Four Keys to Success for MLB '11: The Show

[Heroesandvillains]

Re: Four Keys to Success for MLB '11: The Show

The Show has something established that is amazing -- realism. It hard for me to even express how closely this game emulates actual baseball games I've watched on TV -- not even talkin' about the visuals but the stats and player tendencies.

Take what you see in the L3 pitch / hit info window with a grain of salt some times, because I've looked at it after I was clearly late on a swing and it said " normal " timing. I'm not sayin' it doesn't work, but sometimes it seems to be off.

As far as pitcher confidence goes, if you turn it off in the options, does it just turn the visual for it off or does it turn the entire mechanic off ?

It only visually turns off the individual confidence of pitches. The blue bar underneath each individual pitch. The overall confidence, or lack there of, still exists "under the hood", so to speak.

If your fasball is good, it's still good with the confidence meter turned off.

Think of it as turning the PCI off. It's still there; you just can't see it.

There's no way to turn off or diminish/enhance the overall confidence meter.

As far as the rest of your post goes, I'm almost all in there. This game is great.

The hitter's overall power needs to be toned down, as far as it's influence over base hits are concerned. Fielding needs a makeover too, but I'm fine just using auto field (thanks SCEA for this.).

I mostly agree with Countryboy on all fronts. But Swaldo does make a great case for adding more seperation between top/bottom tier CPU pitchers. I just disagree (mostly) with how he wants to go about it. I personally love the H/9, BB/9, SO/9 ratings. I don't know about you guys, but my Yanks franchise is going great. It feels very real. Sometimes...uh, it feels too really (Javy Vazquez for instance).

[jhawk826]

Re: Four Keys to Success for MLB '11: The Show

The presentation needs to be revamped. The commentary in 10 was the same from 09 with a few minor differences. Because of that, I felt like I was playing 09 instead of '10 for the last few months. Make the commentary more realistic. At least let them have some conversation. It sounds like they were all in separate booths. Hopefully this issue is addressed.

[ElectricWizard]

STANCES STANCES STANCES

[cardsleadtheway]

Re: Four Keys to Success for MLB '11: The Show

Ever play baseball before? I mean, organized competitive baseball? Ever watch it on TV? You can time the pitch perfectly, hit the ball on the sweetspot and still hit the ball into an out. It happens. Just as you can be fooled, flip the bat and get a hit. Its baseball. Sounds to me you want to remove that aspect of a baseball game.

I have agreed with almost everything you have said up to this point. I have played competitive baseball at so many levels for the better part of my life, and still do in fact. If you time a pitch perfectly, and hit it on the sweet spot, you will make solid contact. You won't pop it up and you won't dribble a weak grounder for an easy double play. You won't get a hit every time, or even half of the time because there are these people that just happen to be hanging around in the field trying to stop you from getting a hit. In my opinion, The Show does a great job with getting stats to a realistic level. I just feel that they go about it wrong. The physics are more than a little off in this game and dependent way too much on attributes. Attributes have to play an important role, but it seems like the attributes take over instead of the physics. I would rather have the frustration of a great pitcher placing the pitch exactly where they want it and possible getting more calls going their way, or a great hitter laying off borderline pitches and crushing the mistake than to have the attributes determine a weak grounder because pitcher A has a H/9 rating that trumps the batters contact rating. The truth is that the difference between a .300 hitter and .250 hitter is a mere 25 hits anyway.

All that being said, I would rather not see any changes to the pitching or hitting system without at least a three year development cycle. It takes far too long to make the game as it is, thus the need to skip of the quality assurance part of development. I hope they leave it all alone and focus solely on fielding and fixing all the franchise bugs. That would make it well worth buying again.

[MLB01]

Re: Four Keys to Success for MLB '11: The Show

I went back to using the left thumbstick when hitting. I'd like to share my thoughts on the PCI. I don't think it represents the bat but instead where the batter is looking.

When I aim the PCI ( batter's eye ) on the ball, solid contact is the usual result, but it could be a foul ball, fielded ball, or base hit. Some people think it represents the bat, so if the ball is at the top of the PCI, a ball hit in the air should result and vice versa, but that's not 100% true and with my slider configuration, it's not usually a base hit ( but it is solid contact ). ( solid hits @ 2, timing @ 1, contact @ 4 )

Overall, what I'm sayin' is, I like it.

