-
-
Re: What are your expectations for Generated Counts
I would say slim to none, but anything is possible. During the 4 or 5 months of prototyping those counts were present. Like I stated early it wasn't fun nor did it shorten the game times by very much at all.
It's a classic case of something sounding great on paper and in a design document then it's implemented and it doesn't work or give you the feeling of nostalgia you thought it would.
To give you a more complete picture of how it evolved we play tested two original options. The first was "middle" counts where you would only see middle counts of course. The problem with this implementation was the games took about the same time as a normal game. So regardless of if it was fun or not (which it wasn't) what's the point? If a new feature doesn't accomplish one of the major pillars in the genesis of the design behind it, then "it" has failed the first rule of game design 101. However everyone liked the that you didn't always have a count with two strikes and you a more varied array of pitcher/batter situations. So it had a few redeeming elements in it.
The second option was "late" counts, in it you would only see counts with two strikes. This implementation created insanely fast game times naturally, but there where two many strike outs and not enough walks. The CPU also scored a lot of runs on everyone. Didn't matter who was on the mound and that's not very realistic. All those factors created very unrealistic box scores. However we enjoyed the expeditiousness of the games and the stress of every situation being critical.
So after deliberation we took the best parts of both options and split the difference. Which created the "hybrid" option MLB 14 will ship with. What we ended up with was a mechanic that gave the user more variety of counts, (problem with the "late" option) game times in between the "middle" and "late" modes. It also gives the user more control over their final count, fewer strike 2 situations generated for the user. Last and most certainly not least it was the funnest option of all three.
Hopefully this explains the evolution of the feature and gives you a little more insight in how game designs rarely ever end where they start.
Last edited by Russell_SCEA; 01-30-2014, 02:50 PM.Comment
-
Re: What are your expectations for Generated Counts
This is the type example that separates San Diego Studio from the also rans. They are not going to just run a flag up a pole and see who salutes. No sir, they will do the required testing to get it right.I would say slim to none, but anything is possible. During the 4 or 5 months of prototyping those counts were present. Like I stated early it wasn't fun nor did it shorten the game times by very much at all.
It's a classic case of something sounding great on paper and in a design document then it's implemented and it doesn't work or give you the feeling of nostalgia you thought it would.
To give you a more complete picture of how it evolved we play tested two original options. The first was "middle" counts where you would only see middle counts of course. The problem with this implementation was the games took about the same time as a normal game. So regardless of if it was fun or not (which it wasn't) what's the point? If a new feature doesn't accomplish one of the major pillars in the genesis of the design behind it, then "it" has failed the first rule of game design 101. However everyone liked the that you didn't always have a count with two strikes and you a more varied array of pitcher/batter situations. So it had a few redeeming elements in it.
The second option was "late" counts, in it you would only see counts with two strikes. This implementation created insanely fast game times naturally, but there where two many strike outs and not enough walks. The CPU also scored a lot of runs on everyone. All those factors created very unrealistic box scores. However we enjoyed the expeditiousness of the games and the stress of every situation being critical.
So after deliberation we took the best parts of both options and split the difference. Which created the "hybrid" option MLB 14 will ship with. What we ended up with was a mechanic that gave the user more variety of counts, (problem with the "late" option) game times between the "middle" and "late" modes. It also gives the user more control over their final count, fewer strike 2 situations generated for the user. Last and most certainly not least it was the funnest option of all three.
Hopefully this explains the evolution of the feature and gives you a little more insight in how game designs rarely ever end where they start.Michigan ManComment
-
Re: What are your expectations for Generated Counts
n/m just the way i read what you said...I said i know its active when you are batting and pitching...what i was asking is if i am playing my franchise is if you have GPC turned on for just one option at a time (ie..when im pitching id like it on, when my team bats id like it off) that is what i have been asking....im sure it cant be done but im just curiousComment
-
Re: What are your expectations for Generated Counts
But like Kehlis asked, can this option be chosen before a Franchise game (for example)?
I'm assuming yes, but Ramone called it a Game Mode (though I don't personally think that's what he meant. As in "Game Mode," like RTTS or anything).
Basically, let's say I start a Franchise with NYY and only want to play full games when CC pitches. Can I use Quick Counts for all the games anyone other than CC starts?Comment
-
Re: What are your expectations for Generated Counts
Maybe the guys at Kotaku & PP need to stop reading the bathroom walls and start logging into OS more often!
They might actually learn something!Comment
-
Re: What are your expectations for Generated Counts
That seems a little arbitrary. Some people may like RTTS to be even quicker.
Along those lines, it would be great to have option to only have interactive baserunning when the next base is open (excluding home). So that you're only baserunning when trying to steal a base is an option. Choosing the Lead Runner option does not accomplish this because you have to wait through at-bats - often long ones with lots of foul balls - when your player reaches third. It also doesn't allow you to control your guy on 1st base in a 1st and 3rd situation.
That's been on my wishlist for years!Comment
-
Re: What are your expectations for Generated Counts
Ugh... I have no idea why anyone that wants a SIM experience would find generated counts palatable. One of my favorite features in DMB was that it had pitch by pitch in a text based game.
The most important feature in any baseball game is an interesting, if not realistic pitcher/batter battle. This just feels like a cheap way to overcome the inability of this series to produce even close to realistic pitch counts.
This would be good for an arcade game, though.Comment
Comment