News Post

Posts I'll Never Understand

11:15 AM - April 7, 2005 by Amidst The Blather

This is Part 1 in what will, I'm sure, be a long series. Collect 'em all! Trade 'am with your friends! Stick 'em in your bicycle spokes to get that cool motorcycle sound!

Consider this a rookie card, and treat it with the respect that entails...{br}{br}View the Entire Article{br}

Member Comments

# 61 pfunk880 @ 04/10/05 07:26 PM

I'm glad the sliders are there, and I think it's good to give everyone the option to tweak the game the way they want it. I usually use sliders to make the game more difficult for me.

However, I agree with fossen in that I don't like people who proclaim their set as the ultimate end-all fix to the game's problems, and I don't like the people who won't play a game until Slider King X releases his set. No one can ever make the "perfect set," because everyone plays the game differently. A set may be good for one person, but that doesn't mean it will be for everyone. That's why I don't understand why some people ditch the defaults before even playing the game, because that may end up being the "perfect set" for them. I always play at least 5-10 games on the default and also try different difficulty levels before I do anything with the sliders.

# 62 Jistic @ 04/10/05 09:27 PM

I'm thankful for sliders. I don't understand 50 cent, or the NBA quite honestly, but I do understand the value of sliders. I don't understand somebody being bothered by them however. 'Sliderphobia' is a new one to me.

To simply say to someone, "Get better at hitting, then you don't need sliders", is just wrong. Why? Because a majority of the time in video games it's the CPU that has the disadvantage against the human. That's why people make sliders and/or 'house rules'. It's to allow them to play the game for a longer period of time instead of winning 155-0 in Madden at the highest level.

Back in the day you could learn the 'money' plays and take advantage of the CPU all day. Or hell you could learn the patterns in Pac-Man and win all day too. Now the AI in games is MUCH more sophisitcated...but it's still artificial.

I used to come here all the time when I was a lurker and look up slider sets because I couldnt get believeable games. They were a big help to me. Then I just started posting what I was using. If it helped someone else fine, if not, hey everyones different. Not only is everyone's skill different, but more importantly everyones opinion of what is realistic is different too.

I don't strive for 'realistic' because we'll argue about that all day. I want believeable. Believe me, I've gotten PM's from people not happy with FG%'s of a team they play with that actually shoots the same in real life. But they still aren't happy. You can never tweak a magic formula or 'universal' set to solve everyones needs because of skill level, but more importantly their perception of realistic.

Last year I was about to tear my hair out with ESPN football. I posted sliders that I thought were good, but they just weren't. Then I found somebody's perfect zero sliders and like magic my games were great. I had so much fun. I told everyone that would listen to use these guys sliders. I'm thankful for him cuz he saved the game for me.

You can say all day, "Learn to play the game instead of relying on sliders." But then again, there were plenty of people last year that used that same lame argument to those who couldn't hit lefty HR's in MVP2004....ooops.

If a game plays great 'out of the box' I'm all for it. ESPN CHoops this year was near perfect for me. I play a TON of games on default before I even tweak a thing. But this years game has one problem for me. Free throws are too dam easy. And guess what? There's no difficulty slider for that this year. So my team will always shoot 90+% from the line, while the CPU will never shoot that well.....sure wish I had a slider for that.

As far as watching games, I don't. But I do understand why some do. The same reason why many websites 'predict' sporting outcomes using videogames these days. It's fun. Games are more than games now. WIth all of the modding and customization you can do they are more like mad scientist kits or erector sets. SO why not watch games if it's fun for you. Sometimes you wanna see what would happen if this team played this team in this situation. Even if it's not for real. And best of all? No commercials.

# 63 Pared @ 04/10/05 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossen


	Again - I think that games are a challenge, and you should meet them halfway. You getting scored on too much? You can adjust the slider, or pitch better. You not scoring enough? You can adjust the slider, or learn how to hit. You not getting enough walks? You can adjust the slider, or learn plate discipline.

See, this is the problem most have with your argument, including myself. I'm all for you hating sliders. That's your opinion. Can't disrespect that. But you take drastic examples to prove your point.

