MLB '10 and What it Needs to be the Greatest - Misfit's Blog

Misfit's Blog

MLB '10 and What it Needs to be the Greatest

Posted on February 27, 2010 at 06:26 PM.

(1)

I've spent countless hours with the MLB "The Show" franchise to the point that I would hate to see just how many hours of my life has been spent playing these games. Many, many posters have gushed over the more recent entries in the series so I feel no need to pile on. I will say there's no longer an argument for any game prior. Sure the last MVP game to feature the MLB license was an excellent game, but The Show surpassed it a couple of years ago and those refusing to admit so are just hung up on nostalgia.

With that said, it isn't and has never been perfect. The '08 game was close and just needed some fine tuning. The '09 game included that fine tuning but some of the same omissions remained and I felt the hitting, and overall flow of the game was worse. For the first time, the game felt like it had some Mario Kart "catch-up" A.I. and the cpu would sometimes become super human in late games. I also never felt a synergy with the hitting. I would swear I made solid contact, and replay and hitting analysis would even confirm it, but the results would be erratic. I'm not arguing every well-struck ball should go for a hit, but contact that receives a "perfect" rating with good timing shouldn't result in pop-ups. It just wasn't consistent.

That's really my only gripe with the gameplay as the pitching interface remains strong. Actually, I do have some nit-picks with the pitching now that I think about it. Curveballs never feel effective, or even reliable to the point where I'm surprised when I strike a guy out with a curveball. On the flip-side, the circle change can be way too effective at punching guys out though it is limited as the A.I. at least won't often strike out repeatedly with the same pitch (e.g. - if you punch out David Ortiz with a change in his first A.B. you likely won't be able to do the same in his second).

A lot of the changes I'm hoping exist in the 2010 edition are off the field. I have not kept up with the previews for this year's edition so some features may be confirmed as being in the game already while others may be confirmed as not. Nevertheless, here are my wishes:

Better managing A.I. - I almost feel like I'm cheating when I reach the post season in franchise mode because the opposing manager is so incompetent. I'm not referring to in-game tactics, mostly, but the pre-game stuff. Why would any manager use a five man rotation in October? Unless you have five 20 game winners I see no point and realistically no manager will do it. I'm okay with the opposition going with a strict 4-man rotation, but I'd love it if facing elimination the opposition threw its ace on 3 days rest. Or even better, if the manager brought in an ace starter for some crucial outs late in an elimination game. That may be asking too much but fundamentally I just want to get a sense that the A.I. knows its in a do or die situation.

Contracts - Contract negotiations should be constant, as in, I should be able to engage a player under contract at any point during the season and during the life of their contract. This isn't something new, just about every game I can think of has included this feature except for The Show. It should also play into a player's happiness. Look at the '09 game for example. The cover boy, Dustin Pedroia, has an extreme team friendly contract and like most cover boys, is extremely good. I've seen him achieve 30-30 status in some seasons (never on my team either, this is all A.I.) and a guy winning MVP's with such numbers would be banging down the door to his GM's office for a new deal. It would also help to keep stars from hitting free agency and introduce a home-town discount dynamic. Maybe Player X is willing to sign an extension during spring training for 4 years and 60, but once he hits free agency and sees what he's worth, his demands change and he now wants 7 and 180. Or perhaps during the season you counter his proposal with a low ball offer and insult him, demanding you pay through the roof to keep or he just walks. I encountered exactly that scenario with Pedro Martinez in World Series Baseball, the fact that such a thing doesn't exist in The Show in 2010 is inexcusable.

No Trade Clauses and 10-4 Rights - pretty self explanatory, guys should be able to request no trade clauses when negotiating. Or, you as a GM could use it as leverage when you don't have the richest offer on the table. Mostly it would enhance Road to the Show mode as I'm sure most people would love the option of controlling who their team plays for. The introduction of 10-5 rights should be easy since the game has no trouble keeping track of service time as is.

Dynamic DL - Sounds like something you could place on the back of the box as a feature. Again, this is something that existed in some games nearly 10 years ago but isn't in The Show. Guys should be able to stay on the DL after their 15 days are up without being forced to go on for another 15. This would prevent a guy who's going to be hurt for 20 days from spending 30 on the DL, which is what happens currently in the game. The ability to retro-active guys would be cool too. Say your starter pulls something and has to come out of the game but thinks he shouldn't miss a start. Then come start time maybe he can say during warm-ups "I can't go" so you place him on the DL retro-active to his last start five days ago. Such a feature isn't necessary, but it would add a touch of realism.

Better Aging - Guys age and they get worse, that's the law of the game. It hasn't been in The Show. It's always a fine line as I felt MVP over did it. In that game players would hit 30 and fall off a cliff. It should be different for everyone and somewhat random. Say after age 30 players in between seasons should have a certain percent chance of attrition. That variable should increase every successive year. Say at 32 Player X has will lose 5 points of power with a 15 variable score that could positively or negatively affect the 5 point drop. Then at 33 maybe he has two variable scores, a 15 that could cut his deterioration of 5 points to as few as 2, and 25 score that can only impact the initial 5 point reduction further to say 8 or 10. And it should be different for every player type. Say Pujols is a type A which means he is less likely to rapidly decline but Prince Fielder is a type C and will like fade quicker. How they would apply such titles to players could be arbitrary, or it could be skill based or position based (closers and catchers decline quicker, starters who throw 88 mph sinkers age well).

Position changes and New Pitches - I've always wanted to see this in a game but have yet to see it. As guys get older (or your guy in RTTS) skills worsen to the point where maybe the player can't run down balls in the gap or display the necessary range for shortstop. You should be able to permanently change positions (or in this case, ask players to change or have your manager ask you to change) without editing them in the player editor. This way say in 2012 Derek Jeter is the left fielder in New York with Chamberlain the closer. This could be something that is a risk/reward thing. If you ask a guy to switch roles or positions he may do it willingly, or he may get pissed and demand a trade or just play poorly due to being unhappy. Pitchers at the minor league level should also have the option of developing new pitches much like you yourself can when playing RTTS. Pitching coaches could even have pitch specific ratings. Say you have a power lefty in at Double A that you think could be legit but he throws a fastball, slider, and sinker. You think his ability to throw change-up will determine whether he's a future ace or a future LOOGY but your Double A pitching coach has a D rating for change-up and a D- for circle change. However, your Triple A pitching coach has a B rating for both so you promote your young fireballer to Triple A where you hope a season or two helps him hone that pitch for his big debut in The Show. This of course would necessitate needing full minor league coaching staffs, or they could just tie it to the Farm Director. At the very least, I would like it that any guy under 25 and down on the farm should have a random chance of developing a new pitch if he's a starter. Relievers could either be excused from the feature or just less likely to do so. The random variable could also depend on how many pitches the pitcher currently has, if he has just 2 it could be 80% likely, if he already has 4 it could be 15% likely. It would add a little something extra to spring training when you see your 22 year old showed up to camp with a knuckleball.