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

# 161 swaldo @ 09/28/10 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knight165


	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.

And this coming from a guy who plays "Manage Only" mode. At least that's what you've said in the past - playing an occassional exhibition game for testing purposes. So basically you prefer a game that looks like a TV broadcast with the statistical accuracy of a text based game.

There's nothing wrong with that and I'm not trying to be confrontational or disrespectfull. But lets face it, the suggestions I made apparently are useless to you because you don't play "arcade" mode. And since you didn't like the ideas I think it's fair to ask why you don't like to play arcade mode?

I like text based games, they are great to play on the road in a laptop. But if I'm at home playing a videogame on a 46 inch HDTV I want to move some sticks! So to me "Manage Only" mode would be too boring, but that's just me. For you though what in arcade mode is lacking so much that it doesn't make you want to play it?

# 162 Heroesandvillains @ 09/28/10 04:06 PM

Just my opinion here Swaldo, but I read all if Knights posts. He's probably the single most constructive member at OS.

The question to him about "what's lacking with arcade mode" really isn't fair.

He's said numerous time that MOM mode allows him to play GM/Commisioner.

The question could be, "why do you like MOM mode so much?" And he could explain to you it's features, etc. But, he doesn't ever say a bad word about playing. Infact, he encourages MOM players to play every once in a while.

Your view on his approach is kind of backwards.

# 163 countryboy @ 09/28/10 06:54 PM

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 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.

LMAO!!!!

Thanks, I needed that. Been a rough day.

# 164 JaSnake16 @ 09/28/10 08:07 PM

Wow, Ive been away for a LOOOOOONNNNNNNNNG time, but hey a ratings discussion would wake me up, LOL.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cardsleadtheway


	Yes and no. Ideally, I would like the attributes to play more of a role in how a player performs when doing "it" right, and for the player to have to do "it" right in order to get desired results. I know there are instances where someone like Vlad will swing at a ball in the dirt and manage to hit a double, but these are the exceptions not the rule. I guess I feel like the reward for doing something right is not as pronounced as it should be, nor is the punishment for failure. Attributes seem to me to determine the reward and punishment more than doing "it" right does. If you are seeing something different, well then cool. I am not seeing it at such a clip that it makes me want to throw away the game.

I think the Show does an admirable job of what Cards mentions already but i hope it can be tightened up further to promote further realism. Im sure everyone has seen plenty of examples of this when both the user is hitting and pitching in some results. Yet, ratings need to play a huge role in the end result, baseball (no matter how you wanna look at it) always seems to boil back down to its numbers and the numbers always differentiate the great players from the truly average. Its what makes the game unique. Think about it, when future generations look back to determine how great a player was, it is always the statistics that are glossed over. Ratings are the representation of those statistics.

# 165 Knight165 @ 09/28/10 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swaldo


	And this coming from a guy who plays "Manage Only" mode. At least that's what you've said in the past - playing an occassional exhibition game for testing purposes. So basically you prefer a game that looks like a TV broadcast with the statistical accuracy of a text based game. There's nothing wrong with that and I'm not trying to be confrontational or disrespectfull. But lets face it, the suggestions I made apparently are useless to you because you don't play "arcade" mode. And since you didn't like the ideas I think it's fair to ask why you don't like to play arcade mode? I like text based games, they are great to play on the road in a laptop. But if I'm at home playing a videogame on a 46 inch HDTV I want to move some sticks! So to me "Manage Only" mode would be too boring, but that's just me. For you though what in arcade mode is lacking so much that it doesn't make you want to play it?

