Four Keys to Success for MLB '11: The Show

Feature Article

Submitted on: 09/02/2010 by Christian McLeod

Baseball's pennant push is in full swing, and several teams are feverishly trying to claw their way to a division title. For those of us whose teams have already been eliminated from postseason consideration (my beloved Tigers included), the only baseball we really have to look forward to right now is next season's entry of Sony's stellar MLB: The Show franchise. While this year's title was an excellent addition to the series, there are definitely some nagging issues holding the game back from the elusive "GOAT" status.

With plenty of time still left in this year's development cycle, I figured I would put together a couple critical aspects of the game that should be altered for the upcoming season.

1. Revamp the Batting System

Before anyone gets any ideas, I am not proposing an analog swing system in MLB 11. With that clarified, hitting in The Show series has been one of my biggest gripes since the series debuted on the PS3. My main issue with the game's hitting mechanics really boils down to the fact that even though the user has the ability to control where the PCI is positioned in the hitting zone, there are far too many instances where hits feel random, or determined by a CPU algorithm or player statistics rather than by human control. It is beyond frustrating to work the count against a pitcher like Cliff Lee and then hit a soft dribbler to shortstop -- only to check your batting feedback, which tells you that you had perfect timing and hit a meatball.

To make matters even worse, the developers are still committed to mapping the game's hit-influence mechanic to the right analog stick. By flicking the right stick in a multitude of directions before a pitcher's delivery, you will cue up a canned reaction by your batter to automatically attempt to hit the ball in the direction that was cued up. Not only is this system not ergonomically conducive because of your right thumb already being tied to a button press for hitting, but it is another prime example of a hitting engine that relies more on CPU and statistical information rather than user input.

You are never actually given one-to-one control over your batter's upper torso/hands to make the swing-influence adjustments as the pitch is delivered, rather once the influence is cued you are locked into said influence.

The bottom line is that hitting in MLB 10 is not as much fun as it should be, especially on the higher difficulties without slider tweaks. Hitting a baseball is all about minute adjustments made by the hitter as the ball is being delivered. That aspect needs to be translated to this hardball franchise.

I propose a timing-based hitting system that ties one-to-one swing influence adjustments to the left stick. A perfect example of this proposed system can be seen in The Bigs 2. Since only 17 people on Operation Sports seemed to play 2K's best baseball outing in years, let me explain. While at bat you will notice that before a pitch is even delivered, you are able to control your batter's torso, which in turn influences that player's hand/arm position while swinging the bat. The end result is a hitting system where the user feels completely in control over the end result.

2K was able to make batting in The Bigs 2 feel organic and fun. So much so, in fact, that I was very surprised that MLB 2K10 did not include a similar setup.

Now, in no way do I want MLB 11's hitting system to become an arcade slugfest, but I am confident that the developers could implement a timing-based one-to-one body/arm mechanic with the left stick while implementing proper hitting zones based on a player's real-life statistics. Batting in a baseball game needs to be its most immersive gameplay mechanic in my opinion, and I feel that far too much control is taken away from the gamer with The Show's current setup.

2. Give Users Complete Control Over Analog Sliding

Batting issues aside, the one area where The Show has struggled in my eyes is in regards to the complete lack of control you have over analog sliding. For some reason, the developers will not allow sliding to be set to a completely manual configuration, instead sticking us with the rather annoying "assisted" gameplay option. Yes, the game does give you minor control over slides, but the problem I run into is that the slides I end up doing are either grossly different from what I intended, or my player ends up not sliding at all.

After countless games and observations, the answer became apparently clear that sliding works in the game, but only when the game determines that a situation is worthy of it. For example, you can only slide into home if the other team is trying to make a play on you, and that play is remotely close. Otherwise, you will not be able to make your player slide into home plate. The same concept goes for doubles, triples, bloopers, gappers -- you name it. Unless the CPU decides that you are in a potential slide zone, you will not be able to cue up your "assisted" slide.

