Major League Baseball 2K10 First Look (Gamespot)

[Trevytrev11]

Re: Major League Baseball 2K10 First Look (Gamespot)

What about A-rod, Manny, Pujols, etc?? I don't buy your theory sorry..

They're just better at it.

They have better reflexes, faster hands, better coordination, better pitch recognition skills, better pitch anticipation, better eyes which mean they are better at putting themselves in favorable hittters counts, which mean better pitches to hit, etc. All hitters aren't created equal and just because two guys swing just as hard, doesn't mean the results will be the same.

Jack Cust swings as hard as he can every time up...so does Vladamir Guerrero. It doesn't mean the results are going to be the same. Vlad is better at it. It's why he is going to strike out less, get more hits and hit more HR's.

It's not cause Jack Cust uses a power swing more often, he's just not as talented as Vlad. All hitters are not created equal.

It's like two pitchers with different arm strength. Both can throw their regular fastball and pitcher A can throw 85 and pitcher B can throw 95. Pitcher B isn't doing anything different than pitcher A, he just is built to throw harder. Guys that hit home runs don't try harder, it's just not everyone is built to be a HR hitter, but the majority of the time, all hitters are trying to hit the ball as hard as you can't.

Why wouldn't you?

In a normal at bat early in a game why wouldn't you go into every single at bat and not try to hit the ball as hard as you possibly can? Why would any player come to the plate with bases empty or bases loaded looking to get a hit and not try and hit the ball as hard as he can? Why would they swing softer and hit the ball softer? What advantage is there to hitting a ball softer than harder?

Now if you're telling me he's trying to hit for a certain situation with a certain goal in mind, I agree 100%, but in every situation that this is not the case the hitter is trying to hit the ball as hard as he can.

And if you're telling me with 2 strikes his approach changes to be more defensive, I agree as well with certain hitters, but definitely not all.

[Blzer]

Re: Major League Baseball 2K10 First Look (Gamespot)

Here's my only issue with the statistical breakdowns affecting performance (for those who were talking about it): if it's not dynamic and progressive, it's weak. Say you have that Longoria/Pettitte set up mentioned earlier. If he strikes out, he should now be 2-for-17, and those calculations should be made on the fly in-game. Likewise, if he goes 10-for-10 against him, he should be 12-for-26, and those calculations, again, should be made. If they are static during an entire career and nothing actually changes from how they are now, then how do rookies get that advantage/disadvantage when owning certain pitchers, etc.?

That would be unfortunate if it doesn't change as the seasons go on, but if this is the case, hopefully this will be one of the first things on the agenda for 2K11.

[bulls23]

Re: Major League Baseball 2K10 First Look (Gamespot)

I don't know man, hitters pick up pitches by reading the rotation of the seams or spin of the ball...you don't get that in a baseball video game. Everything is a fastball at first until it changes direction and you react.

Now I'm not saying I can't ever distinguish one pitch from another, but it's later than a hitter actually would and if you're playing at faster pitch speeds becomes more of a guess than a recognition. They're just trying to add a real life element to it.

Now adding texts, IMO, is not the direction I'd prefer. I liked the color coding of the MVP series and suprised they didn't stick with that.

I didn't like the text flashing idea at first, but then I remember how confused I got trying to remember what color meant what pitch in MVP.

Glad 40 man rosters/Sept Call ups made it in to the game.

Excited about MLB Today commentary. Love that feature in NBA2k10.

[Smitty730]

Re: Major League Baseball 2K10 First Look (Gamespot)

Here's my only issue with the statistical breakdowns affecting performance (for those who were talking about it): if it's not dynamic and progressive, it's weak. Say you have that Longoria/Pettitte set up mentioned earlier. If he strikes out, he should now be 2-for-17, and those calculations should be made on the fly in-game. Likewise, if he goes 10-for-10 against him, he should be 12-for-26, and those calculations, again, should be made. If they are static during an entire career and nothing actually changes from how they are now, then how do rookies get that advantage/disadvantage when owning certain pitchers, etc.?

That would be unfortunate if it doesn't change as the seasons go on, but if this is the case, hopefully this will be one of the first things on the agenda for 2K11.

You said it perfectly!

If head-to-head statistics and Inside Edge content are not updated throughout the course of a franchise, all of these new additions are, essentially, pointless.

It's a question we need to continue shoving down the developers' throat until we get an answer. It's awesome that they included this stuff, but like Blzer said, it has to be progressive in order for it to work.

[Jamin23]

Re: Major League Baseball 2K10 First Look (Gamespot)

You said it perfectly!

If head-to-head statistics and Inside Edge content are not updated throughout the course of a franchise, all of these new additions are, essentially, pointless.