I wouldn't say they are useless.
In fact....I hope they do add a new analog stick pitching and batting mode. As a matter of fact, without knowing anything "inside" at all, my guess is you absolutely will see that....if not for '11 in a future version.
But I think that mode is absolutely going to be dependent on attributes, much like the current modes and I get the feeling that is where you and I part ways.
I just don't see where lending too much emphasis on user control as opposed to a balance of user/ratings has a place in an MLB simulation. A generic baseball game, that doesn't try and mimic the MLB in any way....I could see it, but even in that type of environment, there would have to be some way to hinder user control in order to have some semblance of a baseball game. What fun would it to hit .550 every year while the rest of the league(which would rely on ratings I assume) is struggling to break .350? I think that's already one of the major complaints of some guys...that even LEGEND is a bit easy now.
Which I will answer the last part...your question...and it's the exact thing that you want more of!....user input often causes a skewed stat outcome as compared to players in real life.
For me...I probably have as much chance of getting a hit with 35 rated contact hitter as I do with a 95 rated hitter. Very little

....but a good player probably has a better chance of seeing more realistic results. I have a feeling that by tipping the scale to TOO much user control....good players will have even low rated hitters batting well above .300....much like getting the groove of the pitching meter(which I am MUCH too good at for my liking) and never really throwing balls unless I like and getting way too many strikeouts, with even poor pitchers. That's why I reverted back to the classic mode of pitching, which puts much more emphasis on the attributes in determining a pitch.
I think it's nearly impossible to come up with something that gives more user control(I'm sure EVERY game has hidden cripples in it somewhere...in order to keep the user from simply mastering even the most difficult levels)...whether they show it to you or not is another case.
On a final note, I would never just dismiss anyone's ideas...I think yours are good......I think they just need to be mixed in with a different type of system.
Perhaps in a more user dependent game....they could employ some sort of Madden IQ, where the user would pitch/hit/field a set number of plays and the game would determine the "cripples" in order to give the best sim experience.....and maybe give you the chance to re-adjust through another run through the system in order as you feel under/overwhelmed with the game.

M.K.
Knight165

# 166 jdl24 @ 09/28/10 10:51 PM

This game is one of my all time favorites. I have played over 115 games and still find myself not being able to sim the last few games of my A's franchise, even though I won't make the playoffs. The one first I wish we could do in this game, which most sports games won't let us do as well is to create players during franchise/seasonal play. This wouild be an awesome feature if able to be added to next year's game.

# 167 HustlinOwl @ 09/29/10 10:39 AM

all of this is like in NBA 2K11, asking for a perfect release shot to go in every time is not realistic and asking for every perfect timing meatball to be a solid hit/HR is not realistic.

# 168 Pared @ 09/29/10 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swaldo


	People can call it "arcadey" but Ben Brinkman, the dev who originally created the "Hitters Eye" did it to make the game more lifelike. 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.

Brinkman could have used any wording: Authentic, Real, "smell the hot dogs..." That doesn't mean anything when we're talking about guys that don't want little flashing balls and colors to infiltrate their game right now. I was one of MVP's biggest fans and I always turned that option off because it removed me from the experience of playing real baseball.

The Show has moved more and more towards sim, including the option to remove the visual aids of guess pitch so more users can have a visually realistic game. Asking for something that was in MVP because you liked it is entirely different than asking for something to help pick up movement on a pitch.

Currently, the pitchers grip the ball differently based on each pitch. They also hide the ball differently based on their motions. While their motions are 1:1 perfect representations of what the developers have created, the technology isn't there to modify these based on pitch types.

And visually picking up on a pitch will differ based on the monitor and resolution you are using to play your game.

I don't see what else is there to discuss on my end aside to simply offer to you that it seems like many disagree with you while others just want the flashing colored baseballs as a "solution" to a problem a good amount of people don't see. Personally, it doesn't make sense to argue such a thing and again just comes off to me as an argument simply to argue.

To each their own.

# 169 Pared @ 09/29/10 02:38 PM

I'm always FOR options... but you're basically asking them to rip something that another game did for the sake of doing it.

I doubt they'd feel good about that.

Who knows. I can talk to them about it, but I wouldn't get your hopes up.

