Forbes Field

[bfindeisen]

Don't ask me how or why, but yesterday I ended up in a Wikipedia hole and was reading all about Forbes Field; anyways, I read all about it and looked at pictures, etc, and then today I watching a stream of MLB The Show and the person was playing at Forbes Field.

The thing that jumped out at me was how the outfield (walls mainly) doesn't seem to be much like how it was in real life:

http://explorepahistory.com/kora/files/1/2/1-2-55B-25-ExplorePAHistory-a0b9d1-a_349.JPG

The real Forbes Field had a giant scoreboard as part of the wall in left, had a giant mesh fence on top of the wall in right, and the light posts and flagpole were notably in the field of play (not behind the walls like in the game).

I'm not complaining or anything, but I did find it a little bit disappointing after having done all that research and then learning that a lot of the most noteworthy features about the ballpark didn't make it into the game.

Mainly, I am just curious as to how this came to be? Were there technical limitations? Is this just an oversight? Does anyone really care about this?

[bacon96]

Re: Forbes Field

The Forbes Field you described was Forbes Field in it's final form while the version in the game is the original.

[bfindeisen]

Re: Forbes Field

The Forbes Field you described was Forbes Field in it's final form while the version in the game is the original.

Ehh...I guess you can say that; but the light stanchions and flagpole were never ever behind the outfield walls...so that's just not true.

Anyways, not really a big deal. I doubt many people will even notice. I just happened to do a bunch of reading on it, so was expecting one thing, and got something close, although not accurate really.

[Moss44]

Re: Forbes Field

I agree with the OP that I am disappointed that Forbes Field's final form is not in game. It would be great to see the scoreboard, Cathedral of Learning, etc. but in the end it's SCEAs game and I doubt exquisite detail in classic stadiums is their number one priority.

[Ghost Of The Year]

Re: Forbes Field

Of the classic stadiiums in the Show, Forbes is my least favorite. I hate looking at the outfield & seeing, well, nothing. It's the same reason I hate Highland Park in the Show's minors. To spartan for my taste.

[Pourvision21]

Re: Forbes Field

Forbes is my least fav too and I would like to see it as it played during the '60 Series. That's how I remember it anyway.

[HustlinOwl]

Re: Forbes Field

lol, I love it and use for every DD game at home

[bfindeisen]

Re: Forbes Field

lol, I love it and use for every DD game at home

Hey, don't get me wrong! I love that it's even in the game. Really. I'm just neurotic about details, lol. I was hoping for a little more accurate rendition, but oh well.

[Knight165]

Re: Forbes Field

While I would have loved the 60's version of Forbes.....it is the 1918 version.
About the light stanchions ......I would say the reason they put them out of the field of play....is purely that they have no way to give them collision detection(without doing a ton of extra work....which obviously they don't have the time to invest in it)....so they tucked them behind the walls.
So it wouldn't matter WHAT year they gave us in that respect.

M.K.
Knight165

[bfindeisen]

Re: Forbes Field

While I would have loved the 60's version of Forbes.....it is the 1918 version.
About the light stanchions ......I would say the reason they put them out of the field of play....is purely that they have no way to give them collision detection(without doing a ton of extra work....which obviously they don't have the time to invest in it)....so they tucked them behind the walls.
So it wouldn't matter WHAT year they gave us in that respect.

M.K.
Knight165

Yeah that's kind of what I figured. Classic stadium accuracy is way down list of priorites, I'm sure. Not a big deal.

[tessl]

Re: Forbes Field

Ehh...I guess you can say that; but the light stanchions and flagpole were never ever behind the outfield walls...so that's just not true.

Anyways, not really a big deal. I doubt many people will even notice. I just happened to do a bunch of reading on it, so was expecting one thing, and got something close, although not accurate really.

They used the early version of the game and in that era no stadiums had lights. In order to replicate the modern schedule they had to put lights somewhere.

For me, the classic stadium which isn't either very pitcher friendly or very hitter friendly is Crosley which is the stadium I'm using although I don't use the Reds in my franchise.

[Knight165]

Re: Forbes Field

They used the early version of the game and in that era no stadiums had lights. In order to replicate the modern schedule they had to put lights somewhere.

For me, the classic stadium which isn't either very pitcher friendly or very hitter friendly is Crosley which is the stadium I'm using although I don't use the Reds in my franchise.

Yes.....good point as well.
Which is another reason they probably should have done a '60's instead!!!

M.K.
Knight165

[bwright25]

Re: Forbes Field

Its actually almost identical to what Forbes field looked like when it first opened.

I too complained at first till I did more research.

[41_Tom_Seaver_Fan]

Re: Forbes Field

There is an incredible site that details ballparks and their renovations. The Forbes Field in the game actually combines elements from several different periods throughout it's history. If it had to be chosen, it mostly resembles the original, but there are clearly characteristics from several other times of renovations.

After seeing that photo, I agree that the ballpark pictured would've been nicer. It is the one park I don't particularly like too much, and I think the mish-mosh of era's clearly has to do with it.

(From what I can tell, all of the classics take from different periods, but most are not as varied as Forbes)

[Darkleaf]

Re: Forbes Field

What is that white strip the 3rd base coach is standing on? Outline of the tarp?