Sony needs to completely remove the slide-assist option to stop the CPU from determining what type of slide, and when to slide, based on the given situation. Other baseball games that will remain unnamed (may or may not have been released five years ago) gave users complete manual one-to-one right stick control on slides. Once you’ve experienced this level of control, it is mighty hard to go back to the current system in The Show.

3. Roster Auto Load and Dynamic Rosters

The game's basic interface needs to be overhauled, and my biggest pet peeve deals with the lack of roster auto load. I can not even describe the amount of frustration that goes along with having to load my rosters manually every time I boot up the game. It may sound like a small gripe, but when practically every other sports game on the market has been including this feature for years now, it should not be ignored. This leads me to my next point.

The Show needs some form of dynamic rosters. After playing games like MLB 2K10, NBA Live 10 and NBA 2K10, the thought of dealing with weekly roster updates is almost unbearable. If MLB 2K10 demonstrated anything, it is that "living rosters" fit perfectly with a baseball game.

Out of the big four sports, baseball rosters see the most turnover during a season, along with the most stat differentiation. There is something about MLB 10’s weekly roster and statistical updates that leave me with a shallow feeling. If my favorite player is on a hot streak, I want that instantly updated so I can use that player in a exhibition game or online -- I do not want to have to wait a week to get those details. Sports gaming today is all about instant gratification, and MLB 11 should step it up in terms giving fans rosters and player ratings on a daily basis.

4. Include a Dedicated Playoff Mode Complete With Presentation

I am a little surprised the MLB series does not include a dedicated playoff mode with playoff-specific presentation. I’ll admit it, oftentimes my franchise team fails to make the playoffs. As someone who plays each and every one of his team's 162 games, the last thing I want to do if we fail to make the postseason is start up a new season from scratch in hopes of making it to the Fall Classic. Plus, if I do fail, I never get to experience The Show’s playoff atmosphere or see the game's World Series victory celebrations. I feel as if I am missing out on an major aspect of the game's presentation, and it actually bums me out quite a bit (sad I know).

Think about it though, I am sure the developers have dumped some serious time into making a cool World Series celebration, yet I'd venture to say that not even half of the game's clientele has even witnessed it because of the extreme time commitment necessary. I’d like to at least have the option in MLB 11 to set up my own playoff bracket. This way I could set up a series against the CPU or even some buddies just to experience how the game handles the postseason and don't feel so left out.

The developers could take this mode one step further and add it as an online feature so that you could play a full playoff series against friends. Imagine creating your own Yankees/Red Sox postseason memories online, with your PSN ID replacing the phrase "Bucky freaking Dent." I can see it now: "Bumble freaking 14 just won the pennant."

It is puzzling to me that, for as much as MLB 10 did right in terms of the authentic baseball experience, the development team would omit such a key mode from the game. I mean, how else are Pirates fans ever going to see their team in the World Series? If I want to lead even the lowliest of teams to baseball's promised land, while also witnessing some cool presentation elements along the way, I should have that right.

So there you have it, four additions that I think can elevate MLB 11 to sheer Ruthian levels. Sound off below with thoughts.

Christian McLeod is a senior staff writer at Operation Sports specializing in baseball and football games. Born and raised in Michigan, you can currently find him trying to justify that the Tigers still have a shot at the AL Central and glued to NCAA 11. Follow him on Twitter @Bumble14_OS, talk to him on the OS forums at Bumble14, or find him on Xbox Live/PSN via Bumble14.

MLB 11 The Show Videos

Member Comments

# 141 Ranger99 @ 09/24/10 10:42 PM

How about this I play RTTS alot. My players stats (1st Base) were all 99. At the end of my contract I became a free agent and didnt like any of the teams giving me an offer so i tried out for a team in spring training, and I made sure it was team were I was the better player at 1st. I tore it up in spring training and oddly enough was not offered a contract, big deal I thougt, Ill get picked up during the season.... I didnt get picked up or offered any contract. This has happened more than once and it is very irritating. I wish there was something they would do about this. And also, whenever I ask the manager for a position change, i get shot down and benched. I make sure its a position in need of good defense and there is someone that can cover my old position but i still get benched for asking. Whats the point in having having the option if you cant use it?

