Destined to lose?

[THESHAMISASHAME]

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?

Are you serious ??? to do all that as I played all pitches and cutscenes one game would take 10 hours and prove little as its vague and so many variables but as we all agree the trends are all there especially after 5 years of the same programming with a few tweaks to keep things unbalanced .
All the signs are there like dont swing on 3-0 , use contact swing on 3-2 ect and sure when the momentum is out of whack when pitcher control is shot you can throw that all out the window so please dont insult us as we all know what we are talking about here as the issue is 5 years old as it comes off as scripted feel at times .

[bp4baseball]

Re: Destined to lose?

Are you serious ??? to do all that as I played all pitches and cutscenes one game would take 10 hours and prove little as its vague and so many variables but as we all agree the trends are all there especially after 5 years of the same programming with a few tweaks to keep things unbalanced .
All the signs are there like dont swing on 3-0 , use contact swing on 3-2 ect and sure when the momentum is out of whack when pitcher control is shot you can throw that all out the window so please dont insult us as we all know what we are talking about here as the issue is 5 years old as it has a scripted feel at times .

Yep, rather than tweaking the code to make people happier they purposely make changes to make the game unbalanced.

[wudl83]

Re: Destined to lose?

Are you serious ??? to do all that as I played all pitches and cutscenes one game would take 10 hours and prove little as its vague and so many variables but as we all agree the trends are all there especially after 5 years of the same programming with a few tweaks to keep things unbalanced .
All the signs are there like dont swing on 3-0 , use contact swing on 3-2 ect and sure when the momentum is out of whack when pitcher control is shot you can throw that all out the window so please dont insult us as we all know what we are talking about here as the issue is 5 years old as it has a scripted feel at times .

Nope - he only should have tracked the particular scenes and the circumstances. I did this for myself playing another sports game of that I felt being "scripted" in certain situations. Doing this prolongs the playing time of one game about 3-5 minutes at the maximum. This can be done while playing. Easily.

And by doing this you would have something which could prove (or not prove) certain feelings. In my case it did prove only one thing: that I was wrong big time (not saying that this must be the case here, too).

As long as empty words (like "how it happens", "it happens too often", "feeling that it is scripted") are used without a base there won't be much success in discussing a topic like this.

And since some guys have enough time to write long posts in a forum, which obviously takes some time, I really can't understand why those guys don't have the time to write down some lines while playing a game.
Things like losing the rhythm or something like that really aren't viable excuses for me, to add this. Otherwise you always would lose your rhythm when a phone call comes in during a game or when you got go to the toilet.

[Sairheart]

Re: Destined to lose?

Nope - he only should have tracked the particular scenes and the circumstances. I did this for myself playing another sports game of that I felt being "scripted" in certain situations. Doing this prolongs the playing time of one game about 3-5 minutes at the maximum. This can be done while playing. Easily.

And by doing this you would have something which could prove (or not prove) certain feelings. In my case it did prove only one thing: that I was wrong big time (not saying that this must be the case here, too).

As long as empty words (like "how it happens", "it happens too often", "feeling that it is scripted") are used without a base there won't be much success in discussing a topic like this.

And since some guys have enough time to write long posts in a forum, which obviously takes some time, I really can't understand why those guys don't have the time to write down some lines while playing a game.
Things like losing the rhythm or something like that really aren't viable excuses for me, to add this. Otherwise you always would lose your rhythm when a phone call comes in during a game or when you got go to the toilet.

It takes five minutes to write a post on a forum, just because I type fast and put up three paragraphs doesn't mean I had to sweat over it. Like Sham has already stated, the situations I brought up have happened countless times over the length of me playing this game for the past 5 years. I've been playing on the highest difficulty level out the box since 09. It takes me awhile to adjust, I adjust, these things pop up again.