It's a question we need to continue shoving down the developers' throat until we get an answer. It's awesome that they included this stuff, but like Blzer said, it has to be progressive in order for it to work.

We might get an answer in the next developer blog since it is about franchise.

[Craigsca]

Re: Major League Baseball 2K10 First Look (Gamespot)

Here's my only issue with the statistical breakdowns affecting performance (for those who were talking about it): if it's not dynamic and progressive, it's weak. Say you have that Longoria/Pettitte set up mentioned earlier. If he strikes out, he should now be 2-for-17, and those calculations should be made on the fly in-game. Likewise, if he goes 10-for-10 against him, he should be 12-for-26, and those calculations, again, should be made. If they are static during an entire career and nothing actually changes from how they are now, then how do rookies get that advantage/disadvantage when owning certain pitchers, etc.?

That would be unfortunate if it doesn't change as the seasons go on, but if this is the case, hopefully this will be one of the first things on the agenda for 2K11.

But why even waste your time with it? Longoria going 10 for 10 against Pettitte is a perfect example. Oh wait, now he bats approximately .480 against him - we have him at .125. Do we now artificially uptick his performance? It shows how insane basing ANYTHING on small sample sizes really is.

I'd rather you just rate the guys on last year's performance (really, if I had my way we'd probably do a mix of the past 3 years, but I understand at age 40 I'm probably not the key demographic they're shooting for) and let the game itself make the streaks, the slumps, etc. It'd be nice to call my attention to it ("Longoria steps up to the plate....he's 2 for 16 lifetime against Pettitte..."), but PLEASE don't cause me to a hit a dribbler to the 2nd basemen because of this goofy, tacked-on 2 for 16 garbage even though I physically nailed his last pitch. That's just lame.

[JayhawkerStL]

Re: Major League Baseball 2K10 First Look (Gamespot)

But why even waste your time with it? Longoria going 10 for 10 against Pettitte is a perfect example. Oh wait, now he bats approximately .480 against him - we have him at .125. Do we now artificially uptick his performance? It shows how insane basing ANYTHING on small sample sizes really is.

I'd rather you just rate the guys on last year's performance (really, if I had my way we'd probably do a mix of the past 3 years, but I understand at age 40 I'm probably not the key demographic they're shooting for) and let the game itself make the streaks, the slumps, etc. It'd be nice to call my attention to it ("Longoria steps up to the plate....he's 2 for 16 lifetime against Pettitte..."), but PLEASE don't cause me to a hit a dribbler to the 2nd basemen because of this goofy, tacked-on 2 for 16 garbage even though I physically nailed his last pitch. That's just lame.

I'm with you 100%. They ought to hire out Tom Tippet from diamond Mind Baseball to do the ratings. His projection rosters, which are the equivalent of what you get in console games, were so well done. But of course they took into account how a player would be projected to perform based on his history.

But you are right that the kids might get upset when their favorite players do not get the proper amount of love.

[Blzer]

Re: Major League Baseball 2K10 First Look (Gamespot)

But why even waste your time with it? Longoria going 10 for 10 against Pettitte is a perfect example. Oh wait, now he bats approximately .480 against him - we have him at .125. Do we now artificially uptick his performance? It shows how insane basing ANYTHING on small sample sizes really is.

I'd rather you just rate the guys on last year's performance (really, if I had my way we'd probably do a mix of the past 3 years, but I understand at age 40 I'm probably not the key demographic they're shooting for) and let the game itself make the streaks, the slumps, etc. It'd be nice to call my attention to it ("Longoria steps up to the plate....he's 2 for 16 lifetime against Pettitte..."), but PLEASE don't cause me to a hit a dribbler to the 2nd basemen because of this goofy, tacked-on 2 for 16 garbage even though I physically nailed his last pitch. That's just lame.

Now I never said anything like that. Honestly, it should be a very small weight in general. But also to be honest, that's exactly what ownage is, and as I said earlier in this thread, you see it live in front of you. It doesn't even have to be that somebody is seeing a pitcher better... when you own someone, it'll show in the at-bats. That's just how baseball is.

But like I said, I'd much rather it be a weight thing. For instance, I don't want progression to be based on just last year's stats, or the last three year's stats, or the last two games, etc. I want it to be a big combination of a bunch of things that calculate how you'll be not just that at-bat, but that pitch. There's a runner on second, it's night time, you're on the road and on turf, it's 52 degrees outside, you're facing a rookie lefty, you're 35 years old, you're 1-for-2 on the night already, and you have a 1 - 0 count. I don't want to say "have the game determine what I will do based on this", I'm saying "tell me what this guy's performance level is based on this."