[swaldo]

Re: Four Keys to Success for MLB '11: The Show

It is not a pre-determined outcome.
It sounds like you don't want an MLB sim game....you want a generic batting cage.
Thanks...but you can keep it.

When I said "pre-determined" I was referring to outcomes being determined prior to it being displayed on screen (based on various attributes, pitch type and location, stats such as H/9, swing timing & location etc.) But I understand someone can take that and suggest I was referring to a scripted outcome which is not the case.

I was going to use the word "simulation" but that could also be taken to have different meanings. For example, it sounds like what you mainly want is an accurate statistical simulation of baseball - let's call it a glorified text based sim. What I've been talking about is simulating how players actually see and play the game.

Let's take pitch recognition for example. In 'The Show' how can you tell the difference between all of the various pitches? Basically your average user will try to judge the speed or movement while the ball is in flight. In some cases this will be easy, but other times it will be a guess. In real life batters pick up the spin of a ball or the pitchers grip before it leaves the hand, or his hand angle, changes in arm speed, changes in his wind-up motion, or other "tells" which teams or players might discover through carefull study.

There's nothing in the game which simulates any of this, and when I offer suggestions you say I don't want sim?! Let's say a pitcher has a 4-seam, 2-seam, Cutter, Forkball and Changeup in his repertoire? How are you going to tell one from the other? The game needs to find a way to do this to truly call it a "sim", and if some hitters are better at it than others it will help maintain statistical integrity.

How Batters Identify Pitches.gif

[Pared]

Re: Four Keys to Success for MLB '11: The Show

What you suggested doesn't correlate with sim. I'm just referring to your example, mind you.

There is no flash, light, color, sound or any other aid to tell you what is what. A hitter can pick up based on many factors, such as a pitcher tipping his pitches.

What you're asking for, again if we are going by your example, is something so minuscule that most won't even realize nor can accommodate based on the changes.

Most people who play this game won't realize that sort of thing. It almost comes off as an argument solely for the sake of making an argument to me, quite honestly.

[swaldo]

Re: Four Keys to Success for MLB '11: The Show

Ever play baseball before? I mean, organized competitive baseball? Ever watch it on TV? You can time the pitch perfectly, hit the ball on the sweetspot and still hit the ball into an out. It happens. Just as you can be fooled, flip the bat and get a hit. Its baseball. Sounds to me you want to remove that aspect of a baseball game.

Have I ever watched baseball on TV? I shouldn't even dignify this with a response. It's the sort of comment people overreact to then find themselves banned, and discourages the free exchange of ideas. I will add this though...

"A bat swung at 65mph at an upward (Rod Carew 10 degree line drive angle) striking an 85mph fastball at a near 10 degree downward angle squarely hit will result in a 200ft line drive. The ball will go farthest (350ft) if hit about 3/4 inch below center."

Robert Adair - The physics of baseball.

Of course if an outfielder happens to be standing near a 200ft line-drive it can be an out. But let's do away with any idea that you can hit a ball perfectly but dribble it to the pitcher. Physics (with crazy hit variety) - isn't that where we want to be heading?

All I've been suggesting here are ideas that have been used in past or current baseball games (very succesfull ones) and added some of my own ideas. If you put them together and tweak it just right I think it would be a great addition to the PCI system. Do you really think SCEA will just dump that after so many years of use? No way, so what's wrong with trying to come up with options, or talking about what the next innovation in baseball games might be? Is the only innovation we're going to see is refining the statistical accuracy of the current system?

There's no need to get fussy over suggestions as if The Show is so perfect. And I'm done talking about this because most people understand what I'm saying, and if you dont agree I respect that. But there's no point continuing to go in circles if you don't understand or take what I'm saying out of context.

[Heroesandvillains]

Re: Four Keys to Success for MLB '11: The Show

Swaldo, I've enjoyed hearing your ideas.

Cardsleadtheway, you made BY FAR, the most important point of the thread...the development cycle.