I normally play uninterrupted, and unless it's something immediate I don't walk away from the game unless it's between innings. If I came in here with a pitch by pitch breakdown of the game(which you claim to be so simple yet you haven't done it to disprove what ppl have been saying) would ANYONE read that post? What? And wouldn't you just come back and say that was just one game? Would I have to do it for ten games and prove, "If you throw 81 pitches, at a 50-31 split, and are up against the #4 hitter with a small lead, 3-2 count, 47% of the time something "bad" would happen"...I mean it's absurd. Not only would it take more energy to do that than it's worth, NO ONE WOULD CARE. It's not just "chart the situation" it's the CONTEXT of the situation and how you got there. The variables are vast. But the trends, especially if you are playing extremely well on Legend, are obvious.

I'm just trying to illuminate trends in scenarios, like Sham did with the don't swing 3-0 and go contact swing 3-2, that appear to you if you've been playing this game at it's highest level for years and years. I didn't bang into a DP on a 3-1 count when I was down in the game and was like "See! Comeback code! Gotta go argue with a bunch of people on a forum I'm not even a memeber of!" And I've said over and over and over, I DON'T BELIEVE IN A COMEBACK CODE.

Again, go play on Legend, never sim ANYTHING, and dominate the cpu for a few weeks instead of demanding I go out on some chore that wouldn't sway your opinion either way. And I didn't come to "blame" anything. I came here to relay my playing experience, after many years, at it's highest level, after I discovered similar issues. I've played .600 ball on Legend for years, I'm not posting in here because I'm mad that I lose.

[THESHAMISASHAME]

Re: Destined to lose?

Yep, rather than tweaking the code to make people happier they purposely make changes to make the game unbalanced.

Flashback many moons ago ( search the threads ) , the number one complaint from this site was no matter what the game wasnt hard enough even on the hardest level so the game changed from real click sliders to random so you will win and lose regardless of what you do skill wise EX: my fav pitches aimed in the dirt go into the strike zone as needed , scripted errors ect as the game evolved though now it is less noticeable .
Just like the beginners mode added this year as it was only added not to just make the game easier to start BUT to try and guide the gamer by the nose how scea wants you to play their game ...... what a waste (disingenuous ) !!! all like being a actor in a role instead of being a interactive gamer with some type of skill involved ( more what you do than how , more rituals )

[bp4baseball]

Re: Destined to lose?

Flashback many moons ago ( search the threads ) , the number one complaint from this site was no matter what the game wasnt hard enough even on the hardest level so the game changed from real click sliders to random so you will win and lose regardless of what you do skill wise EX: my fav pitches aimed in the dirt go into the strike zone as needed , scripted errors ect as the game evolved though now it is less noticeable .
Just like the beginners mode added this year as it was only added not to just make the game easier to start BUT to try and guide the gamer by the nose how scea wants you to play their game ...... what a waste (disingenuous ) !!! all like being a actor in a role instead of being a interactive gamer with some type of skill involved ( more what you do than how , more rituals )

I enjoy a good conspiracy as much as the next guy, but there's a lot more perception and belief in that post than actual truth and fact.

[Cavicchi]

Re: Destined to lose?

Flashback many moons ago ( search the threads ) , the number one complaint from this site was no matter what the game wasnt hard enough even on the hardest level so the game changed from real click sliders to random so you will win and lose regardless of what you do skill wise EX: my fav pitches aimed in the dirt go into the strike zone as needed , scripted errors ect as the game evolved though now it is less noticeable .
Just like the beginners mode added this year as it was only added not to just make the game easier to start BUT to try and guide the gamer by the nose how scea wants you to play their game ...... what a waste (disingenuous ) !!! all like being a actor in a role instead of being a interactive gamer with some type of skill involved ( more what you do than how , more rituals )

I hear you on that one. I can't think of any pitch I threw during my current franchise that went for a home run on where I wanted it. By the way, I am playing on Beginner Mode as the Braves. The last 4 games played at Turner field made me think I was playing at Coors. 3 out of 4 games yielded lots of homers. The Cubs got 4 home runs in 10 hits, and all the homers were on pitches that went where the game wanted it, not where I wanted it.

I get a sense of reward and punishment when playing the game. Yes, I get that feeling on Beginner Mode, how it wants me to play the game.

