Destined to lose?

[nomo17k]

Re: Destined to lose?

"Game balance issues", "that scripted feeling", "momentum"....are we not all talking about the same phenomenon? This is semantics. I'm just saying this thing feels more prevalent on Legendary. I've had deeply satisfying wins I felt I truly earned and bad losses I felt like I truly deserved by making bad decisions or simply "getting beat" or "it just wasn't our day" type of thing. But I've had too many expericiences with crazy fielding plays, suddenly squeezed strike zones, or good pitches being hit while I've clung to a small lead. And plenty of times I can't get anyone out and then once I get the tie I throw a fastball right down the pipe and get a ground ball to short.

What level of difficulty do you play on? Have you not felt if you took a tough 2-1 pitch to go up 3-1 you were more likely to get a good result if you put a good swing on a pitch? And vice versa?

It is actually not semantics, though it's necessarily ambiguous since I really haven't defined what I really mean by game balance issues (as opposed to other issues that you have). However, game balance issues always exist for any game, where as scripted/forced outcomes and momentum system simply don't exist in this game.

I usually play on All-star/HoF these days, usually HoF. I sometimes use Legend just for fun, pitch fine on that level but don't hit well yet. Overall, I don't really like the game balance on Legend so when I want sim results I try to do it on HoF.

About the pitch count, you are of course more likely to get a fat strike on 3-1 count, regardless of if you took a ball on 2-1 counts. If the pitcher doesn't want to walk you, it only makes sense to throw one in the deep part of the strike zone... just a normal strategy there. That's not a Legend thing but usually true with CPU AI in this game (in fact, my personal opinion is that CPU pitchers should utilize more off-speed stuff and/or pitches on the black even when they pitch in behind counts). And you are of course more likely to drive a deep strike, since you are more likely to hit the pitch with fat part of PCI.

I have no idea why such a typical experience needs other esoteric explanations.


... and forgot to add. All the stuff you mention in the first paragraph is really the prime example of what confirmation bias is... of course you do not admit it, since if you actually give yourself a chance to doubt your belief, then you wouldn't be so convinced all those events (umpire squeezing, fat pitch becoming a routine grounder) are the results of the game forcing situations. They happen even in all the other situations that you quickly forget about. But they just don't leave strong impressions in your mind, unlike when you are playing a tight/dramatic ball game.

[Sairheart]

Re: Destined to lose?

You can combine levels as well so you can pitch on legend and hit on Allstar...

When it comes down to it, I think the fielding issue is a bigger problem than anything. Like others were saying, the animation where the fielder sort of "short arms" when he reaches for the ball, the ball inexplicably getting kicked up at the last moment, the third baseman or shortstop inexplicably overrunning a slow tapper they have to come in on, or when you get automatically locked into a slow animation with a fast runner on base and you can't make that throw in time. I understand these things happen, they just happen too often when I'm up 3-0 and I've been sitting the opposing team down for five or six innings.

I really don't have many qualms on the hitting side, I feel like if I make pitch-by-pitch adjustments when I'm behind in the count and take a good hack at my pitch when I'm ahead in the count, I usually get what could be considered very realistic results. In my experience though I have found that making mistakes early in the inning while I'm on the mound are easier to rectify than when I make a mistake early in an AB when I'm at the plate. I truly feel that one bad swing or one bad take can torpedo an AB, and the "give up a lead one inning, have your 3-4-5 guys up in the next inning and do nothing" scenario really hurts you

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: Destined to lose?

When it comes down to it, I think the fielding issue is a bigger problem than anything.

I'm not that familiar with it, but I know from the slider forum that you can set it to some combination of manual fielding/manual throwing -or- auto fielding/manual throwing -or- auto fielding/auto throwing, so automation might improve your fielding experience. The automation also makes the game look a bit nicer because there's no throw meter popping up. I'd direct you to the slider forum for more info.

[Sairheart]

Re: Destined to lose?

It is actually not semantics, though it's necessarily ambiguous since I really haven't defined what I really mean by game balance issues (as opposed to other issues that you have). However, game balance issues always exist for any game, where as scripted/forced outcomes and momentum system simply don't exist in this game.

