I really, really want to like this game.

[thescottyglasgow]

Quote: Originally Posted by jackbquick

You are wrong in this regard. I encourage you to start checking the swing feedback each and every time you put the ball in play. More often than not it does reflect real physics. But there are many occurrences where it does not. The specific issue that has me fired up about this is the good timing squared up PCI resulting in lazy fly balls. I'm not talking the sort that is in between a fly ball and line drive and it could be classified either way. I'm talking sky high fly balls caught in the shallow outfield where the outfielder has plenty of time to camp under it. The PCI is perfectly centered on the ball with the labels for timing and pitch overlapping. It has happened numerous times and is the smoking gun that it isn't just physics controlling the outcome.

agreed with everyone i have the PCI where the pitch is before it gets there and perfect timing and most of the time I will not get a line drive. I do not understand any of it at all I will swing under late on high and outside and somehow pull a grounder down third base line but sometimes if I swing high and outside and the pitch goes down the middle I hit a opposite field home run when I feel I should have had the grounder to third.

[jackbquick]

Quote: Originally Posted by KBLover

So that means most every home run was hit on a non-squared up ball since there's few line drive HR? How do hitters hit HR on non-squared contact? Stanton hit a 480-ft HR without squaring up the ball? The swing has to be squared up to impart as much of the energy to swing as possible, no? Wouldn't it have to depend on the angle of the swing/swing plane relative to the incoming plane of the pitch as well (and the timing to determine where on the plane the contact was made)?

I'm using the term "squared up" specifically in reference to having good timing and the PCI centered on the ball. This should always result in a line drive, potentially a line drive home run.

Stanton has hit some line drive home runs, but in general home runs occur with the contact point just below the center of the ball. There is a paper on the internet somewhere from a professor who calculated how to produce maximum distance. I don't recall specifics other than contact below center of the ball with something like a 13 degree uppper cut. In the game I think this should translate to the bottom third of the ball being in the center of the PCI.

I suppose you are correct that pitch angle would play a factor, but I'm not sure how that translates to the game.

[Padgoi]

I agree with everyone saying the physics in this game are off. Ratings tie into hit results way too much. If a ball is squared up regardless of player, it should be hit hard. This is why I'm a huge fan of cursor based hitting. Cursor hitting is almost entirely physics based and the show will never adopt it because if they do, we will realize how off the stats are in relation to real baseball. The way they have hitting now, the game controls results and thus they're able to make the statistics realistic.

[kehlis]

Quote: Originally Posted by P.A.D.

I agree with everyone saying the physics in this game are off. Ratings tie into hit results way too much. If a ball is squared up regardless of player, it should be hit hard. This is why I'm a huge fan of cursor based hitting. Cursor hitting is almost entirely physics based and the show will never adopt it because if they do, we will realize how off the stats are in relation to real baseball. The way they have hitting now, the game controls results and thus they're able to make the statistics realistic.

I've never "squared up" on a ball and not hit it hard?

[Padgoi]

Quote: Originally Posted by kehlis

I've never "squared up" on a ball and not hit it hard?

The laws of physics state that if you square up on a pitched ball perfectly, you're gonna hit it hard. You may not get a hit, but you will hit it hard.

[countryboy]

Quote: Originally Posted by P.A.D.

I agree with everyone saying the physics in this game are off. Ratings tie into hit results way too much. If a ball is squared up regardless of player, it should be hit hard. This is why I'm a huge fan of cursor based hitting. Cursor hitting is almost entirely physics based and the show will never adopt it because if they do, we will realize how off the stats are in relation to real baseball. The way they have hitting now, the game controls results and thus they're able to make the statistics realistic.

Cursor hitting is in the game. Its labeled zone hitting but it has the same make up as cursor hitting. In fact you can turn on PCI coverage and then choose how you want the cursor to look via a few different options.

[countryboy]

Quote: Originally Posted by P.A.D.

The laws of physics state that if you square up on a pitched ball perfectly, you're gonna hit it hard. You may not get a hit, but you will hit it hard.

That is what he's saying. Every time he has squared up the ball he has hit it hard.

My experience has been exactly the same. Every single time I have squared up the baseball, I have hit it hard in this game.

[Padgoi]

Quote: Originally Posted by countryboy

Cursor hitting is in the game. Its labeled zone hitting but it has the same make up as cursor hitting. In fact you can turn on PCI coverage and then choose how you want the cursor to look via a few different options.

No sir, zone hitting is zone hitting. Cursor hitting is not zone hitting.