# 170 Joey @ 09/29/10 04:53 PM

+1 on the ability to import franchises (and custom rosters, while we are at it) to MLB '11. I know that's something for a wishlist thread but, hey, isn't this whole thread basically one? So instead of saying I "wish" they would add this I'll just keep with the spirit of this thread's title and say I think it's one of the keys to success for MLB '11: The Show.

Ah, who am I kidding. I'm buying it, regardless.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cardsleadtheway


	If you do have the ability to make the suggestions, please, please, please see about a franchise importing option. I hate to put so much work into my franchise only to start over again. I would love to play my same franchise with the yearly upgrades. Just a fantasy I have.

# 171 Pared @ 09/29/10 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cardsleadtheway


	You mean like the pitching meter? Seriously though, if they can come up with a better way, cool. I don't have quite the creative ability coupled with the specific know how to accomplish something like that. In the end, this is still the greatest game out there. I really wouldn't want anything implemented that would take away from the testing phase. We certainly don't want the amount of bugs to crop up this time around. If you do have the ability to make the suggestions, please, please, please see about a franchise importing option. I hate to put so much work into my franchise only to start over again. I would love to play my same franchise with the yearly upgrades. Just a fantasy I have.

The pitching meter simply took what was already in the MLB series and changed hot it was displayed on the screen.

# 172 swaldo @ 09/29/10 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knight165


	I wouldn't say they are useless. In fact....I hope they do add a new analog stick pitching and batting mode. As a matter of fact, without knowing anything "inside" at all, my guess is you absolutely will see that....if not for '11 in a future version. But I think that mode is absolutely going to be dependent on attributes, much like the current modes and I get the feeling that is where you and I part ways. I just don't see where lending too much emphasis on user control as opposed to a balance of user/ratings has a place in an MLB simulation. A generic baseball game, that doesn't try and mimic the MLB in any way....I could see it, but even in that type of environment, there would have to be some way to hinder user control in order to have some semblance of a baseball game. What fun would it to hit .550 every year while the rest of the league(which would rely on ratings I assume) is struggling to break .350? I think that's already one of the major complaints of some guys...that even LEGEND is a bit easy now. Which I will answer the last part...your question...and it's the exact thing that you want more of!....user input often causes a skewed stat outcome as compared to players in real life. For me...I probably have as much chance of getting a hit with 35 rated contact hitter as I do with a 95 rated hitter. Very little ....but a good player probably has a better chance of seeing more realistic results. I have a feeling that by tipping the scale to TOO much user control....good players will have even low rated hitters batting well above .300....much like getting the groove of the pitching meter(which I am MUCH too good at for my liking) and never really throwing balls unless I like and getting way too many strikeouts, with even poor pitchers. That's why I reverted back to the classic mode of pitching, which puts much more emphasis on the attributes in determining a pitch. I think it's nearly impossible to come up with something that gives more user control(I'm sure EVERY game has hidden cripples in it somewhere...in order to keep the user from simply mastering even the most difficult levels)...whether they show it to you or not is another case. On a final note, I would never just dismiss anyone's ideas...I think yours are good......I think they just need to be mixed in with a different type of system. Perhaps in a more user dependent game....they could employ some sort of Madden IQ, where the user would pitch/hit/field a set number of plays and the game would determine the "cripples" in order to give the best sim experience.....and maybe give you the chance to re-adjust through another run through the system in order as you feel under/overwhelmed with the game. M.K. Knight165

Thanks for the courteous and candid response. So what I hear you saying is that user input can be too easy or hard depending on the user; and you don't like to play that way because it skews stats. If that's how you feel then I think the arcade aspect definately needs a hard look. And I've heard the complaints too - such as the guy who played a whole year with user input and all his players ended up with pretty similiar stats.

So I think the question needs to be asked: how can you take the arcade experience and vary the difficulty - to the point where a pitcher in the batters box will feel severely handicapped? IMO it's going to require certain visual aids or liabilities tied to their abilities which replicate how they see the game. Some people will scoff at them as not being realistic, but if the current system is not working then what other choices are there?

