Before I start, let me preface this by saying I think the game is good. Not great. Not close to great. It's good. However, calling this a solid representation of baseball is simply not accurate. I've been around baseball for pretty much my entire life, all 38 years of it. I know the game. I know the strategies involved. Too many reviewers are reviewing a VIDEO GAME and not a BASEBALL video game. They simply don't understand the nuances of the game in order to provide an accurate review of a game. In my opinion, if you want to give a review about a game, you need to KNOW about that particular thing in real life, otherwise you're simply reviewing what you know rather than what everyone else knows. Let me explain what I feel needs to be addressed and how to address it.
1. Artificial Intelligence Boosts per Difficulty Level - the developers have clearly stated that the CPU AI gets a boost at higher difficulty levels in order to replicate a more challenging experience. The problem with this is that it simply isn't realistic. Do MLB players get an artificial boost when they get to the show as opposed to when they're in AA or AAA? On higher levels, the game should play SMARTER. The CPU should mix pitches better. The CPU should work the corners more. The CPU should lay off clear waste pitches. The CPU should know when to bunt and when not to bunt. The managers should be smarter with substitutions. Don't boost the ratings of the CPU just because you're playing on a harder difficulty level, that's the easy way out. The game should play BETTER on higher difficulty levels, just as players play better in the MLB. Just because the user scores 3 runs doesn't mean the very next half inning the CPU has to score 2 to make it interesting. It doesn't mean an opportunistic error has to occur to allow the CPU to rally. That's cheap coding. Make the game smarter on higher difficulty levels, not cheesier.
2. Errors - I understand the developers have to code the game in order to accurately depict error totals so some of those errors may seem forced, but let's try to maintain a sense of realism on those errors. Errors don't only occur when one team is down by a lot and needs to rally. They occur at all junctures of a game. I've had to lower the error slider exponentially not because the error totals are too high, but because those errors seem to ONLY occur when a team needs to rally to make up a large deficit. The frequency of errors is fine, it's the juncture that's the problem.
3. Zone hitting vs. Cursor hitting - there's a reason why so many people who have played other games prefer the other hitting style to zone hitting. Zone hitting takes control OUT of the user's hands and into the games hands. Too many times I feel like I've totally squared up a ball only to hit a lazy can of corn. Then when I check the PCI, it's right spot on and the timing says good. So why is my contact so poor? The developers say it's because the PCI isn't an accurate reflection of where the cursor is, it's simply a zone and the part of the zone where the bat actually lands is at the sole discretion of . . . the game. Which means any and every single hit you get could be attributed to the game saying it was time to get a hit. I understand ratings have to come into play at some point and so the developers allow the game to dictate how those ratings come into play, however I have a solution for all this. . . and it lies in the meter.
4. The strike zone - the strike zone has zero consistency in the game, regardless of whether you put variable umpiring on or off. It's as if the developers have no respect for umpires and assume they all have different zones in different innings depending on the score of the game. We've all seen umpires make mistakes. We're all seen them blow calls. However, for the most part, their strikes zones remain somewhat consistent. If an ump has a low zone, he generally calls low pitches strikes. This doesn't change throughout the course of the game generally. Variable umpiring means umpires should have tendencies so a pitch just off the black may be called a strike, however it should be called a strike consistently, not when the ump feels like it. Likewise, if variable umpiring is off, CALL THE ZONE CORRECTLY! If we turn variable umpiring off, it's because we don't want those off the black pitches to be called strikes. So why are they sometimes? The umpiring is a gray area because, in my opinion, the developers use the umpires to affect a game's outcome. It shouldn't be this way. Ever.
The Meter: The Solution
The meter is completely underutilized in its time. So many issues could be addressed if the meter was properly implemented. Let me list the ways:
1. Fielding Throws - as I mentioned above in the errors section, errors can be ratings based, but not entirely at the discretion of the game. The meter speed should not be the same for all fielders and the red area should not be the same either. Manny Machado is a solid infielder and should have a larger red area and a slower meter so he rarely makes throwing errors. A poor fielder like Justin Upton should have a very fast meter and a very small red area so that making accurate throws is much more difficult.