# 142 swaldo @ 09/26/10 12:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by countryboy


	What you're not understanding is that what you are asking for are different visual aids to display the ratings. But the ratings will still play a part, which is something you were seemingly complaining about earlier in the thread saying they caused "random" outcomes. No matter what you do, what visual aids you implement, ratings will ALWAYS be part of the equation. I'm not sure I can make it any clearer than that.

What you're saying still doesn't add up. You stated in a previous post...

"You cannot separate good players from bad players by user input and changes to the aids."

Sure you can! I proved this in my last post. And the only ratings I said that I would like to see removed are not even ratings, they are stats! H/9, W/9, SO/9 etc. The Show apparently calls these "ratings", but really shouldn't they only be used for simming games or in a 'manage only' capacity?

And what I'm talking about is a system with transparency. You'll know exactly why you swung and missed on a pitch or hit a home run. Isn't that better than wondering why the ball flopped on perfect/meatball?

So basically I think developers should ask the question: What makes some pro baseball players better or worse than other players, and way better than mere mortals like us? And how can we translate that visually in a game to replicate their abilities in order to make a more organic user experience?

One thing that is clear is that you're happy with the system as is. That's cool, but understand that a system which is based somewhat around pre-determined outcomes is not the future. It might suffice for now because there aren't alot of options, but eventually people are going to tire of it and want more control.

# 143 Knight165 @ 09/26/10 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swaldo


	What you're saying still doesn't add up. You stated in a previous post... "You cannot separate good players from bad players by user input and changes to the aids." Sure you can! I proved this in my last post. And the only ratings I said that I would like to see removed are not even ratings, they are stats! H/9, W/9, SO/9 etc. The Show apparently calls these "ratings", but really shouldn't they only be used for simming games or in a 'manage only' capacity? And what I'm talking about is a system with transparency. You'll know exactly why you swung and missed on a pitch or hit a home run. Isn't that better than wondering why the ball flopped on perfect/meatball? So basically I think developers should ask the question: What makes some pro baseball players better or worse than other players, and way better than mere mortals like us? And how can we translate that visually in a game to replicate their abilities in order to make a more organic user experience? One thing that is clear is that you're happy with the system as is. That's cool, but understand that a system which is based somewhat around pre-determined outcomes is not the future. It might suffice for now because there aren't alot of options, but eventually people are going to tire of it and want more control.

It is not a pre-determined outcome.
It sounds like you don't want an MLB sim game....you want a generic batting cage.
Thanks...but you can keep it.

M.K.
Knight165

# 144 countryboy @ 09/26/10 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swaldo


	What you're saying still doesn't add up. You stated in a previous post... "You cannot separate good players from bad players by user input and changes to the aids." Sure you can! I proved this in my last post. And the only ratings I said that I would like to see removed are not even ratings, they are stats! H/9, W/9, SO/9 etc. The Show apparently calls these "ratings", but really shouldn't they only be used for simming games or in a 'manage only' capacity?

All that you have proven is how visual aids can be used to display the differences in ratings.

Quote:


	And what I'm talking about is a system with transparency. You'll know exactly why you swung and missed on a pitch or hit a home run. Isn't that better than wondering why the ball flopped on perfect/meatball?

Ever play baseball before? I mean, organized competitive baseball? Ever watch it on TV? You can time the pitch perfectly, hit the ball on the sweetspot and still hit the ball into an out. It happens. Just as you can be fooled, flip the bat and get a hit. Its baseball. Sounds to me you want to remove that aspect of a baseball game.

Quote:


	So basically I think developers should ask the question: What makes some pro baseball players better or worse than other players, and way better than mere mortals like us? And how can we translate that visually in a game to replicate their abilities in order to make a more organic user experience?

Ummmm...they use ratings to separate players. And how they can translate it? Again, you're asking for ways to implement visual aids to display ratings.

Quote:


	One thing that is clear is that you're happy with the system as is. That's cool, but understand that a system which is based somewhat around pre-determined outcomes is not the future.

What an ignorant statement.