If you don't like sliders, I'm guess we can safely say you don't use them, correct? You don't try out many different ideas and suggestions thrown out here in the forums, correct? So you have no idea what a joy it is to be able to fix something in a game that was a problem BEFORE a slider adjustment. I'll use one example, and that's the passed ball issues in MLB 2k5. Can you imagine how annoying that would be to many gamers if they couldn't fix that? Sure, they have to deal with excessive amounts of errors by the computer now, but in essence, sliders have saved that game for some. Are multiple passed balls per game a realistic interpretation of the game of baseball? Can you honestly sit there and argue that? I would hope not.

But let's say you're not a slider fan. Or better yet, the game didn't have them. Again, using our example you would have to sit there, and deal with that game, a game you really enjoy, with this flaw. And it's such a huge glaring flaw, that you can't get over it. Aside from it, you can look past everything else. But NOT THIS. Without sliders, this year your fav. game is ruined. Does that sound like fun? Should we completely suspend belief when playing these games at all times and treat it like what it is: a game? Or can we hope for something more, an artistic representation of a game that you love and follow in reality that engrosses you so completely you almost forget you're playing a game?

It seems from some of your "get better" comments, you don't want to try and achieve that latter. If the computer is jacking out HR's in record number, we should just try and hit more than the CPU can. We should just take these items for what they are, and nothing else:

Games.

# 64 fossen @ 04/10/05 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squint


	But does it give me the ability to change those chapters and mold them to how I would like them? Does it allow me to change the actors expressions? To change their backdrops? To effect the lighting? Because that, in essence, would be the logical comparison.

Well ... that's probably where we have to agree to disagree. By your comparision, you feel that sliders somehow fundamentally alter the very structure of the game. To continue the movie analogy, that you could turn Bad News Bears into The Natural with the proper sliders provided.

I don't think the changes that sliders make are that fundamental. I think you're just rearranging scenes. You won't take a game that is initially balanced for offense (like Home Run King) and turn it into a game that focuses on pitcher's duels and defense. And - my main argument is ... why would you bother, even if you could?

And as I said in the blog .... I can see tweaking a game for your own enjoyment. That makes sense, though I don't personally do it. Asking someone else to mold the game to your playstyle is what I really don't get. Assuming that Slider Guy X knows both the inner workings of the game and your gaming needs better than the developers is just something I don't "get".

# 65 fossen @ 04/10/05 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pared


	I'll use one example, and that's the passed ball issues in MLB 2k5. Can you imagine how annoying that would be to many gamers if they couldn't fix that? Sure, they have to deal with excessive amounts of errors by the computer now, but in essence, sliders have saved that game for some. Are multiple passed balls per game a realistic interpretation of the game of baseball? Can you honestly sit there and argue that? I would hope not. But let's say you're not a slider fan. Or better yet, the game didn't have them. Again, using our example you would have to sit there, and deal with that game, a game you really enjoy, with this flaw. And it's such a huge glaring flaw, that you can't get over it. Aside from it, you can look past everything else. But NOT THIS.

To your specific point? About the passed balls? Yesh - I used that slider fix.

But seriously, Pared: how many times is that really what you are doing? Fixing one glaring error that is crippling the game?

Or are you tweaking this and that, trying to achieve some sort of statistical match against a preconcieved notion of what is "realistic"? Evening out every game as much as possible so that they are all "fixed" according to your interpretation of baseball?

Because .... that's what it is. Your interpretation. As you, for example, try to achieve a correct walks per game number, you are making a decision about what causes walks. You are deciding wether it is a pitcher's mistake, or a successful action by the batter.

You're good at what you do, and lots of people respect you greatly. I'm just more interested in playing the games themselves than someone else's interpretation of them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pared


	If the computer is jacking out HR's in record number, we should just try and hit more than the CPU can. We should just take these items for what they are, and nothing else: Games.