2. Pitching - same exact concept as above. Someone like Dallas Keuchel who is known for painting corners should have a slow meter and a HUGE red area. When you first press the button to start the meter, the speed with which is goes up can be based on the speed of the pitchers delivery, which it is now, however the speed that which is comes back should be solely based on the control of that pitcher. Further in this regard, the ball should go to the location based on where the USER MISSES the meter, not where the game decides it should go. Right now, if you miss the meter, it is solely at the game's discretion where the pitch lands. It could be in the dirt. It could be a meatball. It could be anywhere. This alone might be the worst implementation of any pitching meter ever. If I'm early on the pitching meter, the pitch should be high, showing the ball was released early. If I'm late, the ball should be lower than aimed, showing I was late on the release. This isn't rocket science. So if I'm aiming high and inside, if I hit the meter very late, the pitch should be lower and more down the middle. If I hit the meter slightly late, the pitch could be lower but still on the inside part of the plate. Likewise, if I'm aiming low and I miss late, the pitch would be in the dirt. And the ratings come into play based on that pitchers control rating. So if the pitcher has good control, it's easier to pinpoint pitches SOLELY because the meter is easier to use, NOT because the game decides this pitcher is good so his pitches will be more accurate. The meter implementation is HUGE in this game and should be utilized in such a way that the result of the game is more based on the user's input and not because the game decided that a pitcher is good and is going to have a good outing. And different meter speeds make it difficult to master, so for the most part, you won't be hurling shutouts with good pitchers all the time. Heck, you can even implement the meter speed in such a way that it's tied to how well a pitcher throws a pitch. If a pitcher has a well controlled fastball, the meter could be slower, but if the pitcher has a poorly controlled curveball (think Betances), his meter could be VERY fast. It's STILL in the user's control, however it's going to be VERY difficult to master at certain speeds.
3. Hitting - It's time to implement cursor hitting and here's how. In my opinion, ratings should be put into action based on the SIZE of the cursor. So if you're hitting with Mike Trout, the cursor should be larger whereas if you're hitting with Yu Darvish, the cursor should be microscopic. This in itself should (in theory) regulate batting averages and power. Say someone like Starlin Castro is up (who hits for good average but has below average power), maybe his cursor would be LONGER and THINNER so it's easier to punch singles and extra base hits, but not so much homers. And for someone like Joey Gallo who hits for nothing but power, his cursor could be MUCH shorter (like a circle), so if you square up a pitch, it could go a long way, however if you aren't right on it, odds are you're not doing much with it. Likewise, if you're hitting with someone like Trout, it could be Long and Thick so he can punch singles but also has a higher likelihood of hitting homers.
I feel these changes could really add to the game in the sense that it would take away the feeling that the game has so much control based on ratings and put those ratings into use while still allowing the user to dictate play and results. Why take control out of the users hands if you have the tools to give the user total control WHILE AT THE SAME TIME utilizing ratings? I think these changes would bring this game a LONG way to achieving a level of realism we've never seen before in a video game.
Or they could be terrible. Just my thoughts.
1. Artificial Intelligence Boosts per Difficulty Level - the developers have clearly stated that the CPU AI gets a boost at higher difficulty levels in order to replicate a more challenging experience. The problem with this is that it simply isn't realistic. Do MLB players get an artificial boost when they get to the show as opposed to when they're in AA or AAA? On higher levels, the game should play SMARTER. The CPU should mix pitches better. The CPU should work the corners more. The CPU should lay off clear waste pitches. The CPU should know when to bunt and when not to bunt. The managers should be smarter with substitutions. Don't boost the ratings of the CPU just because you're playing on a harder difficulty level, that's the easy way out. The game should play BETTER on higher difficulty levels, just as players play better in the MLB. Just because the user scores 3 runs doesn't mean the very next half inning the CPU has to score 2 to make it interesting. It doesn't mean an opportunistic error has to occur to allow the CPU to rally. That's cheap coding. Make the game smarter on higher difficulty levels, not cheesier.
2. Errors - I understand the developers have to code the game in order to accurately depict error totals so some of those errors may seem forced, but let's try to maintain a sense of realism on those errors. Errors don't only occur when one team is down by a lot and needs to rally. They occur at all junctures of a game. I've had to lower the error slider exponentially not because the error totals are too high, but because those errors seem to ONLY occur when a team needs to rally to make up a large deficit. The frequency of errors is fine, it's the juncture that's the problem.
3. Zone hitting vs. Cursor hitting - there's a reason why so many people who have played other games prefer the other hitting style to zone hitting. Zone hitting takes control OUT of the user's hands and into the games hands. Too many times I feel like I've totally squared up a ball only to hit a lazy can of corn. Then when I check the PCI, it's right spot on and the timing says good. So why is my contact so poor? The developers say it's because the PCI isn't an accurate reflection of where the cursor is, it's simply a zone and the part of the zone where the bat actually lands is at the sole discretion of . . . the game. Which means any and every single hit you get could be attributed to the game saying it was time to get a hit. I understand ratings have to come into play at some point and so the developers allow the game to dictate how those ratings come into play, however I have a solution for all this. . . and it lies in the meter.