Outcomes are pre-determined...you know that how? Tell me, since you think the system is broken, what ratings are used in any given situation that influence the outcome? Whats the formula? How much does user input influence any situation?

I read thru that post and all I see, once again, is how you are wanting visual aids to represent the ratings differences of players. Now I'll wait to read how I'm not understanding what you're saying.

# 145 BobSacamano @ 09/26/10 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by countryboy


	Every play baseball before? I mean, organized competitive baseball? Ever watch it on TV? You can time the pitch perfectly, hit the ball on the sweetspot and still hit the ball into an out. It happens. Just as you can be fooled, flip the bat and get a hit. Its baseball. Sounds to me you want to remove that aspect of a baseball game.

I don't want to speak for the other poster but this is not the problem I have with the hitting engine. The problem I have is when you hit the ball perfectly and hit a lazy fly ball or ground ball and conversely when you DON'T hit it perfectly and crush a home run (or when the CPU does). It's not that sometimes you'll hit the ball perfectly into an out it's that sometimes you'll hit the ball perfectly and hit it weakly. If I hit the ball perfectly (meaning perfect timing and perfect contact) I should be getting close to the "max result" with that player. I get that some of this should be a result of ratings - Pujols can not get all of a pitch and still hit one out and Joe MiddleInfielder can hit a ball perfectly and have it hang up in the outfield for an easy catch.

HOWEVER, having played this game quite a bit I'm convinced that more than ratings the big culprit in this inconsistency is pitcher confidence. I've said it before and I'll say it again - this whole engine should either be scrapped or significantly tweaked in the future. It seems to play WAY too much of a part in determining outcomes in the game - if a pitcher has given up a couple singles any contact is bound to be a rocket, and conversely if he's pitched a couple scoreless innings he's practically unhittable. I don't think it works this way in real life. I think the dev's had made an admirable effort to mimic real-life pitcher confidence, which probably exists to some degree, but it seems like it's way overdone.

If I could suggest a better system - anybody ever play Hardball 5? When your pitcher was struggling it was much harder to control the pitch cursor. It would move around in the zone a little when you were aiming your pitch. You had to steady your hand if you wanted to hit your spot. This would be an interesting way to mimic a pitcher struggling with control.

# 146 countryboy @ 09/26/10 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobSacamano


	I don't want to speak for the other poster but this is not the problem I have with the hitting engine. The problem I have is when you hit the ball perfectly and hit a lazy fly ball or ground ball and conversely when you DON'T hit it perfectly and crush a home run (or when the CPU does). It's not that sometimes you'll hit the ball perfectly into an out it's that sometimes you'll hit the ball perfectly and hit it weakly. If I hit the ball perfectly (meaning perfect timing and perfect contact) I should be getting close to the "max result" with that player. I get that some of this should be a result of ratings - Pujols can not get all of a pitch and still hit one out and Joe MiddleInfielder can hit a ball perfectly and have it hang up in the outfield for an easy catch.

This has to do with ratings. Not only the batters, but the pitcher's as well. If the system were strictly time and hit(and there is a level of batting for that) then the hitting system becomes far too simple. The goal is to try to simulate what you would see in real life and balance that with user input. To do that, there has to be a formula that takes all ratings as well as player input to determine the result.

Quote:


	HOWEVER, having played this game quite a bit I'm convinced that more than ratings the big culprit in this inconsistency is pitcher confidence. I've said it before and I'll say it again - this whole engine should either be scrapped or significantly tweaked in the future. It seems to play WAY too much of a part in determining outcomes in the game - if a pitcher has given up a couple singles any contact is bound to be a rocket, and conversely if he's pitched a couple scoreless innings he's practically unhittable. I don't think it works this way in real life. I think the dev's had made an admirable effort to mimic real-life pitcher confidence, which probably exists to some degree, but it seems like it's way overdone.

I disagree with your assessment of pitcher confidence. I agree its part of the formula, but I don't believe that its overbearing in the formula. Far too many times I've pitched out of jams, rattled a pitcher who was on a roll, and everything in between.

