MLB The Show Server Issues: Detailing the Saga So Far

[Dolenz]

Re: MLB The Show Server Issues: Detailing the Saga So Far

I play mostly Play vs CPU games in DD as a try and work through some missions. It has progressed from the point where I would get an occasional disconnect to now, where as I end a game I cross my fingers and pray it counts. Of course none of that helps. 2 of my last four games in this mode have been disconnected. It has caused me to take breaks from the game.


The big downside to that is the sheer amount of my (and many, many others) time that has been wasted. You could have been disconnected from the server in the second inning but you aren't going to know that until you put in another 40 minutes to finish the game. I can almost live with that in Conquest 3 inning games but 9 inning games take me an hour to finish sometimes.


Last night I actually decided to play a series or two in RTTS. I was on a post game points recap screen and noticed that I had two message that I needed to hit the touch pad to access. I hit the touchpad and the little network circle started spinning and I locked up. This is the most offline of all the major nodes.


I am greatly disappointed in the state of the servers and SDS for their lack of communication.


You have connected practically everything to the servers. Franchise checks the servers to see if you have completed any missions. DD games vs the CPU have to check the servers. You roll out events and timed missions that guarantee that the servers are going to overloaded. So many missions for the best cards require PvP games in Ranked, BR, and Events that you are forcing more people than ever to play online. If you are going to continue to funnel people to the server then you have to make sure you have the ability to handle it all.

[Mike Lowe]

As someone who has yet to go online once, and someone who does not care one bit for rewards (I actually wish I could just turn off all of the notifications), I think this is the best version of the Show ever. I wish franchise mode had some more updates this year, but overall, the gameplay is fantastic with the right sliders, and aside from a few issues like catchers not being good enough at blocking pitches in the dirt and position players still tiring too quickly in franchise mode, I think the game is great.

I've noticed a lot of menus having wrong text, wrong year for stats, etc. but those are minor cosmetic things. I like how the game plays, and only wish SDS spent more time on strengthening their QA versus pedaling some of the gimmicky things we saw prior to release (Ken Griffey's hat is BACKWARDS!).

All told, I've enjoyed the game, and I hope the community doesn't shut this game down via lack of support. I know that's asking a lot to continue to be patient, but be patient--they want to get this right for everyone.

Back to my franchise!

[335TDC]

As someone who has yet to go online once, and someone who does not care one bit for rewards (I actually wish I could just turn off all of the notifications), I think this is the best version of the Show ever. I wish franchise mode had some more updates this year, but overall, the gameplay is fantastic with the right sliders, and aside from a few issues like catchers not being good enough at blocking pitches in the dirt and position players still tiring too quickly in franchise mode, I think the game is great.

I've noticed a lot of menus having wrong text, wrong year for stats, etc. but those are minor cosmetic things. I like how the game plays, and only wish SDS spent more time on strengthening their QA versus pedaling some of the gimmicky things we saw prior to release (Ken Griffey's hat is BACKWARDS!).

All told, I've enjoyed the game, and I hope the community doesn't shut this game down via lack of support. I know that's asking a lot to continue to be patient, but be patient--they want to get this right for everyone.

Back to my franchise!

I play the same way you do, but am on the complete opposite side of the reaction spectrum. I support the online players in their absolute disgust and frustration and believe that -- while you're right: being patient or giving up on the game are the only two options -- taking the "just be patient, they're good guys who want to get it right" stance is ridiculous. This is a LEGACY issue madeworse by the fact that this year SSD has pushed almost all their chips into the middle of the DD online table while not having the infrastructure to support the traffic. Not only that, but instead of just shutting down servers until they're fixed -- I know, money, never gonna happen -- they continue to play with people's time and even released a new "mission" while all this is going on. Irresponsible and inexcusable. Add to this their "Note to the Community" in which they never once used the words "sorry" or "apologize," but promised -- oh, joy! -- FREE STUFF and....well, patience would be, quite frankly, irresponsible.

