Gamers.com gives mvp a 7

[CheckMate]

Re: Gamers.com gives mvp a 7

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
but why should a game let a player play another position he's not even familar with at 100% effectiveness with no penalties or limitations on his abilities???

Then we could simply just draft a team full of the most potent hitters and play them at any position to create an all star team!?

how is this not important in a game?....there is no excuse for this

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Yeah, but then you're not being realistic about the game either. If you draft based on position, you have nothing to worry about.

[CheckMate]

Re: Gamers.com gives mvp a 7

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
but why should a game let a player play another position he's not even familar with at 100% effectiveness with no penalties or limitations on his abilities???

Then we could simply just draft a team full of the most potent hitters and play them at any position to create an all star team!?

how is this not important in a game?....there is no excuse for this

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Yeah, but then you're not being realistic about the game either. If you draft based on position, you have nothing to worry about.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Re: Gamers.com gives mvp a 7

s we hjave to rely on our own honesty to impose these limits????

that isnt too helpful when I need to put in a pinch hitter late in the game and just decide to leave him play any position later in the game..hogwash!! this stinks!

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Re: Gamers.com gives mvp a 7

s we hjave to rely on our own honesty to impose these limits????

that isnt too helpful when I need to put in a pinch hitter late in the game and just decide to leave him play any position later in the game..hogwash!! this stinks!

[CheckMate]

Re: Gamers.com gives mvp a 7

So, you'd have no problem if I beat you in college football by running the option all day with my WR at QB? The game may impose a limit on his passing ability, but if I'm running the ball I don't have to pass it.

[CheckMate]

Re: Gamers.com gives mvp a 7

So, you'd have no problem if I beat you in college football by running the option all day with my WR at QB? The game may impose a limit on his passing ability, but if I'm running the ball I don't have to pass it.

[Cardinalfreak]

Re: Gamers.com gives mvp a 7

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Mo Vaugn should not be playing CF...so I agrree...if the game lets him play CF and a very good one, I dont think I want this game

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

But wouldn't you ask yourself why they put him in CF in the first place.

I could put a WR at QB and run the option all day long in NCAA 03 and then bash the game by saying that the CPU can't stop the option. But would I have a valid arguement?

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

To me it's not about putting Mo Vaughn in the outfield, which is silly, but it does bother me if all center fielders can make all the same plays. I like games where it's noticeable when you have a slow outfielder versus a fast one, and this reviewer makes it sound like that won't be the case. If that's true, then that is definitely a strike against the game to me.

[Cardinalfreak]

Re: Gamers.com gives mvp a 7

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Mo Vaugn should not be playing CF...so I agrree...if the game lets him play CF and a very good one, I dont think I want this game

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

But wouldn't you ask yourself why they put him in CF in the first place.

I could put a WR at QB and run the option all day long in NCAA 03 and then bash the game by saying that the CPU can't stop the option. But would I have a valid arguement?

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

To me it's not about putting Mo Vaughn in the outfield, which is silly, but it does bother me if all center fielders can make all the same plays. I like games where it's noticeable when you have a slow outfielder versus a fast one, and this reviewer makes it sound like that won't be the case. If that's true, then that is definitely a strike against the game to me.

[Blaise]

Re: Gamers.com gives mvp a 7

Personally, you should be able to player any player at any position. I dont care what you do, but the review for MVP is whack, because it tells you nothing about the game, only Mo Vaughn. It doesnt justify its rating or tell us anything about the game we dont already know.

Side Note: Mo is looking great defensively this year, the offseason work out, and spending more time practicing his position has really paid off, as we saw yesterday when he made that play on the McGriff shot down the line.

[Blaise]

Re: Gamers.com gives mvp a 7

Personally, you should be able to player any player at any position. I dont care what you do, but the review for MVP is whack, because it tells you nothing about the game, only Mo Vaughn. It doesnt justify its rating or tell us anything about the game we dont already know.

Side Note: Mo is looking great defensively this year, the offseason work out, and spending more time practicing his position has really paid off, as we saw yesterday when he made that play on the McGriff shot down the line.

[jujuhound]

Re: Gamers.com gives mvp a 7

You should be able to play a guy whatever you want, but you should pay a price for playing him in a position he's not familiar with. The review may suck, but the reviewer is making one point that may or may not be valid. He is saying that defensive abilities do not matter at all in MVP baseball. That is a legitimate complaint regardless of whether the rest of his review blew. We'll find out tomorrow anyway (isn't that when the game is out?).

[jujuhound]

Re: Gamers.com gives mvp a 7

You should be able to play a guy whatever you want, but you should pay a price for playing him in a position he's not familiar with. The review may suck, but the reviewer is making one point that may or may not be valid. He is saying that defensive abilities do not matter at all in MVP baseball. That is a legitimate complaint regardless of whether the rest of his review blew. We'll find out tomorrow anyway (isn't that when the game is out?).

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Re: Gamers.com gives mvp a 7

You should technically be able to play anybody aanywhere BUT...but the game should be programmed deep enough to display different defensive ratings and abilities in a player's style. Earl Weaver was great because I could see the differences when Daryl Strawberry threw a ball from RF and when Howard Johson played a miserable third base with no range....then Ozzie Smith was a vaccuum at SS...he got to everything!...How can a game in todays baseball market not demonstrate these differences after all these years. Would you be happy if you played MAdden and saw Wayne Chrebet out maneuviring Charles Woodson in the open field to catch a down and out over and over??

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Re: Gamers.com gives mvp a 7

You should technically be able to play anybody aanywhere BUT...but the game should be programmed deep enough to display different defensive ratings and abilities in a player's style. Earl Weaver was great because I could see the differences when Daryl Strawberry threw a ball from RF and when Howard Johson played a miserable third base with no range....then Ozzie Smith was a vaccuum at SS...he got to everything!...How can a game in todays baseball market not demonstrate these differences after all these years. Would you be happy if you played MAdden and saw Wayne Chrebet out maneuviring Charles Woodson in the open field to catch a down and out over and over??

[CMH]

Re: Gamers.com gives mvp a 7

GUYS!

he talked about ONE PLAY!

He could've gotten lucky. You really can't judge the fielding ratings of the players from this review b/c it was biased and the sampling was entirely small.

We don't know if Mo made 10 straight errors out there and then magically made a diving catch out there on the next play. The reviewer doesn't offer any information outside of the ONE catch Mo makes.

Now think about it. It's a video game based on ratings. Don't you think there would be a chance that Mo would make a nice catch at centerfield?

I bet when you buy the game, SOMEONE, at least one person will end up hitting a leadoff homerun when they pop the game in and make the assumption, "oh boy, TP is back..." but it's one sample. You may have just gotten a really good pitch to hit. Doesn't necessarily mean the game is a homerun-a-thon.

With the history of this gamers.com site, I think it's safe to say that the guy doesn't know what he's talking about and doesn't give games enough of a chance.

Rent it first if you have questions. Doesn't hurt.