feel with my own eyes and while I admit it's not entirely scientific it's also undeniable. As I mentioned previously all one has to do is either play an online game vs another person or watch streams and videos and you'll clearly see that directional in that setting is absolutely superior. There seems to be no penalty for bad timing or swinging at bad pitches (location) because balls are crushed. I mean crushed.

Show me with proof.

And I don't need any condescending parables, please. Or at least step it up a notch.

I'm unable to provide a full response to your post at this time. But I will address your trailing comments now and, hopefully, come back to others at a later time.

I was not in any way condescending nor do I have any need to step it up a notch. Your previous counter points were primarily based on an appeal to public opinion, which is a logical fallacy. I directly addressed that fallacy and wrapped up all my arguments in a nice tidy bow, that you perceived to be a condescending parable. It was not condescending and the "parable" directly addresses the issue at hand. Rather than writing my statements off as empty platitudes, I encourage you to give them some thought and to revisit both directional and zone hitting modes, giving both a fair trial with an open mind.

Transitioning from one to the other isn't easy. As such, playing a couple games should not be used as a measuring stick. My position was/is to do 50 games of franchise with both. Become proficient with both and your opinions and feedback will exceed that of simply echoing the masses. Should you heed my advice, I'm confident that on reflection you will not find my statements condescending nor a parable.

You want proof and I've defined the means from which you can obtain proof. Play 50 franchise games with Zone and 50 franchise games with directional.

[young22]

Re: The hitting in this game is off...

We have this discussion every year, and every year people take player's year long batting averages to explain why you miss hit so many balls that you were sitting on and went right where you "aimed". Thats such bad logic. You think Miguel Cabrera hits .300 on fastballs down the middle in 2-0 counts when hes sitting on that pitch? Guess what, he doesnt.

Actually he probably hits higher then .300 in that situation

Sent from my SM-G386W using Operation Sports mobile app

[Glenn33]

Re: The hitting in this game is off...

If we had a true MLB simulation, we'd all be bored as hell.

Quote of the year.

[mikeq672]

Re: The hitting in this game is off...

He doesn't hit .100 either. It's not real baseball, we all get that and we also understand that real baseball is really hard. Hitting is arguably the toughest thing to do in sports, but when pitchers screw up and leave stuff hanging against guys like Miguel they will get punished. Not always, and maybe not even as much as we think, but they do get punished, so when you're stuck hitting popups and the only thing you could have done correctly (literally) doesn't translate to any reward - it's less than awesome.

I still say it's input method. I just played a game on zone without moving the PCI, got 14 hits, 4 homeruns. I'm 3 innings into the exact same game using directional...no hits, all weak popups and foul tips. Not saying I should get 14 hits and 4 homeruns, but damn, I shouldn't be able to predict my (lack of) hits as well as one can the lunar cycle. It's linear and bad.

Your tone says you disagree, but everything you typed in the first paragraph says you agree so Im confused.