I couldn't think of anything worse than for SCEA to change things due to popular demand, and need another three years to perfect it. MLB 10 The Show is very good as is. Tweaks next year, and nothing more as far as I'm concerned, gameplay wise.

[swaldo]

Re: Four Keys to Success for MLB '11: The Show

What you suggested doesn't correlate with sim. I'm just referring to your example, mind you.

There is no flash, light, color, sound or any other aid to tell you what is what. A hitter can pick up based on many factors, such as a pitcher tipping his pitches.

What you're asking for, again if we are going by your example, is something so minuscule that most won't even realize nor can accommodate based on the changes.

Most people who play this game won't realize that sort of thing. It almost comes off as an argument solely for the sake of making an argument to me, quite honestly.

People can call it "arcadey" but Ben Brinkman, the dev who originally created the "Hitters Eye" did it to make the game more lifelike. From an interview in Gaming Age 5 years ago...

GA:In your game, MVP 2005 you have a new feature called the hitter's eye. Can you go into a bit of detail on what gamers can expect from this feature?

BB: Gamers can expect hitting to be more accessible in MVP Baseball 2005 because of the Hitter's Eye. The Hitter's Eye, and specifically the ability to Read the Pitch, will make the batter-pitcher match up a little more authentic by leveling the playing field a bit between the batter and pitcher.

With the Read the Pitch element of the Hitter's Eye we tried to reproduce the idea of the batter picking up the spin of the ball right out of the pitcher's hand. This was done using a coloring scheme denoting different pitch types. We have found in focus testing and through playing it ourselves that it makes the game much more accessible for new players and adds another level of complexity for more accomplished MVPers. For the new players it helps with timing, something that has always been tough in baseball games, while skilled players can analyze the trajectory of pitches to make more educated swing decisions.

GA: I think the feature sounds very promising. What lengths have you taken that will keep gamers from "catching on" making the game too easy to hit?

BB: When we first implemented this feature this was our big concern, over time though we determined it was a non-issue. All the ability to read the pitch does is assist in determining the type of pitch. It doesn't tell you location or actually hit the ball for you. Gamers will still have to pay attention and use this pitch type knowledge to make an informed swing decision.

So note the words and terms he used: "Authentic" and "Batter picking up the spin." I'll agree putting colored balls in a game is obviously not realistic, but the spirit of the idea is very sim. And I'll agree for newcomers it may be jarring, but if you educate people (in user manuals and in-game tutorials) why it's in the game and how it's to be used I think most people would warm up to it.

And I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing. I put my ideas out there and people keep asking me questions, criticize and in more than one case disrespect so I'm just responding.

[countryboy]

Re: Four Keys to Success for MLB '11: The Show

It almost comes off as an argument solely for the sake of making an argument to me, quite honestly.

Glad I'm not the only one who feels this way.

[countryboy]

Re: Four Keys to Success for MLB '11: The Show

There's no need to get fussy over suggestions as if The Show is so perfect. And I'm done talking about this because most people understand what I'm saying, and if you dont agree I respect that. But there's no point continuing to go in circles if you don't understand or take what I'm saying out of context.

No one is fussy. You've stated throughout the thread that the outcomes are random and predetermined and I've challenged you on them. But instead of addressing them head on, you post, well much like you did with the part I deleted, which is a long drawn out post and does very little to address what one has asked of you.

[countryboy]

Re: Four Keys to Success for MLB '11: The Show

I have agreed with almost everything you have said up to this point. I have played competitive baseball at so many levels for the better part of my life, and still do in fact. If you time a pitch perfectly, and hit it on the sweet spot, you will make solid contact. You won't pop it up and you won't dribble a weak grounder for an easy double play.

I'm not saying you shouldn't make solid contact. But what are you considering the sweet spot? Anywhere in the PCI? If so, then you would be mistaken. I have yet to center the ball perfectly in the PCI ring and not hit the ball solidly. I have, however, hit if off-center in the PCI, and hit grounders, popups, etc.