Well .... yeah. They are games, whether you like it or not. Especially in console gaming, they are meant to be played .... there are PC statistical sims available, but that's not ever the intent of console gaming. Gaming promotes participation and skill, and statistical fidelity won't allow that. If a game forces me to throw wild pitches now matter how good I am at the game in order to hit a certain stat? It may be a heck of a sim, but it's a terrible game.

If I'm playing a game where there's HR after HR, I'm interested in that interpretation of baseball ... if I don't, I find a game to my liking. I don't want to take MLB and MVP and make them the same, I enjoy the differences between them. I don't like the idea of homogenizing every game according to some statistical model.

# 66 Pared @ 04/10/05 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossen


	To your specific point? About the passed balls? Yesh - I used that slider fix. But seriously, Pared: how many times is that really what you are doing? Fixing one glaring error that is crippling the game? Or are you tweaking this and that, trying to achieve some sort of statistical match against a preconcieved notion of what is "realistic"? Evening out every game as much as possible so that they are all "fixed" according to your interpretation of baseball? Because .... that's what it is. Your interpretation. As you, for example, try to achieve a correct walks per game number, you are making a decision about what causes walks. You are deciding wether it is a pitcher's mistake, or a successful action by the batter. You're good at what you do, and lots of people respect you greatly. I'm just more interested in playing the games themselves than someone else's interpretation of them. Well .... yeah. They are games, whether you like it or not. Especially in console gaming, they are meant to be played .... there are PC statistical sims available, but that's not ever the intent of console gaming. Gaming promotes participation and skill, and statistical fidelity won't allow that. If a game forces me to throw wild pitches now matter how good I am at the game in order to hit a certain stat? It may be a heck of a sim, but it's a terrible game. If I'm playing a game where there's HR after HR, I'm interested in that interpretation of baseball ... if I don't, I find a game to my liking. I don't want to take MLB and MVP and make them the same, I enjoy the differences between them. I don't like the idea of homogenizing every game according to some statistical model.

Hey F,

I completely agree with everything you're saying. We're on the same page more than others would think. But I think a large problem with your article is the point you're making about sliders gets either lost or just isn't very clear. This what I know:

You don't like sliders.
You don't understand people who will NOT play a game without sliders.

That's pretty much the gist I get from that article. Obviously it's an personal article, and you're not denouncing others out there (at least I hope not) but instead proclaiming how you don't understand it. Fair enough. I don't understand Country music, and how Jeff Foxworthy is considered funny by Middle America.

I think a lot of the backlash (if it's even that, I still feel we're discussing appropriately) is from you leaving out that there are two sides of the coin. Sliders are there to save a developer's *** when they don't do something the general public accepts as real, especially in sports gaming. And I'm not talking everyone, cuz you can't please everyone. I'm talking about generally. The masses. And sliders CAN be positive, and I don't think your article maintains that line about the posts you're talking about, and solely that. You crossover a bit into the "hate for sliders" zone and that's where the meaning can get lost.

Hey, don't get me wrong... I do a lot of tweaking only when there are ways to improve a game. It's generally accepted, and I believe that comes from those looking for a statistical representation of sports we love to watch. They are a way, IMO, to immerse the gamer even MORE than the defaults that we are given, and that's the reason I mess with the sliders. It's not for making a game too easy or too hard, b/c that's very dependent on each gamer's individual skill level. But I see the points that you're saying, I just feel that the message gets lost along the way.

Not attacking the article (or you) at all, just sharing my thoughts on the matter. If anything, I should say I appreciate how this thread has made for some great discussion of many things (including helping others learn Tennis terminology!

) while maintaining a decent level of maturity.

# 67 SportsTop @ 04/10/05 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossen


	And as I said in the blog .... I can see tweaking a game for your own enjoyment. That makes sense, though I don't personally do it. Asking someone else to mold the game to your playstyle is what I really don't get. Assuming that Slider Guy X knows both the inner workings of the game and your gaming needs better than the developers is just something I don't "get".

