Simulation vs. Player Control

[Vanilla_Gorilla]

One thing I’ve noticed throughout sports games I’ve played is the tendency of each franchise to side with how the game’s are played out. Whether the game’s are more dependent on simulation stats via players ratings or the user’s inputs.

NBA2K offers the user the most control over their game, meaning you could get a basket from a watermelon with a perfect release. Madden seems to be confused. While The Show heavily leans toward stats and simulation.

There’s nothing wrong with leaning toward’s stats and simulation but I’m sure I’m not alone in this, it feels like you have no control over your game and you’re just more of a spectator. This occurs more in pitching to me than batting. I can get a perfect release on a slider down and away and my pitcher hang it belt high and right down the middle.

What’s the point of my user input if my pitcher is just gonna do what he wants to do? What’s the point of me playing to win the game if the CPU is gonna lose it for me?

Now before someone says that I’m bashing the game or whatnot, I’m not. I’m fine with pitching, it’s just a major annoyance sometimes because user control does matter of course but I don’t think it matters to the extent of us players being in complete control of our game that we are playing.

I think this is something that SDS kinda says “This is okay, it’s not great but we don’t need to worry about it.”

I would say a better way to implement a player’s control while letting the user take complete control of the game would be to make the release point harder to hit for pitchers with lower control (obviously adjustable by sliders). This would make it more important to take warm up pitches and to take the time to get comfortable with your pitchers.

Let me know what you guys think
Cheers

[Caulfield]

Re: Simulation vs. Player Control

it's a really fine line to walk between meshing a players attributes and the individual users stick skills. I prefer that my games are more influenced by the players attributes and my input comes from decision making like whether to pitch with a lefty or righty, when to change pitchers, when to pinch hit, when to bunt, who to shuffle between the majors and the minors, when to shift, who to start and a ton of other stuff but I think my point is made. On the other hand I can see where it might be interesting to set every single players attributes at 50 and see what results I could get with just my stick skills. Fielding-wise I like to use auto because I want to feel immersed by totally relying on my teammates to have my back when I'm pitching. Unless you're pitching with a high strikeout guy, then if you pitch to contact, you have to be able to trust your fielders. If I control the defense then that trust doesnt really exist, for me anyway.

[BigOscar]

Re: Simulation vs. Player Control

Yeah I definitely fall on the side of making the players ratings effect how hard it is for me to execute my input properly, rather than having the game randomly decide what happens depending on ratings.

I like simulation games, I love the Championship/Football Manager series, but I don't want that from a game where I am allegedly controlling my players.

The weird thing is that one element of this game is completely manual, while everything else is a dice roll. That's throwing accuracy, if you put that on button accuracy then you will get perfect throws every single time, regardless of the player you're using, just so long as you aren't completely incompetent and can get the meter right.

[TheWarmWind]

Re: Simulation vs. Player Control

Vanilla_Gorilla you should check out my slider set. I go for a hybrid simulation/arcade style.

You should also check out pulse pitching. At legend difficulty ratings can make a huge difference to how difficult the input is. There still is a factor outside of the user's control, but it is a lot more user input based than the other modes.

Pitch control changes how small the circle can get. Confidence effects how fast the pulse is. There is more I haven't really done a deep dive into the interface, but good pitchers are definitely easier to use than bad ones.

[Baseball Purist]

Re: Simulation vs. Player Control

This series has been like this for awhile. I think it's a common and fair "criticism" from many. If you're looking for your user input to matter consistently on any difficulty higher than all star, the show will become a headache.

I'd be fine with the "simulation" style if it truly was based on ratings. From my playing this year and throughout the series, I've found "simulation" to mean the game just produces random results regardless of players ratings.

This year I have yet to find a balance and thus I've restarted my franchise multiple times.

[Fiddy]

Re: Simulation vs. Player Control

Dumb question.

But with this player control and simulation talk, what level does MLB The Show player ratings play out the best in general? All-Star?

