MLB 09: The Show Patch Released 4/27/09 - Impressions and Discussion Here

[brunnoce]

Quote: Originally Posted by masterkembo

I give up - I've literally done nothing at work today because I'm sitting on the forum. Sounds like some people are getting the updated schedule into their saved frachise and these are the people with freezes. I have no idea why though. At this point, I'm just waiting for word from Russell, hopefully they can shed some light on these problems.

this is what i think too man, my A's schedule look the same as before pacth too me..wich is wrong... yet the franchise is working perfect...

this is just crazy.

[sdf4977]

Also it show the dodgers with a 15-9 record and at that point they have played 25 games even with the one that has not been played Same with the Padres 12-12 with 25 games played so it is saying that game has not been played yet it has already past

[viper8]

Quote: Originally Posted by Russell_SCEA

We know about the roster control issue its the RTTS, and Franchise crashes along with the replay issues I'm looking to get more info on.

Hello Russell,

I have a RTTS going as a pitcher. I'm in season 3 (2011) in the month of July and was called up to the MLB 4 games ago.

I applied the patch (1.06) last night, played 2 games. After the second game, I applied some training points, then went to the schedule, hit "Sim to next appearance" and that's when the game crashed and took me back to the XMB. I restarted the game, loaded up my RTTS and took the same steps and it crashed again. Basically, if I'm at the schedule screen and I move the d-pad left or right to change the date, it crashes every single time.

So, that's what I'm experiencing! Hopefully there is a workaround.

Thanks

Oh, and FYI...the version I had prior to the upgrade was 1.01 and I had no issues with that version.

[dave_sz]

Quote: Originally Posted by masterkembo

Let me make sure that I understand what you're saying - 100's of people have franchise and rtts crash issues the day after the patch is released, and it's NOT the patch?? hrm. I think it's only happening to west coast teams (that have had their schedules changed) but I have been unable to confirm that.

the cubs didn't have their schedule fixed? Where are all these people, the 100's and 100's you're talking about? There might be 10 of them that I can see but guess what, just as many if not more were having rtts glitches and crashes beforehand. Hell, even I had a random XMB reboot once in a while...

[coreyhartsdaughter]

Quote: Originally Posted by sbauer318

First of all, very few position players play 162 games a year. They'll get a rare day off once in a while. I also think you have to compare the two. In 2005, Ortiz played in 159 games. If he had to play in the field every day, do you think he would have played in 159 games? I don't think so. Also, DHs also sit out to keep another position player in the game. Matt Wieters, for example, has a solid bat, and when he gets called up, he will slide into the DH slot just to give his knees a break. There's no way that a DH gets as, or even more, tired than a regular position player, when the position player is out on the field every inning. The DH swings the bat, runs the bases, and sits down. A position player does all of that and more.

Not that I really want to add input on a laughable topic such as this, but:

Who would loose expend more energy in a game, a young outfielder who doesn't make a play all game and also doesn't reach base, or a 35 year old DH who goes 2 for 4, and scores twice?

The point, and argument are moot, and completely irrelevant when taken out of context from the "fatigue" system of the game. If a player playing DH looses slightly more energy than he "should" (if this were real life - which some of you need reminding is NOT) and plays 10 or 12 less games over a season, and THIS makes you loose sleep and endlessly hammer a keyboard on the internet - self evaluation time.

[kt-od]

Quote: Originally Posted by cardsfan2222

How far into were you? The Astros should have played the Dodgers April 21-23, if it happened after that it could still be because of the Dodgers schedule fix.

I was still in April. I had just finished my home series with the Dodgers and was on the 2nd game with the Brew Crew.

[JibbyTucson]

Quote: Originally Posted by sdf4977

Also it show the dodgers with a 15-9 record and at that point they have played 25 games even with the one that has not been played Same with the Padres 12-12 with 25 games played so it is saying that game has not been played yet it has already past

Is there any way you can go back to the opening series to see if you can sim that unplayed game?
Jibby

[SoxFan01605]

Quote: Originally Posted by coreyhartsdaughter

Not that I really want to add input on a laughable topic such as this, but: Who would loose expend more energy in a game, a young outfielder who doesn't make a play all game and also doesn't reach base, or a 35 year old DH who goes 2 for 4, and scores twice? The point, and argument are moot, and completely irrelevant when taken out of context from the "fatigue" system of the game. If a player playing DH looses slightly more energy than he "should" (if this were real life - which some of you need reminding is NOT) and plays 10 or 12 less games over a season, and THIS makes you loose sleep and endlessly hammer a keyboard on the internet - self evaluation time.

lol...a comment about context while ignoring that posts like this move the argument WAY out of context. The issue some people have isn't that they fatigue "slightly less" than they do in real life.

Fatigue/Stamina has been somewhat of an issue in this game for awhile now. It just appears whatever tweaks they made for 09 has the DH going at a faster rate than position players in general...regardless of age. How can you jump on people for using real-world comparisons by making your own real-world comparison? Or am I misunderstanding intent?

There seems to be an issue there for several people and they are discussing it in the most logical place...the patch thread. Most have done so in an honest, mature fashion. The irony here is that it's the ones trying to defend the position are spitting out much more emotional responses than those looking for it to be addressed...which, in turn, causes emotion from the other side as well.