I'll try to make this my last post on this subject:

My understanding of the people that make slider sets (let's take Jistic and Pared for argument's sake) is to basically get a good set of "zeroed" sliders for those of us that don't have the patience (or sometimes understanding) to develop them ourselves. Not to be the one and only slider set for all involved. To make a statement that out-of-the-box sliders are good sliders for everyone is just as ignorant as saying "so-and-so's" slider set is the one and only best for everyone.

The best comparison I can make (yes, better than your movie analogy) are sites of the M-16. Off the press sights set to "zero" on an M-16 are called mechanical zero. Although you will find people that are able to use mechanical zero as their "battle sites", they are very rare. To get your true BZO (battle site zero) you must fire a few shots down range to get a good group, adjust, and refire to ensure you've moved your shot group center mast. Why is this? Because everyone has a different base of fire, bone structure, height, weight, eyesight, and the list goes on and on. All of these things have an effect on how each person fires their weapon and where their rounds impact. People like Jistic and Pared are basically providing us with our "shot groups" because we are of the same general height, weight, bone structure, etc. We adjust from there and come up with our default sliders.

So, default sliders (mechanical zero) may work for some, but true sliders (BZO) for most are adjusted from the default.

I think we've beat this horse as much as we can and received enough opinions on this subject to come to the conclusion that there are people split down the middle on this topic. Might as well separate them into blue states and red states.

Let me close by saying this.....Don't take this as me tearing your blog to shreds fossen. I admire you guys that are writing these blogs. Hell, I could never do it. And if it makes you feel any better, yours is the only blog that I felt compelled enough to write a response to. If nothing else, it made for a good conversation piece....and that's what its all about isn't it?

# 68 pfunk880 @ 04/10/05 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squint


	If nothing else, it made for a good conversation piece....and that's what its all about isn't it?

Yeah, this blog entry has definitely inspired the most discussion, by far.

# 69 luv_mist @ 04/11/05 12:07 AM

Honestly, this site has just increased a few notches in my book because of this blog of conversation. Nothing like good thoughts to arouse the bunches. Once again, I'm late enough to see the "ending" of the chapter of slider simming. I admire the thoughts of all on here that dropped them. Sliders are both good and bad. Simple as that. Now, for the next week....

# 70 Medway @ 04/11/05 02:45 AM

[quote=Hammerhunker]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Medway


	To the above poster, those arent slider tweaks they're rule changes, there's a difference. Closest thing to a slider tweak would be someone taking steroids to "up their stats". QUOTE] I am the above poster, and I disagree with you. Yes they are rule-changes, but aren't they designed to affect results? Aren't sliders designed to do the same?

Yes the affect the results but in a different manner and therefore I don't see the point in making the comparison.

Many games do let you change the rules around, for instance hockey games let you decide if icing or the blue line is taken into consideration. And in that case its exactly the same thing as rule changes that happen in real life. Sliders affect a whole difference aspect of a game compared to rules.

# 71 Medway @ 04/11/05 02:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cardot


	Or when there are sliders that you have no clue what they do (doesn't MVP have one called "Variable Stuff" huh??).

Variable stuff isn't too ambiguous, the term "stuff" is regularly used to describe if a pitcher has "it" that day in real baseball games.

# 72 fossen @ 04/11/05 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squint


	And if it makes you feel any better, yours is the only blog that I felt compelled enough to write a response to. If nothing else, it made for a good conversation piece....and that's what its all about isn't it?

Yeah - it's just a topic for conversation. I believe there are actual theoretical issues that we can discuss as sports gamers. There are enough threads on sock color, who's cheesing who, and the 8th 'Who's your favorite band?' of the week in EE ...

I'm interested in gaming on a theoretical level, the way you'd discuss film or literature, and it's fun to have a debate on these "brass tacks" of sports gaming. Sliders fascinate me because they are so unique to the world of sports gaming, and bring up interesting issues of author's intent. We expect sliders in MVP, but not in Splinter Cell, and I can't help but wonder why.

I'll probably come back to a slider discussion at some other point down the road. Part of the problem on this blog was that I was trying to not simply write about sliders (mainly about that particular combination of watching/sliders), but got a little carried away.