I agree that it would be nearly impossible to get perfect statistical accuracy through user input alone. But I think there are things you can do to increase/decrease the challenge. Creativity would be needed and failure would ensue. Madden's 'vision cone' was a good idea but it just didn't stick.

If The Show had a separate "harcore" arcade mode (or options you can just turn on/off) and keep building in different ideas some are bound to work and might make the experience more fun and statistically realistic. And it's not just about putting in little colored balls, rather a combination of things.

And by the way I'm glad to hear they are (or might) be adding analog pitching/hitting. I look forward to seeing what they come up with in '11.

# 173 swaldo @ 09/29/10 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pared


	Brinkman could have used any wording: Authentic, Real, "smell the hot dogs..." That doesn't mean anything when we're talking about guys that don't want little flashing balls and colors to infiltrate their game right now. I was one of MVP's biggest fans and I always turned that option off because it removed me from the experience of playing real baseball. The Show has moved more and more towards sim, including the option to remove the visual aids of guess pitch so more users can have a visually realistic game. Asking for something that was in MVP because you liked it is entirely different than asking for something to help pick up movement on a pitch. Currently, the pitchers grip the ball differently based on each pitch. They also hide the ball differently based on their motions. While their motions are 1:1 perfect representations of what the developers have created, the technology isn't there to modify these based on pitch types. And visually picking up on a pitch will differ based on the monitor and resolution you are using to play your game. I don't see what else is there to discuss on my end aside to simply offer to you that it seems like many disagree with you while others just want the flashing colored baseballs as a "solution" to a problem a good amount of people don't see. Personally, it doesn't make sense to argue such a thing and again just comes off to me as an argument simply to argue. To each their own.

And I respect this opinion - you said you don't prefer 'Hitters Eye' and you stated why. I'm not going to act like a car salesman and try to sell you on a product you dont want. But just about everyone stated they liked some of my ideas, but instead of discussing the pro's and cons of each (and how they might or might not work in the game) I felt that a few unconstructive responses were slung my way. And you expect me to NOT respond when someone throws the popcorn guy at me? Nah man, I'm putting up my dukes every time.

And the "Hitters Eye" was just an example, I think there are things you can do that are similiar without it being a total ripoff. If you contact the devs and they say they're open to these sort of suggestions I'll go to work and think up some ideas. Otherwise, I have nothing more to say.

# 174 countryboy @ 09/29/10 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cardsleadtheway


	Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the MVP series predate the MLB series? I would say that MLB completely ripped off the meter pitching concept only to take it to the next level. Not that it is a bad thing because the meter pitching is in my opinion the best thing out there. I wish The Show would take the same approach with fielding. They have upgraded every aspect of previous good baseball games save for fielding, which they took a step backwards.

I believe the Show evolved from the old Pennant Race game. I believe, that like EA/MVP, SCEA decided upon a name change with a new direction for their baseball franchise.

As for who predates whom, I believe the two franchises EA/SCEA are pretty much similar.

# 175 Heroesandvillains @ 09/29/10 08:27 PM

A new feature in the hitting mechanic is not a necessity for me. I'd be welcome to some more seperation between great/good/bad CPU pitchers, but I'm not boycotting next year's title if they don't give us a new feature (flashing colors, etc). A new option actually scares me. The development process for a "new toy" generally takes a few years to perfect. Here's my case for adjustments vs. makeover.

This game has slightly too much up-side for a high power rating/downside for a contact guy with no power. A tweak in the power rating's importance could fix this.

The PCI is slightly too forgiving. Again, a tweak. No overhaul is needed.

Aces (CPU) are a little too easy to rattle (this kind of goes hand in hand with the PCI forgiveness). That said, run of the mill guys as well as "good" pitchers perform very realistically. No revamp is necessary.