# 147 Heroesandvillains @ 09/26/10 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobSacamano


	I don't want to speak for the other poster but this is not the problem I have with the hitting engine. The problem I have is when you hit the ball perfectly and hit a lazy fly ball or ground ball and conversely when you DON'T hit it perfectly and crush a home run (or when the CPU does). It's not that sometimes you'll hit the ball perfectly into an out it's that sometimes you'll hit the ball perfectly and hit it weakly. If I hit the ball perfectly (meaning perfect timing and perfect contact) I should be getting close to the "max result" with that player. I get that some of this should be a result of ratings - Pujols can not get all of a pitch and still hit one out and Joe MiddleInfielder can hit a ball perfectly and have it hang up in the outfield for an easy catch. HOWEVER, having played this game quite a bit I'm convinced that more than ratings the big culprit in this inconsistency is pitcher confidence. I've said it before and I'll say it again - this whole engine should either be scrapped or significantly tweaked in the future. It seems to play WAY too much of a part in determining outcomes in the game - if a pitcher has given up a couple singles any contact is bound to be a rocket, and conversely if he's pitched a couple scoreless innings he's practically unhittable. I don't think it works this way in real life. I think the dev's had made an admirable effort to mimic real-life pitcher confidence, which probably exists to some degree, but it seems like it's way overdone. If I could suggest a better system - anybody ever play Hardball 5? When your pitcher was struggling it was much harder to control the pitch cursor. It would move around in the zone a little when you were aiming your pitch. You had to steady your hand if you wanted to hit your spot. This would be an interesting way to mimic a pitcher struggling with control.

Again, how much offense do you guys really want?

Let me say it again. The hardcore, 200+ games a year player is likely looking for the most statistical realism. He'd like/demand that his offense get two-hit against every once in a while. This player would also like/demand that some key players in his lineup hit .250 over the course of an entire season, because in real life, this happens.

Because the hardcore players play this game A LOT, they'll likely be able to get very good with the L-Stick. Based on what you're asking for by wanting the benefit of the doubt on well timed pitches, or as you said "max result," the hardcore player will hit too well.

Thus, the game will only provide realistic hitting averages for the casual player. If SCEA becomes more forgiving with timing, next year I'm out. I'm already on Legend! What do you suggest for someone like me that's already seeing realistic results? An even MORE challenging difficulty level? No thanks.

And to your point on pitching. Just because we don't visually see the pitching cursor move when a guy gets rattled, doesn't mean that it's not very hard to hit your spots when the confidence meter is low. If you're not seeing this, you're pitching at a difficulty too easy for you. Pitching is GREAT this year. I hope they leave user pitching alone.

# 148 Heroesandvillains @ 09/26/10 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MLB01


	The Show has something established that is amazing -- realism. It hard for me to even express how closely this game emulates actual baseball games I've watched on TV -- not even talkin' about the visuals but the stats and player tendencies. Take what you see in the L3 pitch / hit info window with a grain of salt some times, because I've looked at it after I was clearly late on a swing and it said " normal " timing. I'm not sayin' it doesn't work, but sometimes it seems to be off. As far as pitcher confidence goes, if you turn it off in the options, does it just turn the visual for it off or does it turn the entire mechanic off ?

It only visually turns off the individual confidence of pitches. The blue bar underneath each individual pitch. The overall confidence, or lack there of, still exists "under the hood", so to speak.

If your fasball is good, it's still good with the confidence meter turned off.

Think of it as turning the PCI off. It's still there; you just can't see it.

There's no way to turn off or diminish/enhance the overall confidence meter.

As far as the rest of your post goes, I'm almost all in there. This game is great.

The hitter's overall power needs to be toned down, as far as it's influence over base hits are concerned. Fielding needs a makeover too, but I'm fine just using auto field (thanks SCEA for this.).

I mostly agree with Countryboy on all fronts. But Swaldo does make a great case for adding more seperation between top/bottom tier CPU pitchers. I just disagree (mostly) with how he wants to go about it. I personally love the H/9, BB/9, SO/9 ratings. I don't know about you guys, but my Yanks franchise is going great. It feels very real. Sometimes...uh, it feels too really (Javy Vazquez for instance).