I usually play on All-star/HoF these days, usually HoF. I sometimes use Legend just for fun, pitch fine on that level but don't hit well yet. Overall, I don't really like the game balance on Legend so when I want sim results I try to do it on HoF.

About the pitch count, you are of course more likely to get a fat strike on 3-1 count, regardless of if you took a ball on 2-1 counts. If the pitcher doesn't want to walk you, it only makes sense to throw one in the deep part of the strike zone... just a normal strategy there. That's not a Legend thing but usually true with CPU AI in this game (in fact, my personal opinion is that CPU pitchers should utilize more off-speed stuff and/or pitches on the black even when they pitch in behind counts). And you are of course more likely to drive a deep strike, since you are more likely to hit the pitch with fat part of PCI.

I have no idea why such a typical experience needs other esoteric explanations.


... and forgot to add. All the stuff you mention in the first paragraph is really the prime example of what confirmation bias is... of course you do not admit it, since if you actually give yourself a chance to doubt your belief, then you wouldn't be so convinced all those events (umpire squeezing, fat pitch becoming a routine grounder) are the results of the game forcing situations. They happen even in all the other situations that you quickly forget about. But they just don't leave strong impressions in your mind, unlike when you are playing a tight/dramatic ball game.

Why don't you just define what game balance means? Why is it neccesary that it's amibigious in nature? You're saying here that you don't play on Legend because of "game balance"...I'm saying I'm playing on Legend and things don't feel right. Only thing that's becoming clear is that I've played way more innings than you at that difficulty level and yet we can simply dismiss what I think because "the developers say it ain't so." And earlier in the thread someone said the developers said something to the opposite effect. It's not clear to me which it is, I don't know.

In the pitch count scenario, I wasn't speaking so much to the count(obviously there are more inherent advantages in a 3-1 count than a 2-1 count) but HOW you got to that count, in that example taking a nasty off speed pitch.
If the pitcher has you set up for a great pitch and you take it, I feel like it helps. Likewise, if you try set up a hitter perfectly for a slider and they just foul it off, I feel like if you go back to that pitch it's more likely to be hit/not a strike, even if it's in a good spot. You're saying I only notice it when it's a tight game but I don't, I monitor it throughout the game. You've never been in a situation when you've got your reliever out in the 8th holding a lead, and you don't execute the first pitch and it's wild....Then you perfectly execute the second pitch and it's in the zone but it's not called a strike, even though that was being called all game for you?

It's whatever to me, I don't care nearly as much as I think everyone thinks I do. I'm just trying to relay my experience and I'm tired of being told I'm in denial and no, it's really all in my head.

[Sairheart]

Re: Destined to lose?

I'm not that familiar with it, but I know from the slider forum that you can set it to some combination of manual fielding/manual throwing -or- auto fielding/manual throwing -or- auto fielding/auto throwing, so automation might improve your fielding experience. The automation also makes the game look a bit nicer because there's no throw meter popping up. I'd direct you to the slider forum for more info.

I've actually took someone elses advice on the forum and took the throwing meter off and just look at the animation to determine the pressure I put on the analog stick...it has been a great help, I don't have trouble making that long throw from short, or making that underhand toss to start a double play like I used to. Seriously, the literal catching of the ball has become problematic...mainly if I have a lead and I've been pitching exceptionally well, in my opinion, but there is obviously a prevailing opinion that the circumstances have nothing to do with that occurance.

[THESHAMISASHAME]

Re: Destined to lose?

My evidence is anectdotal obviously, but that doesn't make it irrelevant. You're arguing that the perception of the evidence is incorrect, that I am oblivious to the fact that I am oblivious. Like I've said ad nauseum, I don't think there's a comeback code...I just think the game SHRINKS YOUR MARGIN for error and effectively lowers your probability of success in a game where "everything can go right" but you can still get a bad result, or you do something bad like get your bat sawed off but it still lands for a double. Baseball is a very hard game to quantify.