The thing that bugs me the most is how it looks like cheating. Ryan Howard beats out a ground ball. Nate Schierholtz beats out a ground ball and flies into second on a double. I watched the replay and saw Nate running like Mike Trout, so after the game I looked at his attributes--50 (fifty) for speed!

Now I am not saying destined to lose because I don't lose. Perhaps I should say destined to win! Ahh, but I play on Beginner Mode.

Yes, I like to win. I don't think losing is fun :wink:

[bp4baseball]

Re: Destined to lose?

I hear you on that one. I can't think of any pitch I threw during my current franchise that went for a home run on where I wanted it. By the way, I am playing on Beginner Mode as the Braves. The last 4 games played at Turner field made me think I was playing at Coors. 3 out of 4 games yielded lots of homers. The Cubs got 4 home runs in 10 hits, and all the homers were on pitches that went where the game wanted it, not where I wanted it.

I get a sense of reward and punishment when playing the game. Yes, I get that feeling on Beginner Mode, how it wants me to play the game.

The thing that bugs me the most is how it looks like cheating. Ryan Howard beats out a ground ball. Nate Schierholtz beats out a ground ball and flies into second on a double. I watched the replay and saw Nate running like Mike Trout, so after the game I looked at his attributes--50 (fifty) for speed!

Now I am not saying destined to lose because I don't lose. Perhaps I should say destined to win! Ahh, but I play on Beginner Mode.

Yes, I like to win. I don't think losing is fun :wink:

Of course there are many more details I don't know, but lets say it didn't go where you wanted because you made a mistake, either with the pitching meter or the pitcher just threw a bad pitch. Most HR's in real life are on mistake pitches...not where the pitcher intended to throw the ball.

[Cavicchi]

Re: Destined to lose?

Of course there are many more details I don't know, but lets say it didn't go where you wanted because you made a mistake, either with the pitching meter or the pitcher just threw a bad pitch. Most HR's in real life are on mistake pitches...not where the pitcher intended to throw the ball.

I use Classic Pitching. Yes, of course mistake pitches would be a reason, but what decides those mistake pitches and why? There is also the question of why a home run? Why not a double or triple? They get 4 home runs out of 10 hits over the course of 3 games.

There is so much more I could say but it's not related to destined to lose. Just one example I'll throw in here, CPU pitcher is up to bunt, so I throw a 88+ slider up high from Matt Harvey, high across top of zone. However, the "game" decides it hits the pitcher. Why? Because the pitcher is supposed to bunt the runner over to second so they can score a run. Now I'm not playing ball here by throwing an 88+ slider across the top, so I hit the pitcher in the back. I play out the scene and guess what happens, sure, 1st and 2nd and next batter gets a hit to score a run. Now that could be interpreted a different way, like I'm supposed to let the pitcher bunt on a nice fat pitch, not a 88+ slider across the top, so I get punished by hitting the batter on a pitch thrown across the top.

I threw that slider again across the top a few more times in the game, and it went where I wanted, not hitting anyone in the back.

I should add the pitcher was batting from the right side, and Harvey throws from the right side. Interesting that a slider should hit the batter in the back on a slider thrown across the top.

[nomo17k]

Re: Destined to lose?

I find very sad someone complains the game doesn't play realistic using the Beginner mode (or even Rookie/Veteran). It's like complaining that slow-pitch softball doesn't feel like playing fast-pitch softball. That's just the definition of being ludicrous, if not ludacris...

I have to disagree with the statement that skills don't matter at all in recent games. It actually is a huge factor. I play against HUM players regularly online, and better skilled players routinely beat the ones with lesser skills, even using less talented teams.

In fact, skill level is quite very noticeable after playing a few innings. I have to say the vast majority of players who play online aren't very baseball-savy. Not to imply that guys in this thread are like them, but if those guys are playing against CPU, I can actually see them complaining that the game doesn't play realistically due to the game fabricating outcomes, when their pitching in fact is easy to read, mishandle bullpen often, cannot lay off pitches off the strike zone, cannot adjust to off-speed pitches, etc., etc.

If you feel that your skills don't matter, it's likely that you aren't playing with the right difficulty/slider setting for your playing style.

