Four Keys to Success for MLB '11: The Show

[Heroesandvillains]

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

So... no one liked my idea to include Hazel Mae?

Okay...

Fielding revamp, pitcher deception...

And Hazel Mae! ... And Heidi Watney!

[swaldo]

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

With all that you mentioned, ratings are going to play a part and therefore there will be, whats the term you use, "dice rolls".

You cannot separate good players from bad players by user input and changes to the aids. You can't. Ratings have to be used and therefore the game will always have a "randomness" to it.

I'm not following you on this, please let me know what I am not understanding...

Pitcher A has a 100 rated fastball and throws a golf ball.
Pitcher B has a 50 rated fastball and throws a beach ball.

The user aims then a physics engine kicks in which displays the result. This is a calculation not a dice roll. And which pitcher would you rather face? I'll take the beach ball and would probably sprain my back from swinging so hard.

Changing the size of the ball may not seem realistic...or is it? Like Vin Scully (Dodgers announcer who's been around 1000 years) likes to say about the knuckleball - "It's like hitting a ping-pong ball in a windstorm." And having colored balls is not realistic either but it replicates real life abilties. Take for example Ted Williams who probably saw the ball as if it was in slow motion.

I do wonder though if any game implimented something like the "Hitters eye" would it be a liability? In other words could they get sued by EA for ripping off the idea?

[cheechoo98]

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

The 'batter's eye' or 'hitter's eye' with coloured balls is TOTALLY not realistic - and should have never been implemented in a baseball game.

In The Show they already have 'hitter's eye' when you guess pitch correctly, you get a visual cue that you've guessed the correct pitch... Please no.

And the Hazel Mae thing? While she is a plus broadcaster, ( She was great here in Toronto ) I don't get how she makes it onto the 'pretty' broadcasters lists all the time... Her successor on Sportsnet, Martine Gaillard.. and Laura Daikun from theScore, good looking sports ladies... Google it!

ok. back to topic.

[countryboy]

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

I'm not following you on this, please let me know what I am not understanding...

What you're not understanding is that what you are asking for are different visual aids to display the ratings. But the ratings will still play a part, which is something you were seemingly complaining about earlier in the thread saying they caused "random" outcomes.

No matter what you do, what visual aids you implement, ratings will ALWAYS be part of the equation.

I'm not sure I can make it any clearer than that.

[MLB01]

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

What you're not understanding is that what you are asking for are different visual aids to display the ratings. But the ratings will still play a part, which is something you were seemingly complaining about earlier in the thread saying they caused "random" outcomes.

No matter what you do, what visual aids you implement, ratings will ALWAYS be part of the equation.

I'm not sure I can make it any clearer than that.

I agree that ratings must be a part of the outcome because if they didn't and you put too much control in the user's hands, then a bad player could play like a superstar. Ya know what I mean ?

On the other hand, Swaldo was talking about removing some player ratings from the coded equation and putting them into visual aids instead of being hard coded into the engine. I actually like that idea, but some player ratings must stay hard coded in the engine or the simulation aspect of The Show will be lost and that just wouldn't be right in my opinion.

[countryboy]

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

I agree that ratings must be a part of the outcome because if they didn't and you put too much control in the user's hands, then a bad player could play like a superstar. Ya know what I mean ?

I know what you mean as that is what I have been saying.

On the other hand, Swaldo was talking about removing some player ratings from the coded equation and putting them into visual aids instead of being hard coded into the engine. I actually like that idea, but some player ratings must stay hard coded in the engine or the simulation aspect of The Show will be lost and that just wouldn't be right in my opinion.

Visual aids are nothing more than a representation of ratings. I fail to understand the logic of removing ratings and making them nothing more than visual aids. If the ratings are removed, then how do players progress/regress? What aspect of the player is the game going to evaluate in order to determine if he gets better as a contact hitter, worse as a pitcher, etc....?

Ratings are a vital part to the game. Removing them, in my opinion, makes no sense. I know you're not talking about all ratings, but even some. The game is designed to take all ratings into account for their given situation. Removing any of them, not only causes players to lose "significance", but also causes the dev team to completely re-write how situations are now handled without those ratings.

How is that a good idea? Why try to re-invent the wheel? The Show has the simulation aspect of the game down pretty well. Can it get better? Sure, but completely undoing what they have spent numerous years "perfecting" isn't the answer, at least I sure as hell hope it isn't. (see Madden series for example)

[HustlinOwl]

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

hitter's eye = gimmick

[Ranger99]

How about this I play RTTS alot. My players stats (1st Base) were all 99. At the end of my contract I became a free agent and didnt like any of the teams giving me an offer so i tried out for a team in spring training, and I made sure it was team were I was the better player at 1st. I tore it up in spring training and oddly enough was not offered a contract, big deal I thougt, Ill get picked up during the season.... I didnt get picked up or offered any contract. This has happened more than once and it is very irritating. I wish there was something they would do about this. And also, whenever I ask the manager for a position change, i get shot down and benched. I make sure its a position in need of good defense and there is someone that can cover my old position but i still get benched for asking. Whats the point in having having the option if you cant use it?