I love a lot of things about the game. But once I started to minimize my own mistakes, like only swinging at strikes, taking pitches to avoid a quick inning, being defensively aggressive when applicable, mixing up my pitches and the zones I throw in, going through a lineup a diff way the second and third times, knowing when to go to the mound/pull my starter/pull the reliever...once I got things like that under control, I STILL noticed the game tilting in either my direction or the cpu's direction, based on a a set of variables. Trends begin to appear. I'm not the only one who thinks so, it's not all, "you think you're going to bang into a DP and then you swing at that pitch and bang into it. Confirmation bias." And sure, marketers love me, I'm the A-1 capitlist consumer, tell me how the product can fill that void in my life and I will purchase it to become whole. And I thought we were making a whole excercise of coming to conclusions without evidence. You made a comment about that "scripted feeling" as well. I believe we are more in agreement than you think.

And THESHAMISASHAME, I feel you bro. No one is saying here that they played a ton of games on Legendary with good sliders and have had a completely different experience. And I'm not saying that's impossible. It just hasn't been my experience.

We must be twins as I have the EXACT same thoughts on how things can unfold with this game .

Perhaps I made a "mistake" of writing that statement about the "scripted feel," as I really hope that I'm not in agreement with what you write (I don't agree at all about anything you have written).

I made that statement not to mean that I personally actually feel the game is scripted, but really what I meant was that, at times, I see some "game balance issues" that might lead some people (like you and the rest of this-game-forces-outcomes crowd) to feel that way. I don't share the feeling, but I can understand why some people could interpret what I see in different ways. That's where I stand.

This is still the best thing anyone ever wrote about " Scripted Feel "because its exactly how we all feel ! and we also dont think the game is scripted but theres a skewing through many variables thats going on regardless of who its favors and as we agreed earlier it needs to be removed or balanced better so it doesnt appear to be so blatantly forced .
Alot of this may be IMPRESSIONS and just a random dice roll but how would you feel if you rolled a six and it then magically flipped to a three and thats how I feel about the scripted type feeling you described so perfectly a few days ago.

[rjackson]

Re: Destined to lose?

Would this skewing work in the opposite way then? Say I'm a relatively new player and start a Legend franchise with an already weak team. I will get my Josh Booty handed to me, right? After awhile when everyone on my team is hitting .100, the team ERA is infiniti or near, and my team is 0-54...are you saying that the computer is going to balance itself out a bit just to get more realistic numbers? That, I could see. I crushed with Dayan Viciedo last year for 6-8 weeks and then he suddenly went ice cold until his stats were more realistic. This is something that really has to happen and would be a microchosm of what I believe you are getting at, though we are focused more on the W-L aspect, I think?

[wudl83]

Re: Destined to lose?

Sairheart, when you say you monitor those things throughout the game, how about setting up a file (Word, Excel, whatever) where you write down those happenings, including:
- inning
- pitcher (pitch-count of the pitcher, pitch-count in the AB)
- confidence in pitches
- runners on/runners not on
- previous AB
- opposing hitter (contact, power, hot/cold, bla...)
- ...
Know what I mean?
When you have set up something like this you have a real base.
Since you say you are playing so many games, it shouldn't be too tough.

[THESHAMISASHAME]

Re: Destined to lose?

Would this skewing work in the opposite way then? Say I'm a relatively new player and start a Legend franchise with an already weak team. I will get my Josh Booty handed to me, right? After awhile when everyone on my team is hitting .100, the team ERA is infiniti or near, and my team is 0-54...are you saying that the computer is going to balance itself out a bit just to get more realistic numbers? That, I could see. I crushed with Dayan Viciedo last year for 6-8 weeks and then he suddenly went ice cold until his stats were more realistic. This is something that really has to happen and would be a microchosm of what I believe you are getting at, though we are focused more on the W-L aspect, I think?

Thats to difficult to answer do to so many variables including skill level , sliders ect but the game if you set it up fairly will play like a sim do to its engine AND once again its not about winning or losing or who it favors its about HOW it feels scripted as Nomo stated , not that its scripted but how it appears forced at times as the momentum or the skewing shifts to favor or change the odds of a possibilities of outcomes .

[Sairheart]

Re: Destined to lose?

Sairheart, when you say you monitor those things throughout the game, how about setting up a file (Word, Excel, whatever) where you write down those happenings, including:
- inning
- pitcher (pitch-count of the pitcher, pitch-count in the AB)
- confidence in pitches
- runners on/runners not on
- previous AB
- opposing hitter (contact, power, hot/cold, bla...)
- ...
Know what I mean?
When you have set up something like this you have a real base.
Since you say you are playing so many games, it shouldn't be too tough.