# 73 gambler @ 04/11/05 11:29 AM

I'll take a shot at 'explaining' the reason I fully understand both slider tweaking and CPU/CPU watching since I do both.

In the context of CPU/CPU watching, slider tweaking is usually a must. Maybe the sliders have been tweaked, polished, etc by the developers and testers, but they're set for the way most people play the game which is to actually pick up a controller and play the game "the way it was meant to be played." Therefore, if you want to play the game in 'GM' mode (as I call it), the sliders usually have to be tweaked to give more realistic results. Some games are easier than others (ESPN College Hoops 2K5 is excellent out of the box, with the biggest slider change being switching to 15 minute halves for watched games... EA's football games tend to take a bit of work and never quite achieve the 'realism' goal). Anyhow, to me, understanding why sliders are necessary for CPU/CPU watchers should be the easy part. They're playing a different game than the one that came in the box. For people who actually 'play' the game, slider tweaking may make less sense as the article indicates, but I can't comment on that.

As far as GM mode... Why, you (and others) ask, don't I just play any of the fine GM text based games out there like Out of the Park Baseball, Tournament Dreams College Basketball, Front Office Football: The College Years, Total Pro Football, etc? Well... I do. But I also want the 'thrill' of seeing that young outfielder I picked #1 in the draft 3 years ago get a September callup and hit a homerun in his first game, or the defensive line I put together via the draft and free agency absolutely dominate games, or watch the 7 yard run in the closing minutes of a game that puts my halfback above 2000 yards. Yeah, some text based games have excellent play by plays that almost let you 'see the action' but it's still not the same. I'm cursed by loving GM mode games, and equally cursed by not wanting to just 'imagine' the action. I want to see the team I'm molding performing on the field (which by the way can make it easier to see why a team might not be performing as well as you'd expect, as compared to trying to figure it out from play by plays, etc).

One other factor comes into play too. Time. I don't have as much of it to spend these days, often needing to do something else much of an evening. A GM mode game allows me to start a game, watch it while I'm reading, on the computer, eating, etc. In a lot of ways, this is why I'll GM a 'video game' over a text based game. Some text based games (OOTP comes to mind) require you to push a button after every play. Even those that run by themselves don't allow the ability to just glance up once in awhile to take in a play, you have to walk over to the computer, sit down and read.

Anyhow, I'll stop the ramble now, but figured I'd take my shot at explanation.

# 74 ChicagoSparty @ 04/11/05 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossen


	That's nuts. There's a plenty good slider set inside that plastic - it's called "default". 'Course, my argument is .... "learn to hit".

I disagree completely. Your argument might work with regard to certain games, but many games can be improved significantly by tweaking here and there.

There's no real way to "strategize" to do any of the following: (i) make the CPU run more in a football game; (ii) make the CPU steal more in a baseball game; or (iii) make the CPU drop less passes in an NCAA football game. The list goes on; add your favorites. Sliders are crucial to achieve as accurate results as are possible, because I can play my game, but if the CPU doesn't do its part, then where's the fun?

I don't think it's a stretch to say that slider tweaks can improve almost every sports game. WE8 and its predecessors are widely recognized as fantastically realistic games. But for every WEx, there's a game where the CPU continually goes 8-30 passing the ball, or a game where left-handed hitters can't hit home runs, or a game where the CPU-controlled pitcher simply will not throw ball 4, or a game where there are 3-4 wild pitches every other inning. Not all great examples, and at least one not fixable with sliders, but the point is the same: developers make mistakes.

So it seems to me like developers can use the help. They do a great job in creating fun, mostly realistic games within relatively short periods of time. But there often are glaring errors, many of which can be fixed with sliders. I'm happy we have them.

# 75 ChicagoSparty @ 04/11/05 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossen


	Yeah - it's just a topic for conversation.

And a good one at that. 8 pages and rolling tells me you're on to something.