[countryboy]

Re: Simulation vs. Player Control

Dumb question.

But with this player control and simulation talk, what level does MLB The Show player ratings play out the best in general? All-Star?

I don't think it matters honestly. I don't think there is a boost to the CPU at higher difficulty levels nor do I think there is a boost to the USER at lower difficulty levels.

I think the level of difficulty comes from how easily or difficult it is for the USER to maximize the ratings of a given player provided the user input at the time.

Example (and this is for explanation purposes of what I'm saying)

If a hitter has contact rating of 80 and power of 60, when I square up a pitch with perfect timing then the ratings of 80 contact and power of 60 are what is used in the equation when determining outcome (remember pitching ratings are a variable in the equation as well)

I play on default Legend and I've never felt the CPU gets an unfair advantage or cheap boost. The PCI (zone hitting) and timing window are smaller for my hitters as well as my accuracy errors (meter pitching) or a bit more pronounced, but nothing extreme.

I hope that makes sense.

[Vanilla_Gorilla]

Re: Simulation vs. Player Control

This series has been like this for awhile. I think it's a common and fair "criticism" from many. If you're looking for your user input to matter consistently on any difficulty higher than all star, the show will become a headache.

I'd be fine with the "simulation" style if it truly was based on ratings. From my playing this year and throughout the series, I've found "simulation" to mean the game just produces random results regardless of players ratings.

This year I have yet to find a balance and thus I've restarted my franchise multiple times.

I like control of games when I play sports game. Because that’s the whole point of a sports game, you play to control the outcome and get punished for your mistakes. But what’s the whole point of squaring up a ball perfectly or getting a perfect release on a pitch outside for it to be a hanger that gets crushed and your squared up ball to be a shallow pop up??

It just makes you feel like you have no control over the outcome and you’re at the CPU’s mercy.

[Vanilla_Gorilla]

Re: Simulation vs. Player Control

I don't think it matters honestly. I don't think there is a boost to the CPU at higher difficulty levels nor do I think there is a boost to the USER at lower difficulty levels.

I think the level of difficulty comes from how easily or difficult it is for the USER to maximize the ratings of a given player provided the user input at the time.

Example (and this is for explanation purposes of what I'm saying)

If a hitter has contact rating of 80 and power of 60, when I square up a pitch with perfect timing then the ratings of 80 contact and power of 60 are what is used in the equation when determining outcome (remember pitching ratings are a variable in the equation as well)

I play on default Legend and I've never felt the CPU gets an unfair advantage or cheap boost. The PCI (zone hitting) and timing window are smaller for my hitters as well as my accuracy errors (meter pitching) or a bit more pronounced, but nothing extreme.

I hope that makes sense.

SDS has done a great job with the difficulties. I feel like the AI just makes more dumb mistakes on lower difficulties and is smarter on higher difficulties, which is how it’s SUPPOSED to be.

It’s not like Madden nowadays where higher difficulties will make your players dumb and slow as rocks and have DeShone Kizer looking like Aaron Rodgers.

[Thomas7]

Re: Simulation vs. Player Control

You Know The Show.

[Detroit Tigers]

Simulation vs. Player Control

This game has always had a bit of this tbh, and I think for good reason. It’s tuned from the get-go so that you’re not hitting .485 with every player or going 162-0. Like the median experience is a team BA of around .285 and a team ERA around 3.50, then you tweak sliders and difficulty from there.

It could be a lot better but I think due to the nature of the sport (and limitations of the engine) they’ve done a really nice job of balancing user input with some restrictions that keep stats in line with reality.

I also tend to think the hitting engine is actually much more precise than people give it credit for. When you’re in the zone and REALLY see a pitch and barrel it up, results trend toward being pretty sick. If anything the game rewards sloppy timing with hits and contact too often, which throws your expectations into a funk. Don’t have time to elaborate further on that but I’d guess at least a few folks will know what I mean there.