This is easy to do in theory, but if I keep taking myself out the game to write notes, I worry I will knock out my rhythm and then ACTUALLY engage in some confirmation bias where I'm all "I don't think I can get a hit on this 2-1 count but I'm gonna try really hard..." and get myself caught up in between. But you are right it would establish a more accurate base rather than anectdotal, "I get the feeling..." sort of analysis.

I'm going to put in some more work but like I was saying, before I actually got better at the game I wasn't noticing these things that much...now that I'm better I notice it more. And really, the entire idea of it sort of balancing itself, like say you've been cruising for four innings and you suddenly give up a infield single and a blooper...I'm not inherently against this! This happens in baseball! But that happens way more often than say you jump out to that early 3-0 lead and just cruise to victory. IMO, I've experienced being "forced" to get out of jams in a tight game waaaay more often than I felt like, "Oh, man, what an easy game, just one of those easy Sunday afternoon joints where every ball finds a fielder."

In my experience, if you've gotten away with a lot of hard hit balls but haven't given up any runs, or say you get three double plays in the first three innings, the odds of things suddenly unraveling later in the game are higher unless you really perform exceptionally well. Likewise, go with a power swing in 1-1 counts or on first pitches(situations in which, I claim at least, the game does not think you should do that) and see how well that works out for you and how many ab's you can climb back into and make productive after that.

I want to continue to stress I don't think anything is ever set in stone, but the impression that it is is obviously an issue and not just something imagined by players performing poorly.

[wudl83]

Re: Destined to lose?

And here we get the problem.

When you say "too often" we need a foundation for that statement. Debating about something occuring too often or too seldomly without a proper base is senseless IMO. That's not meant as an offense.

And look, what you are stating is so highly typical for sports gaming.
You said you haven't experienced certain things before getting better. Well, getting better involves always playing more. By implication this means you are playing the game more and more.

That being said, it is absolutely logic that you see certain situations more often. Those situations may already have been there while you have been a worse player. But since you didn't know the game as much you didn't notice them so heavily. The more you play, the more certain situations occur. It would be strange if it wouldn't work that way.

But IMO the problem is that although the relative number of certain events occuring may be ok, the absolute number of those events gets too high because you play so much. And because of that you see those things so often that it comes to the point where you start feeling in a certain way.

Besides that, you said that you do not want to lose the flow or get knocked out your rhythm, may be it's true from your sight, but may be it is not true, since you already aren't in flow when playing the game. I bet that you already have subtle feelings while playing the game, haven't you?

Otherwise you would not post here in this thread. You are aware of certain things (at least you think you are). And I don't think you can dig yourself so deep into a game that you are completely without unconscious thoughts.

Everybody does so, I am quite sure.


EDIT:
Maybe you can understand better what I want to say by giving you an example.
Let's say Person A plays 4 games per week. This makes 16 games in one month. In every 4th game a certain thing happens. This means over one month he will get into this situation 4 times.
Let's say Person B plays 2 games per day. That makes 60 games in on month. In every 4th game a certain ghing happens. This means over one month he will get into this situation 15 times.
What do you guess Person A is thinking of the situation, and what Person B is thinking of the situation?
The relative number is the same (and it may even be "real" compared to reality). But the absolute numbers are way different.

[Cavicchi]

Re: Destined to lose?

Otherwise you would not post here in this thread. You are aware of certain things (at least you think you are). And I don't think you can dig yourself so deep into a game that you are completely without unconscious thoughts.

How long ago did you get your degree in psychiatry?

[Sairheart]

Re: Destined to lose?

And here we get the problem.

When you say "too often" we need a foundation for that statement. Debating about something occuring too often or too seldomly without a proper base is senseless IMO. That's not meant as an offense.

And look, what you are stating is so highly typical for sports gaming.
You said you haven't experienced certain things before getting better. Well, getting better involves always playing more. By implication this means you are playing the game more and more.

That being said, it is absolutely logic that you see certain situations more often. Those situations may already have been there while you have been a worse player. But since you didn't know the game as much you didn't notice them so heavily. The more you play, the more certain situations occur. It would be strange if it wouldn't work that way.