[chrishthomas]

Re: Destined to lose?

Honestly, I am surprised this thread is still open. While there has been some relatively insightful commentary from several users, in years past this type of thread was gone in minutes. Moderation of this forum appears to have changed a bit. And, that’s not a bad thing as long as people keep disagreements civil. But, I digress. I apologize in advance for the length of this post.

One of Nomo's recent posts actually hits on a very pertinent issue to this thread. When he mentioned the misuse of the term “random”, he was right. While there are some occurrences within a game of baseball that lean toward randomness (e.g., balls taking weird hops), other things like players committing errors isn't an issue of randomness. A more appropriate term would be "likelihood". Players' ratings are derived from statistics they have accumulated over the course of their careers. Statistics such as fielding percentage (which I would assume is the basis for fielding ratings) are based on the number of errors a player commits along with the number of chances he had. In effect, this provides us with a probability, or likelihood, that he will commit an error on any given play.

Now here's where things get tricky -- and after far too many hours thinking about how it relates to the The Show -- I think this is the beginning of understanding how momentum, confidence, or game balance issues impact that probability in such a way that many players feel that the outcome was forced or created, rather than naturally derived based on statistically derived likelihood.

In an earlier post, the idea of coin flips was mentioned (50/50 chance for heads or tails). Along with the idea of probability there is a related aspect of coin flips that is often overlooked, and also misunderstood. That idea is independence. Each coin flip is independent of previous or subsequent flips - meaning the outcome of any particular flip is in no way impacted by what happened before or will happen after that particular flip. And, this is where a lot of confusion about probability and independence occurs.

Say for instance, I plan on flipping a coin 100 times...the expected outcome would be 50 heads and 50 tails. Now, let's say I run off a string of 20 straight heads to start. What is my expected outcome now?

Many people intuitively assume that the flips will somehow balance out, that because I ran off a string of heads, I will inevitably run off a string of tails that will balance things out and get the final outcome near 50-50 as we originally expected. However, based on independent flips, that is incorrect. I should now expect my outcome to be around 60 heads and 40 tails. The remaining 80 flips are not impacted by those first 20 flips, and because of that I should expect a balanced outcome (40 heads and 40 tails) for these remaining flips. So from this point, my expected outcome is now 20+40 (60 heads) and 40 tails.

That is, just because I ran off 20 straight heads (which is highly unlikely: .5^20 = .00000095 chance of that actually happening), there isn't some sort of probabilistic mechanism that will correct for that in order to arrive at the original expected outcome of 50/50. Now, when it's all said and done, I may actually run off a string of tails, but that would be just as unlikely as the first scenario.

So, how does all this tie into The Show. My impression is that events in The Show (as in real baseball) aren't independent of one another. What happens on a previous play may, in fact, impact the probability of what occurs on subsequent plays. Those features in the game like clutch, confidence, momentum (if there is such a thing), I assume are intended to mimic these aspects of real life fluctuations, or variables that impact the likelihood that a player will commit an error, or that a pitcher will miss with an important pitch. And thus, we often "see" occurrences in the game, like that untimely error in the 9th, that seem forced (but really aren't forced--just the probability of a certain occurrence had increased based on previous plays).

Even beyond these computerized machinations, there are real factors that impact this as well (just for example, if I let a runner reach base in a close game, there is a relatively good chance that I will be throwing balls low in the zone to induce a ground ball, and avoid that shot to the gap or heaven forbid a two-run blast. Now the batter has a better idea of where my pitches will be located and can be pickier about what he swings at. Or, if I’m really trying to keep it down, I may end up missing the zone and walking the batter. When all of these things are taken into consideration, the outcomes of these situations become linked, rather than independent, and thus the probabilities of certain occurrences may be greater and may lead to us recognizing certain outcomes more often than we would expect to see if the events were truly independent.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: Destined to lose?

I use Classic Pitching. Yes, of course mistake pitches would be a reason, but what decides those mistake pitches and why? There is also the question of why a home run? Why not a double or triple? They get 4 home runs out of 10 hits over the course of 3 games.