[dasfette]

I don't think I totally understand this mentality that some in the OS community have around developers. It very much feels like, per those folks, no one is ever, ever, ever to become upset over the way a game releases. You're allowed to provide "constructive criticism", but anything other than that can become reason for deletion of posts or banning (and, for the record, I'm not, by any means, condoning personal attacks on devs).

Well, funny thing around constructive criticism: I'm not a software engineer. And even if I was I simply don't have access to the game's coding. So it's a little difficult to provide constructive criticism around why the game's online modes don't work.

I can't imagine ANY other industry/commercial product where this is acceptable. If you buy a new car from Chevy and it doesn't go into reverse, are you satisfied with "you just have to be patient until Chevy finds a fix"? No! "Oh, and you better be an engineer because, unless you can tell us WHY the car won't go into reverse, we don't wanna hear it."

Sure, a car costs considerably more than a video game. But let's use a battery-operated shower cleaner. If you put the batteries in and it doesn't spray, would anyone find it reasonable for the consumer to "wait for a fix"? No! You'd return it as broken and have the choice, as a consumer, to buy a different product from another developer.

But video games don't work that way. Once you open that plastic wrapping, it's yours. If it doesn't perform to established expectations? Well, sucks for you, because no returning it. So you're either forced to wait for a fix (and you BETTER not say anything bad about the product - only constructive criticism!) or you sell it on the open market. It's absolutely absurd that we let the video game industry get away with such things.

But, that's where capitalism is so great. If you truly want to change those practices, you simply stop buying the product. SDS is a business here to make a profit. No profit means changes to the product, or no more business. So, maybe we should all put our money where our mouths are and stop buying the game until the devs decide to put out a working product that is worth the cost they charge.

[335TDC]

We're having a mature discussion...we can be critical without bashing SCEA and calling their game garbage and the developers liars.

We CAN, but I say as long as attacks aren't of a personal nature, SSD-bashing is well-deserved, so long as the criticisms have basis in fact. When you go No-Man's-Sky silent for over a week and haven't apologized, you get what you deserve.

[335TDC]

I don't think I totally understand this mentality that some in the OS community have around developers. It very much feels like, per those folks, no one is ever, ever, ever to become upset over the way a game releases. You're allowed to provide "constructive criticism", but anything other than that can become reason for deletion of posts or banning (and, for the record, I'm not, by any means, condoning personal attacks on devs).

Well, funny thing around constructive criticism: I'm not a software engineer. And even if I was I simply don't have access to the game's coding. So it's a little difficult to provide constructive criticism around why the game's online modes don't work.

I can't imagine ANY other industry/commercial product where this is acceptable. If you buy a new car from Chevy and it doesn't go into reverse, are you satisfied with "you just have to be patient until Chevy finds a fix"? No! "Oh, and you better be an engineer because, unless you can tell us WHY the car won't go into reverse, we don't wanna hear it."

Sure, a car costs considerably more than a video game. But let's use a battery-operated shower cleaner. If you put the batteries in and it doesn't spray, would anyone find it reasonable for the consumer to "wait for a fix"? No! You'd return it as broken and have the choice, as a consumer, to buy a different product from another developer.

But video games don't work that way. Once you open that plastic wrapping, it's yours. If it doesn't perform to established expectations? Well, sucks for you, because no returning it. So you're either forced to wait for a fix (and you BETTER not say anything bad about the product - only constructive criticism!) or you sell it on the open market. It's absolutely absurd that we let the video game industry get away with such things.

But, that's where capitalism is so great. If you truly want to change those practices, you simply stop buying the product. SDS is a business here to make a profit. No profit means changes to the product, or no more business. So, maybe we should all put our money where our mouths are and stop buying the game until the devs decide to put out a working product that is worth the cost they charge.

Great post, especially concerning the "constructive criticism." I've always felt that OS was too sensitive about this, but at the same time I understand their desire to control the vocabulary used on their site. The "provide a solution or don't complain" angle is total garbage -- it's a mealy-mouthed middle-management business mantra meant to prevent the boat from rocking even while it's sinking.