But IMO the problem is that although the relative number of certain events occuring may be ok, the absolute number of those events gets too high because you play so much. And because of that you see those things so often that it comes to the point where you start feeling in a certain way.

Besides that, you said that you do not want to lose the flow or get knocked out your rhythm, may be it's true from your sight, but may be it is not true, since you already aren't in flow when playing the game. I bet that you already have subtle feelings while playing the game, haven't you?

Otherwise you would not post here in this thread. You are aware of certain things (at least you think you are). And I don't think you can dig yourself so deep into a game that you are completely without unconscious thoughts.

Everybody does so, I am quite sure.


EDIT:
Maybe you can understand better what I want to say by giving you an example.
Let's say Person A plays 4 games per week. This makes 16 games in one month. In every 4th game a certain thing happens. This means over one month he will get into this situation 4 times.
Let's say Person B plays 2 games per day. That makes 60 games in on month. In every 4th game a certain ghing happens. This means over one month he will get into this situation 15 times.
What do you guess Person A is thinking of the situation, and what Person B is thinking of the situation?
The relative number is the same (and it may even be "real" compared to reality). But the absolute numbers are way different.

Right, me playing the game a lot is directly connected to as to why I don't properly understand the game...though I understand what you are trying to say. And like people have said over and over, it's not "certain situations" occuring. It's HOW certain situations occur and the context in which they occur. You're downplaying the scientific use of the word "often" and you're here making a pyschiatric judgement that you are "quite sure...everybody does". Based on what exactly?

My point was I really haven't noticed it until I was routinely going through the first five or six innings with everything going right for me, i.e me holding a lead while running the pitch count up for the starter to about 100 through 5, and my starter only yielding a few baserunners and having already got out of a jam etc. And like I've said, my (perceived or not) pitch by pitch understanding of the game has actually made me a better player, whether or not momentum exists...the problem mainly boils down to fielding animations handcuffing me. Have I worked out of them even when my "perceived" notion of things tilted against me occured? Yes! But it's killed me way more times.

I'm fatigued with this conversation. If I find different results over the next few weeks I'll return, I'm more than happy to be wrong it's june and I might not have a baseball game to play. I'd rather some other people whoop on the cpu on Legend for a few weeks in the game and see how it works out for them, before telling me my experience is a figment of my imagination.

[THESHAMISASHAME]

Re: Destined to lose?

I'm fatigued with this conversation. If I find different results over the next few weeks I'll return, I'm more than happy to be wrong it's june and I might not have a baseball game to play. I'd rather some other people whoop on the cpu on Legend for a few weeks in the game and see how it works out for them, before telling me my experience is a figment of my imagination.

I hear you man and since MLB 09 this series hasnt lasted past May for me do to all the " Scripted Type " Feeling stuff that just wrecks the game for me .
As a Baseball fan this is very troubling but the alternative is even worse as I find myself more focusing on actually what I do than how or any skill , just more rituals of do as I say and youll be rewarded with a treat as deemed with a advantage and how much fun is that ?.
I have always been a free thinker and not a lapdog who just settles
TC and Im not very optimistic for any changes in the future other than some more visuals stuff but nothing really has change in true gameplay in years other than some engine tweaks to keep things unbalanced and more visuals to try make the outcomes / probabilities seem less forced/predictable .

[wudl83]

Re: Destined to lose?

@Sairheart:
You don't go into detail - because you can't. You pick single scenes and act as they would occur all the time. Do you think a fruitful conversation will come up with exaggerations and vague propositions?

You don't prove something with numbers - because you can't or don't want to. We still do not know what "too often" means. What is too often? Until you haven't said what "too often" means it is senseless to try to debate about it.
You pick special situations and you say that in your opinion those situations hapen too often (and don't try to tell me you haven't, you HAVE).
And then you are the one who says he is getting tired? Thats ridiculous. How can the one that blames something be tired of the conversation, where the blaming of something is the topic? You are the one that wanted to tell something is wrong. If you want to prove something than please do it.

You did not have ONE SINGLE valid counterargument against my post, you only say you get better and have become a very good player, but yeah I see. In fact you did prove my previous points with your post and you didn't even recognize that you were doing it.

@Cavicchi:
Will there be a time when you grow up?