User pitching is nearly perfect right now. As well CPU hitting (obviously, because these go hand in hand). My user walks allowed, strikeouts, hits per game, home runs allowed are all nearly spot on.

Fielding, on the other hand, really needs some work. A new feature here I would welcome, as long as auto field stays (just incase the new feature needs work).

Other than outfield errors and the stolen base/pickoff programming, I think I just about covered it (for in game play). This is game is beautiful! Am I the only one? We've got two choices:

1. Tear down, and rebuild.

2. Add to the foundation of this year's model

I'll take the latter. Why mess too much with a good thing?

# 176 dp68 @ 09/30/10 03:21 AM

1. Create A Team (and be able to use it in Franchise Mode)

2. Create A Stadium

That's what I want!

# 177 JaSnake16 @ 09/30/10 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heroesandvillians


	This game has slightly too much up-side for a high power rating/downside for a contact guy with no power. A tweak in the power rating's importance could fix this.

You make some great points in your entire post. My only slight caveat would be that the power ratings for out of the box stock players should be slightly tweaked where a 99 overall power hitter may hit say on average 52 homers over a 10 season (not career but the same season over and over) sim. This would put power where it rightfully is currently in baseball. Right now these hitters over a sim average closer to 65 which may have worked 10 years ago but not now. Im sure the "curve" on the power ratings wouldnt be too much to adjust. This would work as well for "weaker" hitters where they could still be able to hit the most obvious mistake for a HR every now and then during a played game. Hope you get my point

# 178 swaldo @ 09/30/10 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heroesandvillians


	A new feature in the hitting mechanic is not a necessity for me. I'd be welcome to some more seperation between great/good/bad CPU pitchers, but I'm not boycotting next year's title if they don't give us a new feature (flashing colors, etc). A new option actually scares me. The development process for a "new toy" generally takes a few years to perfect. Here's my case for adjustments vs. makeover. This game has slightly too much up-side for a high power rating/downside for a contact guy with no power. A tweak in the power rating's importance could fix this. The PCI is slightly too forgiving. Again, a tweak. No overhaul is needed. Aces (CPU) are a little too easy to rattle (this kind of goes hand in hand with the PCI forgiveness). That said, run of the mill guys as well as "good" pitchers perform very realistically. No revamp is necessary. User pitching is nearly perfect right now. As well CPU hitting (obviously, because these go hand in hand). My user walks allowed, strikeouts, hits per game, home runs allowed are all nearly spot on. Fielding, on the other hand, really needs some work. A new feature here I would welcome, as long as auto field stays (just incase the new feature needs work). Other than outfield errors and the stolen base/pickoff programming, I think I just about covered it (for in game play). This is game is beautiful! Am I the only one? We've got two choices: 1. Tear down, and rebuild. 2. Add to the foundation of this year's model I'll take the latter. Why mess too much with a good thing?

I wonder if SCEA gets user data sent to them - similiar to EA who gets millions of reports so they can send out tune files to tweak problem areas? Seems like that would go a long way in improving the current system.

# 179 dave724 @ 10/17/10 04:47 PM

Well, I have been mentioning the playoff setup feature for use online/offline for more than 3 years. Glad someone found it on the forum. Here is a link to just one made earlier this year.

http://www.operationsports.com/vBulletin/scea-sports-mlb-online/401231-online-features-expansion-inclusion.html

# 180 morieeel @ 11/04/10 09:59 AM

Im one of those in betweeners. I cant sit thru a MOM mode, but I dont like too much user influence in the game. I like the balance the SCEA team has provided. One thing I enjoy is that I dont need to be playing everyday to keep my skill levels equal or greater than I was previously. On the flip side, I feel like if I do play everyday, Im not increasing my teams success too much. Granted I improve a little with awareness and timing, but Im still married to my player ratings/confidence/hot-cold streaks. I cant say that with other sport titles. I wouldnt revamp what isnt broke.

« Previous 1 2…6 7 8910 11 12 13 14 Next »

More Links