4. The strike zone - the strike zone has zero consistency in the game, regardless of whether you put variable umpiring on or off. It's as if the developers have no respect for umpires and assume they all have different zones in different innings depending on the score of the game. We've all seen umpires make mistakes. We're all seen them blow calls. However, for the most part, their strikes zones remain somewhat consistent. If an ump has a low zone, he generally calls low pitches strikes. This doesn't change throughout the course of the game generally. Variable umpiring means umpires should have tendencies so a pitch just off the black may be called a strike, however it should be called a strike consistently, not when the ump feels like it. Likewise, if variable umpiring is off, CALL THE ZONE CORRECTLY! If we turn variable umpiring off, it's because we don't want those off the black pitches to be called strikes. So why are they sometimes? The umpiring is a gray area because, in my opinion, the developers use the umpires to affect a game's outcome. It shouldn't be this way. Ever.
The Meter: The Solution
The meter is completely underutilized in its time. So many issues could be addressed if the meter was properly implemented. Let me list the ways:
1. Fielding Throws - as I mentioned above in the errors section, errors can be ratings based, but not entirely at the discretion of the game. The meter speed should not be the same for all fielders and the red area should not be the same either. Manny Machado is a solid infielder and should have a larger red area and a slower meter so he rarely makes throwing errors. A poor fielder like Justin Upton should have a very fast meter and a very small red area so that making accurate throws is much more difficult.
2. Pitching - same exact concept as above. Someone like Dallas Keuchel who is known for painting corners should have a slow meter and a HUGE red area. When you first press the button to start the meter, the speed with which is goes up can be based on the speed of the pitchers delivery, which it is now, however the speed that which is comes back should be solely based on the control of that pitcher. Further in this regard, the ball should go to the location based on where the USER MISSES the meter, not where the game decides it should go. Right now, if you miss the meter, it is solely at the game's discretion where the pitch lands. It could be in the dirt. It could be a meatball. It could be anywhere. This alone might be the worst implementation of any pitching meter ever. If I'm early on the pitching meter, the pitch should be high, showing the ball was released early. If I'm late, the ball should be lower than aimed, showing I was late on the release. This isn't rocket science. So if I'm aiming high and inside, if I hit the meter very late, the pitch should be lower and more down the middle. If I hit the meter slightly late, the pitch could be lower but still on the inside part of the plate. Likewise, if I'm aiming low and I miss late, the pitch would be in the dirt. And the ratings come into play based on that pitchers control rating. So if the pitcher has good control, it's easier to pinpoint pitches SOLELY because the meter is easier to use, NOT because the game decides this pitcher is good so his pitches will be more accurate. The meter implementation is HUGE in this game and should be utilized in such a way that the result of the game is more based on the user's input and not because the game decided that a pitcher is good and is going to have a good outing. And different meter speeds make it difficult to master, so for the most part, you won't be hurling shutouts with good pitchers all the time. Heck, you can even implement the meter speed in such a way that it's tied to how well a pitcher throws a pitch. If a pitcher has a well controlled fastball, the meter could be slower, but if the pitcher has a poorly controlled curveball (think Betances), his meter could be VERY fast. It's STILL in the user's control, however it's going to be VERY difficult to master at certain speeds.
3. Hitting - It's time to implement cursor hitting and here's how. In my opinion, ratings should be put into action based on the SIZE of the cursor. So if you're hitting with Mike Trout, the cursor should be larger whereas if you're hitting with Yu Darvish, the cursor should be microscopic. This in itself should (in theory) regulate batting averages and power. Say someone like Starlin Castro is up (who hits for good average but has below average power), maybe his cursor would be LONGER and THINNER so it's easier to punch singles and extra base hits, but not so much homers. And for someone like Joey Gallo who hits for nothing but power, his cursor could be MUCH shorter (like a circle), so if you square up a pitch, it could go a long way, however if you aren't right on it, odds are you're not doing much with it. Likewise, if you're hitting with someone like Trout, it could be Long and Thick so he can punch singles but also has a higher likelihood of hitting homers.
I feel these changes could really add to the game in the sense that it would take away the feeling that the game has so much control based on ratings and put those ratings into use while still allowing the user to dictate play and results. Why take control out of the users hands if you have the tools to give the user total control WHILE AT THE SAME TIME utilizing ratings? I think these changes would bring this game a LONG way to achieving a level of realism we've never seen before in a video game.
Or they could be terrible. Just my thoughts.
Comment