# 149 jhawk826 @ 09/26/10 08:25 PM

The presentation needs to be revamped. The commentary in 10 was the same from 09 with a few minor differences. Because of that, I felt like I was playing 09 instead of '10 for the last few months. Make the commentary more realistic. At least let them have some conversation. It sounds like they were all in separate booths. Hopefully this issue is addressed.

# 150 swaldo @ 09/27/10 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knight165


	It is not a pre-determined outcome. It sounds like you don't want an MLB sim game....you want a generic batting cage. Thanks...but you can keep it.

When I said "pre-determined" I was referring to outcomes being determined prior to it being displayed on screen (based on various attributes, pitch type and location, stats such as H/9, swing timing & location etc.) But I understand someone can take that and suggest I was referring to a scripted outcome which is not the case.

I was going to use the word "simulation" but that could also be taken to have different meanings. For example, it sounds like what you mainly want is an accurate statistical simulation of baseball - let's call it a glorified text based sim. What I've been talking about is simulating how players actually see and play the game.

Let's take pitch recognition for example. In 'The Show' how can you tell the difference between all of the various pitches? Basically your average user will try to judge the speed or movement while the ball is in flight. In some cases this will be easy, but other times it will be a guess. In real life batters pick up the spin of a ball or the pitchers grip before it leaves the hand, or his hand angle, changes in arm speed, changes in his wind-up motion, or other "tells" which teams or players might discover through carefull study.

There's nothing in the game which simulates any of this, and when I offer suggestions you say I don't want sim?! Let's say a pitcher has a 4-seam, 2-seam, Cutter, Forkball and Changeup in his repertoire? How are you going to tell one from the other? The game needs to find a way to do this to truly call it a "sim", and if some hitters are better at it than others it will help maintain statistical integrity.

Attachment 28077

# 151 Pared @ 09/27/10 03:03 PM

What you suggested doesn't correlate with sim. I'm just referring to your example, mind you.

There is no flash, light, color, sound or any other aid to tell you what is what. A hitter can pick up based on many factors, such as a pitcher tipping his pitches.

What you're asking for, again if we are going by your example, is something so minuscule that most won't even realize nor can accommodate based on the changes.

Most people who play this game won't realize that sort of thing. It almost comes off as an argument solely for the sake of making an argument to me, quite honestly.

# 152 swaldo @ 09/27/10 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by countryboy


	Ever play baseball before? I mean, organized competitive baseball? Ever watch it on TV? You can time the pitch perfectly, hit the ball on the sweetspot and still hit the ball into an out. It happens. Just as you can be fooled, flip the bat and get a hit. Its baseball. Sounds to me you want to remove that aspect of a baseball game.

Have I ever watched baseball on TV? I shouldn't even dignify this with a response. It's the sort of comment people overreact to then find themselves banned, and discourages the free exchange of ideas. I will add this though...

"A bat swung at 65mph at an upward (Rod Carew 10 degree line drive angle) striking an 85mph fastball at a near 10 degree downward angle squarely hit will result in a 200ft line drive. The ball will go farthest (350ft) if hit about 3/4 inch below center."

Robert Adair - The physics of baseball.

Of course if an outfielder happens to be standing near a 200ft line-drive it can be an out. But let's do away with any idea that you can hit a ball perfectly but dribble it to the pitcher. Physics (with crazy hit variety) - isn't that where we want to be heading?

All I've been suggesting here are ideas that have been used in past or current baseball games (very succesfull ones) and added some of my own ideas. If you put them together and tweak it just right I think it would be a great addition to the PCI system. Do you really think SCEA will just dump that after so many years of use? No way, so what's wrong with trying to come up with options, or talking about what the next innovation in baseball games might be? Is the only innovation we're going to see is refining the statistical accuracy of the current system?

There's no need to get fussy over suggestions as if The Show is so perfect. And I'm done talking about this because most people understand what I'm saying, and if you dont agree I respect that. But there's no point continuing to go in circles if you don't understand or take what I'm saying out of context.

# 153 Heroesandvillains @ 09/27/10 04:02 PM

Swaldo, I've enjoyed hearing your ideas.