[swaldo]

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

What you're not understanding is that what you are asking for are different visual aids to display the ratings. But the ratings will still play a part, which is something you were seemingly complaining about earlier in the thread saying they caused "random" outcomes.

No matter what you do, what visual aids you implement, ratings will ALWAYS be part of the equation.

I'm not sure I can make it any clearer than that.

What you're saying still doesn't add up. You stated in a previous post...

"You cannot separate good players from bad players by user input and changes to the aids."

Sure you can! I proved this in my last post. And the only ratings I said that I would like to see removed are not even ratings, they are stats! H/9, W/9, SO/9 etc. The Show apparently calls these "ratings", but really shouldn't they only be used for simming games or in a 'manage only' capacity?

And what I'm talking about is a system with transparency. You'll know exactly why you swung and missed on a pitch or hit a home run. Isn't that better than wondering why the ball flopped on perfect/meatball?

So basically I think developers should ask the question: What makes some pro baseball players better or worse than other players, and way better than mere mortals like us? And how can we translate that visually in a game to replicate their abilities in order to make a more organic user experience?

One thing that is clear is that you're happy with the system as is. That's cool, but understand that a system which is based somewhat around pre-determined outcomes is not the future. It might suffice for now because there aren't alot of options, but eventually people are going to tire of it and want more control.

[Knight165]

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

What you're saying still doesn't add up. You stated in a previous post...

"You cannot separate good players from bad players by user input and changes to the aids."

Sure you can! I proved this in my last post. And the only ratings I said that I would like to see removed are not even ratings, they are stats! H/9, W/9, SO/9 etc. The Show apparently calls these "ratings", but really shouldn't they only be used for simming games or in a 'manage only' capacity?

And what I'm talking about is a system with transparency. You'll know exactly why you swung and missed on a pitch or hit a home run. Isn't that better than wondering why the ball flopped on perfect/meatball?

So basically I think developers should ask the question: What makes some pro baseball players better or worse than other players, and way better than mere mortals like us? And how can we translate that visually in a game to replicate their abilities in order to make a more organic user experience?

One thing that is clear is that you're happy with the system as is. That's cool, but understand that a system which is based somewhat around pre-determined outcomes is not the future. It might suffice for now because there aren't alot of options, but eventually people are going to tire of it and want more control.

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.

M.K.
Knight165

[countryboy]

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

What you're saying still doesn't add up. You stated in a previous post...

"You cannot separate good players from bad players by user input and changes to the aids."

Sure you can! I proved this in my last post. And the only ratings I said that I would like to see removed are not even ratings, they are stats! H/9, W/9, SO/9 etc. The Show apparently calls these "ratings", but really shouldn't they only be used for simming games or in a 'manage only' capacity?

All that you have proven is how visual aids can be used to display the differences in ratings.

And what I'm talking about is a system with transparency. You'll know exactly why you swung and missed on a pitch or hit a home run. Isn't that better than wondering why the ball flopped on perfect/meatball?

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.

So basically I think developers should ask the question: What makes some pro baseball players better or worse than other players, and way better than mere mortals like us? And how can we translate that visually in a game to replicate their abilities in order to make a more organic user experience?

Ummmm...they use ratings to separate players. And how they can translate it? Again, you're asking for ways to implement visual aids to display ratings.

One thing that is clear is that you're happy with the system as is. That's cool, but understand that a system which is based somewhat around pre-determined outcomes is not the future.

What an ignorant statement.

Outcomes are pre-determined...you know that how? Tell me, since you think the system is broken, what ratings are used in any given situation that influence the outcome? Whats the formula? How much does user input influence any situation?

I read thru that post and all I see, once again, is how you are wanting visual aids to represent the ratings differences of players. Now I'll wait to read how I'm not understanding what you're saying.

[BobSacamano]

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

Every 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 don't want to speak for the other poster but this is not the problem I have with the hitting engine. The problem I have is when you hit the ball perfectly and hit a lazy fly ball or ground ball and conversely when you DON'T hit it perfectly and crush a home run (or when the CPU does). It's not that sometimes you'll hit the ball perfectly into an out it's that sometimes you'll hit the ball perfectly and hit it weakly. If I hit the ball perfectly (meaning perfect timing and perfect contact) I should be getting close to the "max result" with that player. I get that some of this should be a result of ratings - Pujols can not get all of a pitch and still hit one out and Joe MiddleInfielder can hit a ball perfectly and have it hang up in the outfield for an easy catch.

HOWEVER, having played this game quite a bit I'm convinced that more than ratings the big culprit in this inconsistency is pitcher confidence. I've said it before and I'll say it again - this whole engine should either be scrapped or significantly tweaked in the future. It seems to play WAY too much of a part in determining outcomes in the game - if a pitcher has given up a couple singles any contact is bound to be a rocket, and conversely if he's pitched a couple scoreless innings he's practically unhittable. I don't think it works this way in real life. I think the dev's had made an admirable effort to mimic real-life pitcher confidence, which probably exists to some degree, but it seems like it's way overdone.

