MLB 13 The Show - The Player Ratings Algorithm Has Changed, 17 Players Rated 99

[slickkill77]

Re: MLB 13 The Show - The Player Ratings Algorithm Has Changed, 17 Players Rated 99

I think 2 things need to be done.
1. The ratings need to be stretched out more. Way too many 99's.
2. Potential needs to be scrapped or reworked. I think using the 20-80 scale that scouts use would be much more effective especially for the minor league players


And why can players be higher than a 99? I'm not questioning whether or not it can be done, I fully trust you there Knight, but I am questioning why is that even possible? Shouldn't 99 represent the best in the game. Guys that, while not perfect, they are damn near perfect. Wouldn't it make more sense to stretch the ratings out so that guys don't just stop at 99 because it's a limit the game imposes? As I said earlier 99 should be reserved for very very few players. And guys like Jose Altuve have no business being a 90. Realistically he should be mid 80's at best. But because the ratings are so inflated, he's 9 points away from being considered one of the best in the game. Which he is not.

You're probably going to say its just a number and if the stats bear out then why does it matter. While I agree with you that these numbers are purely cosmetic, for the most part, I'm sure it has some effect on the way gm's in the game sign people and hand out contracts because of the inflated ratings.

[Knight165]

Re: MLB 13 The Show - The Player Ratings Algorithm Has Changed, 17 Players Rated 99

I think 2 things need to be done.
1. The ratings need to be stretched out more. Way too many 99's.
2. Potential needs to be scrapped or reworked. I think using the 20-80 scale that scouts use would be much more effective especially for the minor league players


And why can players be higher than a 99? I'm not questioning whether or not it can be done, I fully trust you there Knight, but I am questioning why is that even possible? Shouldn't 99 represent the best in the game. Guys that, while not perfect, they are damn near perfect. Wouldn't it make more sense to stretch the ratings out so that guys don't just stop at 99 because it's a limit the game imposes? As I said earlier 99 should be reserved for very very few players. And guys like Jose Altuve have no business being a 90. Realistically he should be mid 80's at best. But because the ratings are so inflated, he's 9 points away from being considered one of the best in the game. Which he is not.

You're probably going to say its just a number and if the stats bear out then why does it matter. While I agree with you that these numbers are purely cosmetic, for the most part, I'm sure it has some effect on the way gm's in the game sign people and hand out contracts because of the inflated ratings.

slick...nothing against you....but this is EXACTLY why I have been against #'s from the start.
How can I argue something that isn't real? Nowhere outside a video game is this even used. It's preposterous...
..and you bring up Altuve.
What is a 90 in this game?
What is an 85? What is the actual difference?

...and going past a 99.....how can it be?
If a guy with 87/88....92/94.....and nothing at 99 except for say fielding is a 99(which it is in the game once you see it)....then obviously higher ratings will translate into an ACTUAL(not displayed) OVR above a 99.

While CPU GM's do see the OVR as a tool in trades/moves/signings etc....I believe they also see it on the true scale(in which the human player is forced to actually put some further investigation into(stats/etc)...so they see a player is 110 etc...

Why didn't they display past 99?...IDK

M.K.
Knight165

[CMH]

I'm gonna make a quick assumption and bring forward an idea.

Perhaps, outside of any limitations, there is no way to see past 99 because those players are the cream of the crop and the reality is we cannot factually argue which of those 99 rated players is better than the other.

So, in essence, the game ratings are being designed to reflect reality in that the argument behind Pujols vs Cabrera is an argument that would never see a winner. So they are 99s.

Now an idea. How would you guys feel if instead of showing us ratings, the game simply ranked players 1-1xxx?

I ask because it seems this is what people actually want but I don't think they truly understand the arguments that would be created by such a system.


Sent from my mobile device.

[tabarnes19_SDS]

Re: MLB 13 The Show - The Player Ratings Algorithm Has Changed, 17 Players Rated 99

One interesting tid bit I learned at CD was that the cpu looks at statistics as well for making trades. So ovl and potential are not only factors looked at.

[Cavicchi]

Re: MLB 13 The Show - The Player Ratings Algorithm Has Changed, 17 Players Rated 99

I like the number ratings. I just don't get a relief pitcher, Chapman, being rated a 99 in the starting pitcher category.

[nomo17k]

Re: MLB 13 The Show - The Player Ratings Algorithm Has Changed, 17 Players Rated 99

I am actually willing to bet a huge chunk of money (which in my world is in cents) that ratings are historically limited to 0 - 99 purely to save screen estate.... 2 chars instead of 3.. that used to be a huge thing when games were displaying with fixed font within limited screen size at low resolution...

[birthday_massacre]

Re: MLB 13 The Show - The Player Ratings Algorithm Has Changed, 17 Players Rated 99

slick...nothing against you....but this is EXACTLY why I have been against #'s from the start.
How can I argue something that isn't real? Nowhere outside a video game is this even used. It's preposterous...
..and you bring up Altuve.
What is a 90 in this game?
What is an 85? What is the actual difference?

...and going past a 99.....how can it be?
If a guy with 87/88....92/94.....and nothing at 99 except for say fielding is a 99(which it is in the game once you see it)....then obviously higher ratings will translate into an ACTUAL(not displayed) OVR above a 99.