Cardsleadtheway, you made BY FAR, the most important point of the thread...the development cycle.

I couldn't think of anything worse than for SCEA to change things due to popular demand, and need another three years to perfect it. MLB 10 The Show is very good as is. Tweaks next year, and nothing more as far as I'm concerned, gameplay wise.

# 154 swaldo @ 09/27/10 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pared


	What you suggested doesn't correlate with sim. I'm just referring to your example, mind you. There is no flash, light, color, sound or any other aid to tell you what is what. A hitter can pick up based on many factors, such as a pitcher tipping his pitches. What you're asking for, again if we are going by your example, is something so minuscule that most won't even realize nor can accommodate based on the changes. Most people who play this game won't realize that sort of thing. It almost comes off as an argument solely for the sake of making an argument to me, quite honestly.

People can call it "arcadey" but Ben Brinkman, the dev who originally created the "Hitters Eye" did it to make the game more lifelike. From an interview in Gaming Age 5 years ago...

GA:In your game, MVP 2005 you have a new feature called the hitter's eye. Can you go into a bit of detail on what gamers can expect from this feature?

BB: Gamers can expect hitting to be more accessible in MVP Baseball 2005 because of the Hitter's Eye. The Hitter's Eye, and specifically the ability to Read the Pitch, will make the batter-pitcher match up a little more authentic by leveling the playing field a bit between the batter and pitcher.

With the Read the Pitch element of the Hitter's Eye we tried to reproduce the idea of the batter picking up the spin of the ball right out of the pitcher's hand. This was done using a coloring scheme denoting different pitch types. We have found in focus testing and through playing it ourselves that it makes the game much more accessible for new players and adds another level of complexity for more accomplished MVPers. For the new players it helps with timing, something that has always been tough in baseball games, while skilled players can analyze the trajectory of pitches to make more educated swing decisions.

GA: I think the feature sounds very promising. What lengths have you taken that will keep gamers from "catching on" making the game too easy to hit?

BB: When we first implemented this feature this was our big concern, over time though we determined it was a non-issue. All the ability to read the pitch does is assist in determining the type of pitch. It doesn't tell you location or actually hit the ball for you. Gamers will still have to pay attention and use this pitch type knowledge to make an informed swing decision.

So note the words and terms he used: "Authentic" and "Batter picking up the spin." I'll agree putting colored balls in a game is obviously not realistic, but the spirit of the idea is very sim. And I'll agree for newcomers it may be jarring, but if you educate people (in user manuals and in-game tutorials) why it's in the game and how it's to be used I think most people would warm up to it.

And I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing. I put my ideas out there and people keep asking me questions, criticize and in more than one case disrespect so I'm just responding.

# 155 countryboy @ 09/27/10 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pared


	It almost comes off as an argument solely for the sake of making an argument to me, quite honestly.

Glad I'm not the only one who feels this way.

# 156 countryboy @ 09/27/10 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swaldo


	There's no need to get fussy over suggestions as if The Show is so perfect. And I'm done talking about this because most people understand what I'm saying, and if you dont agree I respect that. But there's no point continuing to go in circles if you don't understand or take what I'm saying out of context.

No one is fussy. You've stated throughout the thread that the outcomes are random and predetermined and I've challenged you on them. But instead of addressing them head on, you post, well much like you did with the part I deleted, which is a long drawn out post and does very little to address what one has asked of you.

# 157 countryboy @ 09/27/10 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cardsleadtheway


	I have agreed with almost everything you have said up to this point. I have played competitive baseball at so many levels for the better part of my life, and still do in fact. If you time a pitch perfectly, and hit it on the sweet spot, you will make solid contact. You won't pop it up and you won't dribble a weak grounder for an easy double play.

I'm not saying you shouldn't make solid contact. But what are you considering the sweet spot? Anywhere in the PCI? If so, then you would be mistaken. I have yet to center the ball perfectly in the PCI ring and not hit the ball solidly. I have, however, hit if off-center in the PCI, and hit grounders, popups, etc.