If I could suggest a better system - anybody ever play Hardball 5? When your pitcher was struggling it was much harder to control the pitch cursor. It would move around in the zone a little when you were aiming your pitch. You had to steady your hand if you wanted to hit your spot. This would be an interesting way to mimic a pitcher struggling with control.

[countryboy]

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

I don't want to speak for the other poster but this is not the problem I have with the hitting engine. The problem I have is when you hit the ball perfectly and hit a lazy fly ball or ground ball and conversely when you DON'T hit it perfectly and crush a home run (or when the CPU does). It's not that sometimes you'll hit the ball perfectly into an out it's that sometimes you'll hit the ball perfectly and hit it weakly. If I hit the ball perfectly (meaning perfect timing and perfect contact) I should be getting close to the "max result" with that player. I get that some of this should be a result of ratings - Pujols can not get all of a pitch and still hit one out and Joe MiddleInfielder can hit a ball perfectly and have it hang up in the outfield for an easy catch.

This has to do with ratings. Not only the batters, but the pitcher's as well. If the system were strictly time and hit(and there is a level of batting for that) then the hitting system becomes far too simple. The goal is to try to simulate what you would see in real life and balance that with user input. To do that, there has to be a formula that takes all ratings as well as player input to determine the result.

HOWEVER, having played this game quite a bit I'm convinced that more than ratings the big culprit in this inconsistency is pitcher confidence. I've said it before and I'll say it again - this whole engine should either be scrapped or significantly tweaked in the future. It seems to play WAY too much of a part in determining outcomes in the game - if a pitcher has given up a couple singles any contact is bound to be a rocket, and conversely if he's pitched a couple scoreless innings he's practically unhittable. I don't think it works this way in real life. I think the dev's had made an admirable effort to mimic real-life pitcher confidence, which probably exists to some degree, but it seems like it's way overdone.

I disagree with your assessment of pitcher confidence. I agree its part of the formula, but I don't believe that its overbearing in the formula. Far too many times I've pitched out of jams, rattled a pitcher who was on a roll, and everything in between.

[Heroesandvillains]

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

I don't want to speak for the other poster but this is not the problem I have with the hitting engine. The problem I have is when you hit the ball perfectly and hit a lazy fly ball or ground ball and conversely when you DON'T hit it perfectly and crush a home run (or when the CPU does). It's not that sometimes you'll hit the ball perfectly into an out it's that sometimes you'll hit the ball perfectly and hit it weakly. If I hit the ball perfectly (meaning perfect timing and perfect contact) I should be getting close to the "max result" with that player. I get that some of this should be a result of ratings - Pujols can not get all of a pitch and still hit one out and Joe MiddleInfielder can hit a ball perfectly and have it hang up in the outfield for an easy catch.

HOWEVER, having played this game quite a bit I'm convinced that more than ratings the big culprit in this inconsistency is pitcher confidence. I've said it before and I'll say it again - this whole engine should either be scrapped or significantly tweaked in the future. It seems to play WAY too much of a part in determining outcomes in the game - if a pitcher has given up a couple singles any contact is bound to be a rocket, and conversely if he's pitched a couple scoreless innings he's practically unhittable. I don't think it works this way in real life. I think the dev's had made an admirable effort to mimic real-life pitcher confidence, which probably exists to some degree, but it seems like it's way overdone.

If I could suggest a better system - anybody ever play Hardball 5? When your pitcher was struggling it was much harder to control the pitch cursor. It would move around in the zone a little when you were aiming your pitch. You had to steady your hand if you wanted to hit your spot. This would be an interesting way to mimic a pitcher struggling with control.

Again, how much offense do you guys really want?

Let me say it again. The hardcore, 200+ games a year player is likely looking for the most statistical realism. He'd like/demand that his offense get two-hit against every once in a while. This player would also like/demand that some key players in his lineup hit .250 over the course of an entire season, because in real life, this happens.

Because the hardcore players play this game A LOT, they'll likely be able to get very good with the L-Stick. Based on what you're asking for by wanting the benefit of the doubt on well timed pitches, or as you said "max result," the hardcore player will hit too well.

Thus, the game will only provide realistic hitting averages for the casual player. If SCEA becomes more forgiving with timing, next year I'm out. I'm already on Legend! What do you suggest for someone like me that's already seeing realistic results? An even MORE challenging difficulty level? No thanks.

And to your point on pitching. Just because we don't visually see the pitching cursor move when a guy gets rattled, doesn't mean that it's not very hard to hit your spots when the confidence meter is low. If you're not seeing this, you're pitching at a difficulty too easy for you. Pitching is GREAT this year. I hope they leave user pitching alone.

[MLB01]

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 ?