# 76 inkcil @ 04/11/05 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossen


	I'm interested in gaming on a theoretical level, the way you'd discuss film or literature, and it's fun to have a debate on these "brass tacks" of sports gaming. Sliders fascinate me because they are so unique to the world of sports gaming, and bring up interesting issues of author's intent. We expect sliders in MVP, but not in Splinter Cell, and I can't help but wonder why.

Good question. And for the record, I'm glad you posted this topic...I sorta interpreted you posting it as you wanting to hear explanations and reasons from the Slider/CPU Watcher community for why we do what we do. So your article didn't offend me at all.

I think that one reason why we want sliders in MVP (to take just one sports game as an example) is because of the exposure we get to the MLB on a daily basis, either through Radio, Print, TV, or just buddies talking about the games. We don't get that kind of exposure to government black ops, espionage and covert operations.

If you are hearing all year about how K-rod is striking out all these batters in real life, but while playing MVP or looking at stats notice that his ERA is consistently over 5.00 after X number of simmed seasons, you will question the integrity of the game (unless you're playing something like MLB Slugfest).

If you are hearing about Barry Bonds hitting all these homeruns on TV and when you play the game (or watch the CPU play) Bonds hits the same # of HRs as David Eckstein at the end of a simulated season, then you'll question the integrity of the game. Especially if you come to a forum and ev'one is saying the same thing about the virtual Bond's performance. There will be a thread like "Why can't Bonds Hit in this Game?" And I think the thread would be like 5-10 pages long in no time. The thread will be full of comments like:

"It's poor development"
"You need to learn to hit"
"I'm taking this game back"
"Use these slider adjustments to increase CPU hitting"
"Who says Bonds can't have only 12 hr's through 120 games in real life?"
"It's not a big deal. You guys are over-exaggerating. This game is great."
"I use the Giants and I hit plenty of HR with Barry Bonds."
"Will there be a patch?"
"They ruined this game."
"If you don't like it, just play the other baseball game."

And there will be other additional Threads on the same subject like:

"I know why Bonds can't Hit"
"Bonds hitting is..."
"CAP for Barry Bonds here"
"Anyone else notice this?"
"Quick Question"
"For all those who use the Giants"
"Barry Bonds glitch related to Steroid Allegations?"
"Does Anyone Know how to..."

So I think it's b/c we receive so much exposure to the real thing, that we desire for our sports games to mimic the real thing. And we have something to base it on - stats and images and recaps that we are bombarded with ev'day. I can't speak for ev'one, but it just adds to the fun factor when I have to pitch to Bonds with the bases loaded...b/c I get the same butterflies and want to strike him out just about as much as I want him to strike out if I am watching him on TV bat with the bases loaded agiant my fav. team. But if the virtual Bonds is batting .232 with 12 HRs through 120-plus games played in September, it just takes away from the experience.

And don't you just love it when the CPU walks Bonds with 2 outs and first base open in order to protect its lead in the 9th inning? And why do we like seeing that scenario unfold in a videogame? B/c we see it so much in real life.

Heck, if the game the developers gave us won't do it "right out the box," then maybe, just maybe, the sliders will.

Sliders keep hope alive.

# 77 Medway @ 04/13/05 03:51 AM

[quote=tigerx82
My 2 cents: this is something i dont feel too strongly about. I like sliders because i have seen them address specific gameplay problems I am having, but i HATE them because they make me feel like i am never at the optimum gaming settings and there is always a final tweak I need to go to enjoy the game to a level to which someone else is enjoying it.

Sliders have made us much less tolerant to things we might once have overlooked thus making it harder for me to enjoy games. But I guess i still need them in case i find something in a game that i just have to tweak.[/QUOTE]

Excellent point, I agree 100%. In the end though I'm glad I have sliders. And although a lot of people here obsess about them I think for the most part its really an ends to a means. If we didnt truly believe the games were being enhanced by sliders there wouldn't be such a fuss over them. In some cases sliders might be used as a crutch (as opposed to learning to play better). But in the end I I think it comes down to the fact that many of these games are not shipping with gameplay that matches real life as much as we'd like and sliders have time and again helped that.

« Previous 1 2 34Next »

More Links

Posts I'll Never Understand