MLB 12 The Show Gameplay Video - Cubs vs. Cardinals (OS Exclusive) - Part 3

[econoodle]

Quote: Originally Posted by seasprite

was just about to post this.....Ive been wanting this for a while. Adds more to what you can do strategy wise.

yes.

it's one my favorite, little 'big' things put in the game this year.

[nomo17k]

Quote: Originally Posted by Vashyron.

Most of baseball physics is high school level physics and the fact that SCEA has waited 9 games to actually put some proper physics into this game is pretty disappointing. Good physics should be the foundation of a baseball game. ...

This just shows you haven't studied physics at a level higher than high school.

[Pared]

Quote: Originally Posted by stealyerface

Strike Zone is lower than it was last year. At least the top of the zone is more representational to the actual strike zone. I saw a few pitches that would have been strikes for sure last year, and they were correctly called for balls this year. Very nice. ~syf

I thought the same... but it is unchanged. At least that is what we were told.

It's the camera angle, I believe. All about perception.

[stealyerface]

Hmm.. I'll take perception I suppose.


In the BPV it made it seem like the pitches that were up a bit were balls, but it may very well have been that the new camera allowed the balls that looked high to actually look high enough to be called balls.

It surprises me that they would tell you they did not change it, only because it seemed like last year, and again, maybe it was all about the camera placement, that a common complaint was that high strike.

I guess the same could be true with the batting camera, as the lower the camera lens was, the higher the strike zone would appear.

Either way, be it camera tricks or a revamped strike zone, looks great to me.

By the way, as a CD invitee, did they expand on the "Personalities" of the 14 different umpires, and did that explanation (if applicable) mean we would see different strike zones, both north/south as well as East/West, and would they finally be true personalities via name, or what mood they were in that particular day? Meaning, does Roy Nelson like the inside pitch, and when he is behind the dish, will it be a steady diet of inside black pitches when he is announced as the plate umpire, or will you need to figure out what Roy is calling that day?

I searched this in the CD threads, and did not see an acceptable answer to this, hence my asking about it now.

~syf

[Pared]

Yes - that's part of the reason there isn't as much a need to change the strikezone. The k zone is defined a certain way but in reality there is no true finite visible line like a foul line - just the interpretation of the rule. The umpire variance helps reflect that were some guys see it one way and others a different way.

So the K zone with umpire variance on is, as the case in real life, a baseline for measurement.

My only concern that I will express going forward is consistency. I felt the umps changed their views as the game progressed but not in a way that made sense to the user (or in this case, me).

[Vashyron.]

Quote: Originally Posted by nomo17k

This just shows you haven't studied physics at a level higher than high school.

I have taken 2 semesters of college physics and easily got As both semesters. The trajectory of the ball hitting off the bat is high school physics, I literally did baseball trajectory problems in high school. Now how the ball comes off the bat is complicated. I've seen weak slap hitters hitting opposite field HRs off pitches on the inner third in 11 so the bat-on-ball physics needed just not a little work but a lot of work.

Also, there's no reason for the baserunner speed and fielder speed sliders, the players should be running at realistic velocities (feet per second) since the ballparks in-game have the same dimensions of their real-world counterparts. There's really no excuse for the outfielders being so fast in all previous versions of the game. Plus, the friction of dirt and grass is known, I remember this series having issues with groundballs not reaching the wall when hit down the line back on PS2 because of the friction coefficient being wrong.

[Manny_Shevitz]

Quote: Originally Posted by nomo17k

This just shows you haven't studied physics at a level higher than high school.

I don't really see how this insult is adding anything constructive to the discussion. Vashyron makes a good point, and all he meant was that replicating the physics of baseball isn't as complex as replicating the physics of -- to cite other videogame examples -- space travel or warfare. It is disappointing, to some of us, that The Show didn't start of with a strong foundation of physics, which is arguably the most important aspect of the game of baseball. Just because you, and many other members of this forum, aren't as concerned about it as some of us, and think that things like batting stances and accurate stadium details and which pocket a player keeps his batting gloves in when he's not wearing them, are more crucial to creating a realistic game of baseball, doesn't mean that everyone feels that way. And I'm not knocking you for being of that opinion, I'm just saying that we all have different ideas about what constitutes an authentic baseball video game.

Don't get me wrong, I love The Show, and I believe the team at San Diego are passionate and sincere about making the best possible MLB baseball simulation that they can. But over the past couple of years, I've found myself playing The Show less, and Pro Yakyu Spirits (a Japanese baseball title, for those of you not aware of it) more, for the very reason that Vashyron brings up. Even though I know very little about the players and teams in Japanese baseball, and can't read or understand a word of Japanese, and even though the graphics aren't as polished or detailed as The Show, I still consistently have more fun and more unpredictable and exciting outcomes in PYS, because that game is built on a very strong foundation of realistic ball to bat physics. That's why the new feature that I'm most excited about in this year's version of The Show is the revamped physics, and I really do hope it will make the game more enjoyable. I'm not expecting it to be as refined as the physics in PYS, considering Konami have had a lot more time to perfect their version, and also the fact that PYS uses a cursor-based batting system, but I'm hopeful at least that Sony is heading in the right direction.

Still, it is valid to wonder why they didn't incoroporate a realistic physics engine from the get go.

[stealyerface]

Quote: Originally Posted by Pared

Yes - that's part of the reason there isn't as much a need to change the strikezone. The k zone is defined a certain way but in reality there is no true finite visible line like a foul line - just the interpretation of the rule. The umpire variance helps reflect that were some guys see it one way and others a different way. So the K zone with umpire variance on is, as the case in real life, a baseline for measurement. My only concern that I will express going forward is consistency. I felt the umps changed their views as the game progressed but not in a way that made sense to the user (or in this case, me).

Oh boy.

Well, I suppose I will express some concern if this is the case as well, as I would rather see it as not a definite, but at least a trend. One of the things that announcers, and pitchers for that matter, always talk about and appreciate is a guy who is consistent with his strike zone for the entire game. You want to give the outer three inches in the first inning, you had better settle in then, and give it to me in the 7th when I have set the hitters up three times through.

I love the idea of the different personalities and zones, and even expanding or squeezing the zone, as that what happens in real life. But if the zone changes all game long, with the same umpire behind the plate, that could become a bit frustrating.

Either way, I am interested to see how it is implemented, especially in a three or four game series.

~syf