The physics are more than a little off in this game and dependent way too much on attributes. Attributes have to play an important role, but it seems like the attributes take over instead of the physics.I would rather have the frustration of a great pitcher placing the pitch exactly where they want it and possible getting more calls going their way, or a great hitter laying off borderline pitches and crushing the mistake than to have the attributes determine a weak grounder because pitcher A has a H/9 rating that trumps the batters contact rating.

Again, I disagree. I don't view this as attributes taking over or one thing trumping another. I believe that its a formula that is put into place, that leads to the outcome. As I've said to Swaldo, you can't just have the game be based solely on user input and in my opinion, that is what I feel that you and others are alluding to.

[cardsleadtheway]

Re: Four Keys to Success for MLB '11: The Show

I'm not saying you shouldn't make solid contact. But what are you considering the sweet spot? Anywhere in the PCI? If so, then you would be mistaken. I have yet to center the ball perfectly in the PCI ring and not hit the ball solidly. I have, however, hit if off-center in the PCI, and hit grounders, popups, etc.



Again, I disagree. I don't view this as attributes taking over or one thing trumping another. I believe that its a formula that is put into place, that leads to the outcome. As I've said to Swaldo, you can't just have the game be based solely on user input and in my opinion, that is what I feel that you and others are alluding to.

Of course I would not consider anywhere in the PCI to be solid. I tend to assume that the center of the PCI, along with feedback locations of "meatball", "perfect", or "wheelhouse", and to a lesser extent "solid" as hitting the sweet spot. Correct me on this if I am wrong.

I never once stated that I want to remove the attributes, just that I would prefer to see the attributes affect the game differently than it does. I have played way too many games to not see attributes take precedent to any and all user input. For that, I prefer to watch real life games. What I would like to see is, as I have stated before, attributes having an effect on things like location and ability to hit well off the sweet spot. I have seen way too many times where great contact is made by a decent player against a great pitcher only to have it turn into a weak grounder to the pitcher or tailor made double play ball, as well as a good hitter taking a mediocre pitcher over the wall on low and away pitches 3 feet off the plate. If you don't believe me, play a two player game and watch what happens to the exact same meatball pitch with various levels of pitchers. It shouldn't be like that. Ratings should play a huge part in the game, but I personally feel that they override the laws of physics.

Now I am not arguing just to argue. This to me is a minor flaw that I can easily overlook (especially when Adam Dunn is taking those low and away pitches over the wall for me). The overall feel of the game is just that incredible. Plus I have an amazing ability to pretend just about anything to compensate for even the slightest lack of realism.

[countryboy]

Re: Four Keys to Success for MLB '11: The Show

Of course I would not consider anywhere in the PCI to be solid. I tend to assume that the center of the PCI, along with feedback locations of "meatball", "perfect", or "wheelhouse", and to a lesser extent "solid" as hitting the sweet spot. Correct me on this if I am wrong.

Thats how I view it. Center of the PCI with good timing. As I said, I have never looked at the hitting feedback and saw a time where I hit the ball in the center of the PCI with good timing and hit the ball weakly.

I never once stated that I want to remove the attributes, just that I would prefer to see the attributes affect the game differently than it does. I have played way too many games to not see attributes take precedent to any and all user input. For that, I prefer to watch real life games. What I would like to see is, as I have stated before, attributes having an effect on things like location and ability to hit well off the sweet spot. I have seen way too many times where great contact is made by a decent player against a great pitcher only to have it turn into a weak grounder to the pitcher or tailor made double play ball, as well as a good hitter taking a mediocre pitcher over the wall on low and away pitches 3 feet off the plate. If you don't believe me, play a two player game and watch what happens to the exact same meatball pitch with various levels of pitchers. It shouldn't be like that. Ratings should play a huge part in the game, but I personally feel that they override the laws of physics.

I wasn't suggesting that you wanted attributes removed, but that you want the user input to have more weight.

As for games played, as you know I've played a ton. And there hasn't been one time where I felt as though the game was producing an outcome just to produce it. I don't know what else to say to that. What I see from the game, I see from games on TV or in my experiences in the years that I played. Maybe the providing of swing information is casting false expectations, I dunno.

I'm not trying to suggest that you are wrong and I am right, just that we are obviously seeing or better yet, viewing the game in two different ways.