Your game will always have some sort of mathematics involved, though. There are always numbers working behind the big machine and sometimes you just can't stop it. But now tell me this: what if you have a guy who has a 95 speed rating, a 98 agility rating, a 90 steal aggressiveness rating, and a 96 steal success rating (let's say those are all hypothetically in the game)... now let's say that this player, for some odd reason or another, is 200-for-200 in stealing bases in the month of May, but 0-for-200 in stealing bases in the month of June. Okay, now say it's June 7th. Which should play the bigger role in him being able to steal a base? His ability, or his success rate? Maybe it's that the pitcher and catcher are just getting quicker timings in altogether and there's nothing that you can really do to stop that wheel, despite how fast he is.

I'm not talking about sample-size so much as I'm asking when the line is then drawn that these are allowed to take some sort of effect. I don't want it to be an end-all, be-all effect, but I do want them to by dynamically progressive so that Longoria isn't always just stuck with that 2-for-16 against Pettitte.

[Craigsca]

Re: Major League Baseball 2K10 First Look (Gamespot)

Now I never said anything like that. Honestly, it should be a very small weight in general. But also to be honest, that's exactly what ownage is, and as I said earlier in this thread, you see it live in front of you. It doesn't even have to be that somebody is seeing a pitcher better... when you own someone, it'll show in the at-bats. That's just how baseball is.

But like I said, I'd much rather it be a weight thing. For instance, I don't want progression to be based on just last year's stats, or the last three year's stats, or the last two games, etc. I want it to be a big combination of a bunch of things that calculate how you'll be not just that at-bat, but that pitch. There's a runner on second, it's night time, you're on the road and on turf, it's 52 degrees outside, you're facing a rookie lefty, you're 35 years old, you're 1-for-2 on the night already, and you have a 1 - 0 count. I don't want to say "have the game determine what I will do based on this", I'm saying "tell me what this guy's performance level is based on this."

Your game will always have some sort of mathematics involved, though. There are always numbers working behind the big machine and sometimes you just can't stop it. But now tell me this: what if you have a guy who has a 95 speed rating, a 98 agility rating, a 90 steal aggressiveness rating, and a 96 steal success rating (let's say those are all hypothetically in the game)... now let's say that this player, for some odd reason or another, is 200-for-200 in stealing bases in the month of May, but 0-for-200 in stealing bases in the month of June. Okay, now say it's June 7th. Which should play the bigger role in him being able to steal a base? His ability, or his success rate? Maybe it's that the pitcher and catcher are just getting quicker timings in altogether and there's nothing that you can really do to stop that wheel, despite how fast he is.

I'm not talking about sample-size so much as I'm asking when the line is then drawn that these are allowed to take some sort of effect. I don't want it to be an end-all, be-all effect, but I do want them to by dynamically progressive so that Longoria isn't always just stuck with that 2-for-16 against Pettitte.

I don't mind anything like this in the game - but just prove to me it's REAL. Don't just base and/or influence what happens on statistical information that could easily be replicated by tossing a coin.

If a guy, season after season, can replicate that he hits better in April than in May, and the sample sizes are large enough to prove that it's not just some byproduct of white noise, then by all means include it. The problem is - baseball has so many statistics that people try to give meaning to them when there isn't any. The #1 predictor of future performance is past performance. However, when you break it down into smaller and smaller buckets (night vs. day, RISP, Mondays vs. Tuesday) the data becomes less meaningful. I don't want my game using meaningless statistical info to "help" formulate an outcome.

[Blzer]

Re: Major League Baseball 2K10 First Look (Gamespot)

I don't mind anything like this in the game - but just prove to me it's REAL. Don't just base and/or influence what happens on statistical information that could easily be replicated by tossing a coin.

If a guy, season after season, can replicate that he hits better in April than in May, and the sample sizes are large enough to prove that it's not just some byproduct of white noise, then by all means include it. The problem is - baseball has so many statistics that people try to give meaning to them when there isn't any. The #1 predictor of future performance is past performance. However, when you break it down into smaller and smaller buckets (night vs. day, RISP, Mondays vs. Tuesday) the data becomes less meaningful. I don't want my game using meaningless statistical info to "help" formulate an outcome.

I completely understand and I completely agree. And unlike Joe Morgan, I don't want my team to ever "use up all of my runs" (as the idiot claims having a streaky game of over a dozen runs can lead to nothingness the next game).

Okay, now here's where I'm going to say something that sounds like an oxymoron: every at-bat should be treated independently, but what you do should also have some basis on what you just did prior. What I mean is, just because you hit a home run your last at-bat does not increase or decrease your ability to hit a home run, but it may increase or decrease your potential to hit a home run based on what you're seeing. It could just be that you're seeing the ball well that night, that the pitcher is tipping something to you, that you have a good swing going, etc. It could just be that you're confident at the plate, I don't know. So maybe you're swinging with more assurance than you were before, and as a result if good contact is made the ball may carry more. It's a tough thing to replicate in a video game, but they only try and do the best they can.