Quote:


	The physics are more than a little off in this game and dependent way too much on attributes. Attributes have to play an important role, but it seems like the attributes take over instead of the physics.I would rather have the frustration of a great pitcher placing the pitch exactly where they want it and possible getting more calls going their way, or a great hitter laying off borderline pitches and crushing the mistake than to have the attributes determine a weak grounder because pitcher A has a H/9 rating that trumps the batters contact rating.

Again, I disagree. I don't view this as attributes taking over or one thing trumping another. I believe that its a formula that is put into place, that leads to the outcome. As I've said to Swaldo, you can't just have the game be based solely on user input and in my opinion, that is what I feel that you and others are alluding to.

# 158 countryboy @ 09/27/10 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cardsleadtheway


	Of course I would not consider anywhere in the PCI to be solid. I tend to assume that the center of the PCI, along with feedback locations of "meatball", "perfect", or "wheelhouse", and to a lesser extent "solid" as hitting the sweet spot. Correct me on this if I am wrong.

Thats how I view it. Center of the PCI with good timing. As I said, I have never looked at the hitting feedback and saw a time where I hit the ball in the center of the PCI with good timing and hit the ball weakly.

Quote:


	I never once stated that I want to remove the attributes, just that I would prefer to see the attributes affect the game differently than it does. I have played way too many games to not see attributes take precedent to any and all user input. For that, I prefer to watch real life games. What I would like to see is, as I have stated before, attributes having an effect on things like location and ability to hit well off the sweet spot. I have seen way too many times where great contact is made by a decent player against a great pitcher only to have it turn into a weak grounder to the pitcher or tailor made double play ball, as well as a good hitter taking a mediocre pitcher over the wall on low and away pitches 3 feet off the plate. If you don't believe me, play a two player game and watch what happens to the exact same meatball pitch with various levels of pitchers. It shouldn't be like that. Ratings should play a huge part in the game, but I personally feel that they override the laws of physics.

I wasn't suggesting that you wanted attributes removed, but that you want the user input to have more weight.

As for games played, as you know I've played a ton. And there hasn't been one time where I felt as though the game was producing an outcome just to produce it. I don't know what else to say to that. What I see from the game, I see from games on TV or in my experiences in the years that I played. Maybe the providing of swing information is casting false expectations, I dunno.

I'm not trying to suggest that you are wrong and I am right, just that we are obviously seeing or better yet, viewing the game in two different ways.

# 159 swaldo @ 09/27/10 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by countryboy


	No one is fussy. You've stated throughout the thread that the outcomes are random and predetermined and I've challenged you on them. But instead of addressing them head on, you post, well much like you did with the part I deleted, which is a long drawn out post and does very little to address what one has asked of you.

It doesn't matter if ratings & other factors are filtered through a random number generator or calculated by a formula. Either way each would be set up so long term stats would look the same if you compared them.

So you win and lets say it's a formula, big deal? The discussion was about putting more control in a users hands. Instead, you focus on the fact I said "random" and brought out the little popcorn guy (

) as if you "got me" or something. If you avoid doing stuff like this and instead stay on the main topic people won't have to drag on with you and turn threads into rubbish.

# 160 Knight165 @ 09/28/10 12:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swaldo


	It doesn't matter if ratings & other factors are filtered through a random number generator or calculated by a formula. Either way each would be set up so long term stats would look the same if you compared them. So you win and it's a formula, big deal? The discussion was about putting more control in a users hands. Instead, you focus on the fact I said "random" and brought out the little popcorn guy () as if you "got me" or something. If you avoid doing stuff like this and instead stay on the main topic people won't have to drag on with you and turn threads into rubbish.

Funny....I feel people are having to drag on with you.

Either way...
I feel...if you put too much control in the users hands..........................
..................................getting......... ......................further.............
......................and .................................................. ...................
...........further................................ ......away.............................from....... ....................................SIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIMMMMMMMMMMMMM play!

It's a pretty good balance right now IMO...and should be getting even more difficult IMO.

M.K.
Knight165

« Previous 1 2…6 789 10 11 12 13 14 Next »

More Links