The difference with video games and product returns, quite simply, is a simple caveat emptor: these are true luxury items, and the buyer can easily wait a week or two to see how things play out. But we don't, mainly because we love them and their releases are treated with such fanfare, much like blockbuster movies. It's our own fault at this point, and that sucks.

[Dolenz]

Re: MLB The Show Server Issues: Detailing the Saga So Far

We're having a mature discussion...we can be critical without bashing SCEA and calling their game garbage and the developers liars.

I have said this before, the game is great, it's the servers that are garbage. They make me want to

[UofM Alumni]

Re: MLB The Show Server Issues: Detailing the Saga So Far

Is there any end to the server issues? I want to get the osfm rosters downloaded but cant

[Mike Lowe]

No one at OS has told me to be supportive. I find there's great benefit in being kind when possible. I know it's frustrating, but you're stressing yourself out over a video game which isn't healthy. And even if we consider the game a total loss, it's $60. Sucks, but not the end of the world.

For what it's worth, franchise mode seems to be playing quite well. It's the only mode I've played so far, so I can't speak to the other modes. I can say, I haven't been frustrated with the game because I am simply avoiding those areas for now (accidental at first, but now intentional).

I get what folks are saying about saying what they want, but I guess outside of venting, I'm not sure the purpose it serves. I think SDS knows folks are disappointed and frustrated.

[MLB14]

Re: MLB The Show Server Issues: Detailing the Saga So Far

The Show was always shaky online, but it was never like what I read this year. It seems like the server instability has gotten worse every year from 2014..

I think the problems lie more in the code powering online game connections than the servers themselves. I think that because how could they so badly underestimate the server bandwidth they would need for a solid launch.

This is the first year I've ever seen the game put up ridiculous distances for HRs too, but I'm giving them a pass on that because I know the new in-air ball physics are probably causing that. If they don't fix that though.. It's a negative point in my opinion. Human beings cannot hit a ball further than ~475 ft. at sea level (without wind).

Graphically, the game is outstanding. Under the hood.. I think the foundation they've built on over the past several years is buckling. This is the first year I've seen MLB 2K-like game glitches in MLB The Show and it's kinda weird.

[jeffy777]

Re: MLB The Show Server Issues: Detailing the Saga So Far

I specifically asked about lag and online performance during one of the Twitch streams and Ramone said they couldn't really answer because they wouldn't know until the game launched. Maybe it's time to consider a beta to really test the servers in advance BEFORE release...

At this rate, it's starting to feel like the servers will only improve when the load decreases...and less people are playing the game...as in they've given up for the year and traded it in.

[Dolenz]

Re: MLB The Show Server Issues: Detailing the Saga So Far

And even if we consider the game a total loss, it's $60. Sucks, but not the end of the world.

Well , many paid $100, and that extra $40 was specifically so we could have the extras that would allow us to play DD. The mode that is most broken.


I can be patient but there is a limit to that patience, especially when there is little to no communication that gives me any idea about how much longer I am supposed to remain patient.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: MLB The Show Server Issues: Detailing the Saga So Far

I don't think I totally understand this mentality that some in the OS community have around developers. It very much feels like, per those folks, no one is ever, ever, ever to become upset over the way a game releases. You're allowed to provide "constructive criticism", but anything other than that can become reason for deletion of posts or banning (and, for the record, I'm not, by any means, condoning personal attacks on devs).

Well, funny thing around constructive criticism: I'm not a software engineer. And even if I was I simply don't have access to the game's coding. So it's a little difficult to provide constructive criticism around why the game's online modes don't work.

I can't imagine ANY other industry/commercial product where this is acceptable. If you buy a new car from Chevy and it doesn't go into reverse, are you satisfied with "you just have to be patient until Chevy finds a fix"? No! "Oh, and you better be an engineer because, unless you can tell us WHY the car won't go into reverse, we don't wanna hear it."

Sure, a car costs considerably more than a video game. But let's use a battery-operated shower cleaner. If you put the batteries in and it doesn't spray, would anyone find it reasonable for the consumer to "wait for a fix"? No! You'd return it as broken and have the choice, as a consumer, to buy a different product from another developer.