Oh and to Trevytrev11, you asked why someone would ever want to hit a ball softer than harder? Well, that's like asking a golfer why they don't just always pull out their driver. Because sometimes, it's not about how hard you hit it, but it's because it's where the ball lands. Now I'm not saying they do some on-the-fly calculations to determine how hard they should swing, but baseball is that weird sport where soft hits can be more successful than hard hits, depending on the situation.

[JBH3]

Re: Major League Baseball 2K10 First Look (Gamespot)

Sounds like they're expanding franchise mode...

40 man rosters
Sept. Call-ups
Comp picks
and rehab starts?

With the rehab starts I hope it means we will see more frequent injuries. None of the gameplay items sound like overly new items, just enhancements or features from previous iterations brought back. It will be nice to have the gesture rater thingy back...

[rock85]

Re: Major League Baseball 2K10 First Look (Gamespot)

They're just better at it.

They have better reflexes, faster hands, better coordination, better pitch recognition skills, better pitch anticipation, better eyes which mean they are better at putting themselves in favorable hittters counts, which mean better pitches to hit, etc. All hitters aren't created equal and just because two guys swing just as hard, doesn't mean the results will be the same.

Jack Cust swings as hard as he can every time up...so does Vladamir Guerrero. It doesn't mean the results are going to be the same. Vlad is better at it. It's why he is going to strike out less, get more hits and hit more HR's.

It's not cause Jack Cust uses a power swing more often, he's just not as talented as Vlad. All hitters are not created equal.

It's like two pitchers with different arm strength. Both can throw their regular fastball and pitcher A can throw 85 and pitcher B can throw 95. Pitcher B isn't doing anything different than pitcher A, he just is built to throw harder. Guys that hit home runs don't try harder, it's just not everyone is built to be a HR hitter, but the majority of the time, all hitters are trying to hit the ball as hard as you can't.

Why wouldn't you?

In a normal at bat early in a game why wouldn't you go into every single at bat and not try to hit the ball as hard as you possibly can? Why would any player come to the plate with bases empty or bases loaded looking to get a hit and not try and hit the ball as hard as he can? Why would they swing softer and hit the ball softer? What advantage is there to hitting a ball softer than harder?

Now if you're telling me he's trying to hit for a certain situation with a certain goal in mind, I agree 100%, but in every situation that this is not the case the hitter is trying to hit the ball as hard as he can.

And if you're telling me with 2 strikes his approach changes to be more defensive, I agree as well with certain hitters, but definitely not all.

Very well said Trev

[CujoMatty]

Actually, it's not the swing. It's the ability to predict what you are going to get with far more accuracy. They don't swing differently with a 3-1 count. They turn their focus to the one pitch they think they will see, and can safely take any pitch, even a strike, that is not what they were expecting.

It's so much easier to drive the ball when you can focus on one pitch, in one spot. Once you get 2 strikes, most guys do not alter their swings, but don't have the luxury of focusing on just one pitch.

This is actually why I liked the 2K8 technique of a variable sized zone that a batter could predict a pitch would thrown into. Better hitters had larger zones that would reult in a bonus. Weaker hitters had a very small zone. The zone was also variable depending on the count, as it would be smaller with two strikes.

That seemed like a better way to reward the better hitters, and did a pretty good job illustrating how guys hit.

I agree with this a million percent. The size of the zone changed depending on the count, how good a hitter and if the player was hot or cold. I thought that worked pretty good. I'm a little worried about the whole hitting mechanic in general but I'll wait and see. After the second patch and bigfnjoe's sliders I actually enjoyed 2k9 so I have fairly high hopes for this one. I felt the pitching mechanic worked well the last couple years and am not sure if the extra step is necessary but again I'll hold my judgement. I always get the show as well and from what I've been reading for both games I have a feeling it's gonna be a good year in baseball video gaming for me!!

[CujoMatty]

Another thought sorta off topic. I wish 2k would hold a focus group like SCEA does with the show and invited guys like bigfnjoe to find out their input on things to make better. Bigfnjoe seriously made 2k9 playable for me. It would be nice to see u as well as some others get to have some feedback after all their hard work. While most people were jumping ship to the show there was still a few people trying to help 2k players out. I was fortunate to enjoy both games largely because of OS members like bigfnjoe so for that thank you!!!!

[dorismary]

Re: Major League Baseball 2K10 First Look (Gamespot)

If the pitcher vs Batter duel is truly based on Real stats , day night L-R ect this game could truly be a nice sim as VC was always very trust worthy group and now they had a full cycle.