There is so much more I could say but it's not related to destined to lose. Just one example I'll throw in here, CPU pitcher is up to bunt, so I throw a 88+ slider up high from Matt Harvey, high across top of zone. However, the "game" decides it hits the pitcher. Why? Because the pitcher is supposed to bunt the runner over to second so they can score a run. Now I'm not playing ball here by throwing an 88+ slider across the top, so I hit the pitcher in the back. I play out the scene and guess what happens, sure, 1st and 2nd and next batter gets a hit to score a run. Now that could be interpreted a different way, like I'm supposed to let the pitcher bunt on a nice fat pitch, not a 88+ slider across the top, so I get punished by hitting the batter on a pitch thrown across the top.

I threw that slider again across the top a few more times in the game, and it went where I wanted, not hitting anyone in the back.

I should add the pitcher was batting from the right side, and Harvey throws from the right side. Interesting that a slider should hit the batter in the back on a slider thrown across the top.

This sounds like a complaint about video games in general and not being in TOTAL control. Most of us don't particularly want to be able to make the game do everything we want when we want. There would be no challenge or sense of accomplishment. There would be no joy when what we want to happen actually does happen.

As far as "what determines what." everything in the game is driven by ratings and how they interact with other ratings. From there each outcome has a probability that it will happen, and I don't think probability is ever 1, meaning you will see different things happen from the same starting point....even if you re-create your actions faithfully.

Probability is a hard concept that very few really understand it's obviously not a priority in primary/secondary education.

[Cavicchi]

Re: Destined to lose?

This sounds like a complaint about video games in general and not being in TOTAL control. Most of us don't particularly want to be able to make the game do everything we want when we want. There would be no challenge or sense of accomplishment. There would be no joy when what we want to happen actually does happen.

As far as "what determines what." everything in the game is driven by ratings and how they interact with other ratings. From there each outcome has a probability that it will happen, and I don't think probability is ever 1, meaning you will see different things happen from the same starting point....even if you re-create your actions faithfully.

Probability is a hard concept that very few really understand it's obviously not a priority in primary/secondary education.

Everything is not determined by ratings. Schierholtz does not run like Mike Trout with a speed rating of 50. I gave Medlen a home run rating of 81 and he gave up 2 homers out of 4 hits. Medlen's rating for homers does not suggest giving up 2 homers from 4 hits. None of the pitches for home runs by Medlen was where I wanted it.

As for expecting realism, I never said this game is realistic. I responded to a post that mentioned Beginner Mode.

If the CPU likes a player, the player does well. I can bring in who the CPU likes and he gets a pass even on a pitch thrown to a bad spot. Fielders the CPU likes do better than than those that should be better.

I play to have fun, but a fairly close to realistic approach would be appreciated. In addition, I don't think what I experience is all that strange given what others experience on higher levels.

[Cavicchi]

Re: Destined to lose?

I find very sad someone complains the game doesn't play realistic using the Beginner mode (or even Rookie/Veteran). It's like complaining that slow-pitch softball doesn't feel like playing fast-pitch softball. That's just the definition of being ludicrous, if not ludacris...

This game would not be realistic on any level because the ratings are not even remotely close to realistic. You can play with sliders and whatever but the ratings are what make or break a baseball game, in my opinion. There is not one single roster that corrects the issues with this game, such as all pitchers must have 3 pitch types. Any baseball game that says all pitchers must have 3 pitch types is not trying to replicate real baseball, in my opinion. There is no such thing in baseball, all pitchers must have 3 pitch types!

[bp4baseball]

Re: Destined to lose?

This game would not be realistic on any level because the ratings are not even remotely close to realistic. You can play with sliders and whatever but the ratings are what make or break a baseball game, in my opinion. There is not one single roster that corrects the issues with this game, such as all pitchers must have 3 pitch types. Any baseball game that says all pitchers must have 3 pitch types is not trying to replicate real baseball, in my opinion. There is no such thing in baseball, all pitchers must have 3 pitch types!

Sounds like this game just isn't for you. There are many out there (myself included) who find the game producing very realistic stats and providing a balance between ratings and skill.