While CPU GM's do see the OVR as a tool in trades/moves/signings etc....I believe they also see it on the true scale(in which the human player is forced to actually put some further investigation into(stats/etc)...so they see a player is 110 etc...

Why didn't they display past 99?...IDK

M.K.
Knight165

You do make a great point that is probably why letters should have been used instead of numbers. Over a 99 could be an A+ for example.

Please using letter grades (a B for example could be 84-86) you would have a range of numbers and not an exact number. I still never liked just the bars but I think a letter grade would be better than the number ratings

With the letters you could also rate them at each position, for example a RP could be an A- but as a starter they could be a C.

[Cavicchi]

Re: MLB 13 The Show - The Player Ratings Algorithm Has Changed, 17 Players Rated 99

You do make a great point that is probably why letters should have been used instead of numbers. Over a 99 could be an A+ for example.

Please using letter grades (a B for example could be 84-86) you would have a range of numbers and not an exact number. I still never liked just the bars but I think a letter grade would be better than the number ratings

With the letters you could also rate them at each position, for example a RP could be an A- but as a starter they could be a C.

Letters have been used before, for fielding, hitting, running and pitching. I'm okay with that method, but I'm also okay with the numbers method. Actually, I prefer the numbers rating better because it can be more precise when comparing players.

[slickkill77]

Re: MLB 13 The Show - The Player Ratings Algorithm Has Changed, 17 Players Rated 99

slick...nothing against you....but this is EXACTLY why I have been against #'s from the start.
How can I argue something that isn't real? Nowhere outside a video game is this even used. It's preposterous...
..and you bring up Altuve.
What is a 90 in this game?
What is an 85? What is the actual difference?

...and going past a 99.....how can it be?
If a guy with 87/88....92/94.....and nothing at 99 except for say fielding is a 99(which it is in the game once you see it)....then obviously higher ratings will translate into an ACTUAL(not displayed) OVR above a 99.

While CPU GM's do see the OVR as a tool in trades/moves/signings etc....I believe they also see it on the true scale(in which the human player is forced to actually put some further investigation into(stats/etc)...so they see a player is 110 etc...

Why didn't they display past 99?...IDK

M.K.
Knight165

That's true, but the bar is still an arbitrary number is it not? So why would that make a difference? I'm not trying to be a douche about this either. I just want an answer because you are one of the biggest supporters when it comes to just bars. Really, if anything, the overall should be scrapped completely. That would put a bigger emphasis on scouting and getting players you really want/need. And really don't the numbers just make everyone's job easier that do the rosters?

Numbers are used in scouting scales either 20-80 or 2-8 so either of those would be acceptable to me or letters. I'm merely saying that if the ratings are going to stay how they are, they need to change.

[Knight165]

Re: MLB 13 The Show - The Player Ratings Algorithm Has Changed, 17 Players Rated 99

That's true, but the bar is still an arbitrary number is it not? So why would that make a difference? I'm not trying to be a douche about this either. I just want an answer because you are one of the biggest supporters when it comes to just bars. Really, if anything, the overall should be scrapped completely. That would put a bigger emphasis on scouting and getting players you really want/need. And really don't the numbers just make everyone's job easier that do the rosters?

Numbers are used in scouting scales either 20-80 or 2-8 so either of those would be acceptable to me or letters. I'm merely saying that if the ratings are going to stay how they are, they need to change.

You don't have to convince me...
I'd rather nothing than #'s OR bars...I'd prefer 20-80...but I'd take nothing if we couldn't get that.

For me...
20-80 > NOTHING > BARS > NOTHING > BARS >NOTHING > BARS >NOTHING



M.K.
Knight165

[slickkill77]

Re: MLB 13 The Show - The Player Ratings Algorithm Has Changed, 17 Players Rated 99

You don't have to convince me...
I'd rather nothing than #'s OR bars...I'd prefer 20-80...but I'd take nothing if we couldn't get that.

For me...
20-80 > NOTHING > BARS > NOTHING > BARS >NOTHING > BARS >NOTHING



M.K.
Knight165

Glad we could agree on that

[Qb]

Re: MLB 13 The Show - The Player Ratings Algorithm Has Changed, 17 Players Rated 99

You don't have to convince me...I'd prefer 20-80

Can't wait to read something like, "Why is Stanton's power only 80?!? It has to be 99!!!"

[seanjeezy]

Re: MLB 13 The Show - The Player Ratings Algorithm Has Changed, 17 Players Rated 99

Can't wait to read something like, "Why is Stanton's power only 80?!? It has to be 99!!!"

Joking, but Stanton is actually closer to 90 since his raw power breaks the conventional scale like B-Ham's speed. But yeah, some people will never be satisfied regardless lol

[ShowTyme15]

Re: MLB 13 The Show - The Player Ratings Algorithm Has Changed, 17 Players Rated 99

Joking, but Stanton is actually closer to 90 since his raw power breaks the conventional scale like B-Ham's speed. But yeah, some people will never be satisfied regardless lol

That's the beauty of today's society.

[Knight165]

Re: MLB 13 The Show - The Player Ratings Algorithm Has Changed, 17 Players Rated 99

Can't wait to read something like, "Why is Stanton's power only 80?!? It has to be 99!!!"

Preach it.

M.K.
Knight165