But video games don't work that way. Once you open that plastic wrapping, it's yours. If it doesn't perform to established expectations? Well, sucks for you, because no returning it. So you're either forced to wait for a fix (and you BETTER not say anything bad about the product - only constructive criticism!) or you sell it on the open market. It's absolutely absurd that we let the video game industry get away with such things.

But, that's where capitalism is so great. If you truly want to change those practices, you simply stop buying the product. SDS is a business here to make a profit. No profit means changes to the product, or no more business. So, maybe we should all put our money where our mouths are and stop buying the game until the devs decide to put out a working product that is worth the cost they charge.

Great post, especially concerning the "constructive criticism." I've always felt that OS was too sensitive about this, but at the same time I understand their desire to control the vocabulary used on their site. The "provide a solution or don't complain" angle is total garbage -- it's a mealy-mouthed middle-management business mantra meant to prevent the boat from rocking even while it's sinking.

The difference with video games and product returns, quite simply, is a simple caveat emptor: these are true luxury items, and the buyer can easily wait a week or two to see how things play out. But we don't, mainly because we love them and their releases are treated with such fanfare, much like blockbuster movies. It's our own fault at this point, and that sucks.

A few comments on this line of thinking...

1. OS is a privately owned website that can institute whatever rules it deems necessary. If users don't like it, they don't have to use it. No one is forcing anyone to post here. But, when you do, it has to be by the rules.

2. Even if you don't feel competent to levy "constructive criticism" your wording can go along way to determining whether the post is acceptable or not. Almost 100% of the time when people name-call the devs (or anyone else), that will result in a deleted post at minimum. People know to expect that and the rules are very clear. People that can't get their point across without name-calling either need to remember to breathe before posting or they are not mature enough to be part of this community (theoretically).

3. Furthermore, do you really need to be a software engineer to think constructively--at least in general terms--about what the issues are and how to fix them? I don't think that's the case. You could say that your online experience is very frustrating and that Sony would be wise to change servers or upgrade and I think most people would consider that quite milquetoast and constructive in nature--even if not incredibly detailed. It's when you say it with expletives and accusatory language/name-calling that makes it unpleasant.

4. Your whole Chevy analogy doesn't fit. If you have a problem with a Chevy, you take it up with the dealership/GM. If you have a problem with Sony's game, you take it up with Sony. Venting on a middle man's website (OS) is not completely necessary in getting your issues resolved (or at least communicating your displeasure). Chevy will deal with a lot more heated feedback than OS, because Chevy is selling you a product and wants you to buy another. OS doesn't get any benefit at all from being patient toward irate feedback. Your analogies don't work because you're conflating consumer-business relationships (buying a product directly from a business) with consumer-third party situations (posting about the transaction on a separate message board).

5. As for the idea of putting your money where your mouth is....I totally, unequivocally 100% agree. People can skip next year's edition if they don't like this one and that's a reasonable thing to do. Furthermore, this whole "pre-ordering" glitzy versions is part of the problem. If they don't even need to display their "wares" and prove it to the customer, their model allows them to publish essentially a prototype on launch day and fix it over the ensuing weeks and months as they always do.

As for the blame, well, blame the consumers who knowingly pony up $100+ before the game even comes out with every expectation that they'll be disappointed. Also, blame the suits at Sony Corporate for putting their game developers on unrealistic timelines with a skeleton crew and minimal resources. I'm sure the guys at SDS dislike buggy game releases at least as much as we do. I'm sure they are upset that the rollout was not smooth and they have to figure it out while under fire from very unhappy customers. Personally, this is one of the reasons I am happy to work on editing for a while, lol, before ever playing a game.

[dasfette]

A few comments on this line of thinking...

1. OS is a privately owned website that can institute whatever rules it deems necessary. If users don't like it, they don't have to use it. No one is forcing anyone to post here. But, when you do, it has to be by the rules.

