I moved away from Meter and started using Pure Analog years ago b/c to me, it just felt the most realistic in regards to the natural motion of the windup and pitch location. I've tried every option and even spent a ton of hours using Pulse recently, but I always end up going back to Pure Analog, which is why I was kinda confused when they introduced Pinpoint w/ the main reason being to give players an even more accurate option.
Pure Analog, to me, is already insanely accurate enough. Even on Legend, I've never had any complaints in regards to where the ball ends up compared to where I was aiming. If I hit the yellow line on the down-stroke and place the marker in the middle of the circle on the up-stroke, 9 times out of 10 the ball goes exactly where I intended it to. Upping the difficulty and playing w/ low rated pitchers only seems to make the up-stroke a bit more touchy -- meaning it's a bit harder to get the marker to land in the circle. But other than that, as I said, if you hit the yellow line and land the marker in the circle, it's going to go where you intended it to w/ little-to-no deviation.
With that said, I still figured I'd give Pinpoint a shot. I knew from the reveal video that it wasn't going to be easy to just jump into and that a lot of practice would have to go into it to really get the hang of it.
But after a number of games and using multiple different pitchers, my early impressions leave me unimpressed. Not that it's a poorly made interface. In fact, it's very well made for a first iteration. My issue isn't exactly so much w/ the difficulty of the execution as much as it is w/ whether or not it's worth using for the boost in accuracy.
Pure Analog only has two systems in place and fairly simple; the timing of the down-stroke when it hits the yellow line and the angle on the up-stroke to get into the top circle for horizontal ball-placement.
(Yes, technically there's a third system where the speed of your up-stroke will supposedly affect the pitch velocity, but 99% of players go max velocity anyway and there's no real reason to NOT do so, which leaves that part of the interface moot)
Pinpoint has three different systems in place:
1. the pattern you have to follow w/ the right stick
2. the speed in which you must follow that pattern to the top circle
3. the timing of the down-stroke to the bottom circle.
The 2nd step is where most -- if not all -- of your accuracy comes from and it is NOT forgiving. Pinpoint is surely accurate as all hell when you get it right, but even the slightest deviation of speed in which you have to follow the pattern can affect your accuracy greatly.
A pitcher w/ a slow windup is fairly easy to handle, becoming slightly more difficult out of the stretch (as it does w/ Pure Analog and Meter). But even a guy like Kershaw pitching out of the stretch can be a world of difference from using a guy like Josh Hader, who has a crazy fast windup by default. Spend 7+ innings pitching w/ the former before switching to the latter and you'll likely be flailing all over the place to start. They weren't lying when they said that every pitcher will feel unique and come w/ their own challenges... and trust me when I say the 8 warm-up pitches you're given when substituting pitchers have never been more useful than they are now when using Pinpoint. I haven't even dared try to execute a slide-step yet...
So while the option is as advertised in every way and really well done, I just don't see myself ever fully committing to it as my main pitching interface when Pure Analog is already accurate enough.
If you're looking for a more challenging pitching interface and willing to invest several hours practicing to get really good at it, then this is definitely the option for you. But if a crazy accurate interface is all you're looking for, Pure Analog is still where it's at, IMO. I just don't believe Pinpoint is worth the time and effort you'd have to put into mastering it for the added accuracy (if that's what you're after) when the difference in accuracy b/w Pinpoint and Pure Analog is pretty marginal.
Pure Analog, to me, is already insanely accurate enough. Even on Legend, I've never had any complaints in regards to where the ball ends up compared to where I was aiming. If I hit the yellow line on the down-stroke and place the marker in the middle of the circle on the up-stroke, 9 times out of 10 the ball goes exactly where I intended it to. Upping the difficulty and playing w/ low rated pitchers only seems to make the up-stroke a bit more touchy -- meaning it's a bit harder to get the marker to land in the circle. But other than that, as I said, if you hit the yellow line and land the marker in the circle, it's going to go where you intended it to w/ little-to-no deviation.
With that said, I still figured I'd give Pinpoint a shot. I knew from the reveal video that it wasn't going to be easy to just jump into and that a lot of practice would have to go into it to really get the hang of it.
But after a number of games and using multiple different pitchers, my early impressions leave me unimpressed. Not that it's a poorly made interface. In fact, it's very well made for a first iteration. My issue isn't exactly so much w/ the difficulty of the execution as much as it is w/ whether or not it's worth using for the boost in accuracy.
Pure Analog only has two systems in place and fairly simple; the timing of the down-stroke when it hits the yellow line and the angle on the up-stroke to get into the top circle for horizontal ball-placement.
(Yes, technically there's a third system where the speed of your up-stroke will supposedly affect the pitch velocity, but 99% of players go max velocity anyway and there's no real reason to NOT do so, which leaves that part of the interface moot)
Pinpoint has three different systems in place:
1. the pattern you have to follow w/ the right stick
2. the speed in which you must follow that pattern to the top circle
3. the timing of the down-stroke to the bottom circle.
The 2nd step is where most -- if not all -- of your accuracy comes from and it is NOT forgiving. Pinpoint is surely accurate as all hell when you get it right, but even the slightest deviation of speed in which you have to follow the pattern can affect your accuracy greatly.
A pitcher w/ a slow windup is fairly easy to handle, becoming slightly more difficult out of the stretch (as it does w/ Pure Analog and Meter). But even a guy like Kershaw pitching out of the stretch can be a world of difference from using a guy like Josh Hader, who has a crazy fast windup by default. Spend 7+ innings pitching w/ the former before switching to the latter and you'll likely be flailing all over the place to start. They weren't lying when they said that every pitcher will feel unique and come w/ their own challenges... and trust me when I say the 8 warm-up pitches you're given when substituting pitchers have never been more useful than they are now when using Pinpoint. I haven't even dared try to execute a slide-step yet...
So while the option is as advertised in every way and really well done, I just don't see myself ever fully committing to it as my main pitching interface when Pure Analog is already accurate enough.
If you're looking for a more challenging pitching interface and willing to invest several hours practicing to get really good at it, then this is definitely the option for you. But if a crazy accurate interface is all you're looking for, Pure Analog is still where it's at, IMO. I just don't believe Pinpoint is worth the time and effort you'd have to put into mastering it for the added accuracy (if that's what you're after) when the difference in accuracy b/w Pinpoint and Pure Analog is pretty marginal.
Comment