2. Even if you don't feel competent to levy "constructive criticism" your wording can go along way to determining whether the post is acceptable or not. Almost 100% of the time when people name-call the devs (or anyone else), that will result in a deleted post at minimum. People know to expect that and the rules are very clear. People that can't get their point across without name-calling either need to remember to breathe before posting or they are not mature enough to be part of this community (theoretically).

3. Furthermore, do you really need to be a software engineer to think constructively--at least in general terms--about what the issues are and how to fix them? I don't think that's the case. You could say that your online experience is very frustrating and that Sony would be wise to change servers or upgrade and I think most people would consider that quite milquetoast and constructive in nature--even if not incredibly detailed. It's when you say it with expletives and accusatory language/name-calling that makes it unpleasant.

4. Your whole Chevy analogy doesn't fit. If you have a problem with a Chevy, you take it up with the dealership/GM. If you have a problem with Sony's game, you take it up with Sony. Venting on a middle man's website (OS) is not completely necessary in getting your issues resolved (or at least communicating your displeasure). Chevy will deal with a lot more heated feedback than OS, because Chevy is selling you a product and wants you to buy another. OS doesn't get any benefit at all from being patient toward irate feedback. Your analogies don't work because you're conflating consumer-business relationships (buying a product directly from a business) with consumer-third party situations (posting about the transaction on a separate message board).

5. As for the idea of putting your money where your mouth is....I totally, unequivocally 100% agree. People can skip next year's edition if they don't like this one and that's a reasonable thing to do. Furthermore, this whole "pre-ordering" glitzy versions is part of the problem. If they don't even need to display their "wares" and prove it to the customer, their model allows them to publish essentially a prototype on launch day and fix it over the ensuing weeks and months as they always do.

As for the blame, well, blame the consumers who knowingly pony up $100+ before the game even comes out with every expectation that they'll be disappointed. Also, blame the suits at Sony Corporate for putting their game developers on unrealistic timelines with a skeleton crew and minimal resources. I'm sure the guys at SDS dislike buggy game releases at least as much as we do. I'm sure they are upset that the rollout was not smooth and they have to figure it out while under fire from very unhappy customers. Personally, this is one of the reasons I am happy to work on editing for a while, lol, before ever playing a game.

I agree. OS is a private website, here to make money - and they can do as they wish. I can think how I wish. I can (technically) post what I want, bad language and all. And OS can delete my posts/ban me. Hell, if I do something REALLY stupid, I can even get arrested! That's totally cool, all the way around. It's responsibility for the action/individual - and that's great! I'm being totally serious.

The reason people post on forums is to connect with other consumers/individuals. OS is a bit different (and I would argue, better) because we DO get developer response. If OS isn't the forum to allow for freedom of thought around game performance (or at least limited thought, in some form), that's totally fine. Again, OS can do as they wish.

The reality is that people will go SOMEWHERE to talk to each other. See those ads at the bottom of the page? That's profit. They exist because OS has people who visit the site. So, truthfully, the same mentality applies to OS. If someone doesn't like that there are rules, or what the rules are, then don't belong to/visit OS. No profit = a change in philosophy/rules, or, possibly, no OS.

Personally, I don't mind the rules and, for the most part, I like what OS provides. Thus the reason I'm not on here cursing or attacking devs. I even try to follow the rules! What I am providing is my opinion, in what I believe to be a constructive manner. Remember, "constructive criticism" can be rather subjective.

You mention going straight back to the dealership (or, in this case, Sony). I agree. If people are really angry about the game, they should probably call Sony/SDS until they're sick of hearing from 'em. But I got to say that I disagree with your thought that, in reality, people ONLY go back to the dealership. If that were the case, forums around vehicle/vehicle performance wouldn't exist. Yet, they do.

Regardless, we're on the same page. The Show isn't, in my opinion, a bad game (surprise: I don't play online). SDS seem like decent folks. OS is full of really cool, smart people. And it absolutely makes sense that some people are upset over the game, and over OS. Again - take it or leave it. That's the choice we all have to make.

[335TDC]

You can't "go back to the dealership" with a video game. Once the shrink wrap is broken, it's YOUR problem. That, my friend, is a "bad analogy."