Four Keys to Success for MLB '11: The Show

[Heroesandvillains]

Swaldo, good post.

The color indicator is very intriguing. As well as ball size advice.

Your comparison of the "good/bad hitter vs. good/bad pitcher" scenario is great.

Question: How do you account for the average hitter vs. average hitter scenario? How do you ensure that the pitcher still has the advantage, which he should? How do you make for certain, and most importantly, that simply mastering the L-Stick won't make my team bat .290?

You're on the right path here Swaldo. I just don't want to be king because I put 50 hours in the cages.

[swaldo]

Quote: Originally Posted by heroesandvillians

Swaldo, good post. The color indicator is very intriguing. As well as ball size advice. Your comparison of the "good/bad hitter vs. good/bad pitcher" comparison is great. Question: How do you account for the average hitter vs. average hitter scenario? How do you ensure that the pitcher still has the advantage, which he should? How do you make for certain, and most importantly, that simply mastering the L-Stick won't make my team bat .290? You're on the right path here Swaldo. I just don't want to be king because I put 50 hours in the cages.

That's a good question, and in my post I mentioned it would take alot of tweaking/testing to get it just right. And that's exactly how you do it (by starting with average vs average.) To start this would entail adjusting the PCI size until it feels right, then work in the other factors you put in to make the ratings stand out during live play.

And yea, mastery can't happen. Just leave it the way it is until you can do it right. If SCEA puts me on their payroll and sends me a prototype I'll fire it up.

[ElectricWizard]

STANCES STANCES STANCES

[major major]

Would welcome scaling down the size of hitters PCI's, but would not welcome the ball size increasing or decreasing. If the Show were to implement an oscillating ball size, then please allow it to be turned off.

[Heroesandvillains]

Quote: Originally Posted by major major

Would welcome scaling down the size of hitters PCI's, but would not welcome the ball size increasing or decreasing. If the Show were to implement an oscillating ball size, then please allow it to be turned off.

I find the ball size thing to be intriguing, more than I find it to be ideal.

I guess to underlying point is to come up with some way to add a greater deal of deception/advantage to really good pitchers. The ball literally changing is one idea. I'd personally prefer just giving their pitches more movement and depth next year.

[major major]

Quote: Originally Posted by heroesandvillians

I find the ball size thing to be intriguing, more than I find it to be ideal. I guess to underlying point is to come up with some way to add a greater deal of deception/advantage to really good pitchers. The ball literally changing is one idea. I'd personally prefer just giving their pitches more movement and depth.

For sure.

Maybe something that allows the hitter to see the ball more clearly=Laces seen quicker or something. I can see them now, but the ball is always on top of the plate.

[countryboy]

Quote: Originally Posted by swaldo

I don't know why you say I'm "chasing" a randomness theory when there's obviously some sort of dice roll going on under the hood (based on various ratings of the players involved etc.) You even confirmed that in your posts and is similiar to text based games - the only difference being you do have some control over the outcome. Anyway, you can have more user control and still have ratings. It would go something like this. Batters Vision rating: You're going to need to bring in something similiar to MVP's "Hitters Eye" system which turns the baseball different colors in the pitcher's hand and leaves a trail as the ball flies through the air toward the plate to aid in hitting. Good hitters would be able to see the colors longer than poor hitters - and some hitters won't be able to see it at all. Batters Contact rating: This one is simple, you increase or decrease the size of the PCI to reflect their rating. For example pitchers (at bat) will have a tiny PCI while Ichiro types will have a large PCI. Batters Power rating: This will be smaller than the contact PCI and will effect distance and trajectory. Batter Discipline rating: This one is tough because the user is basically in contol of discipline. However, you could tie in check swings here. Good hitters would easily be able to check swing while poor hitters would rarely be able to pull it off. Check swings are best with fully loaded swing animations (ala MVP) that's why 2K initially didn't have CW's this year (because their swings are pre-loaded so it was tough to program in check swings.) So maybe you'd have fully loaded swing animations for good hitters who can easily check swing, and pre-loaded animations for poor hitters. Of course there are compications with this but I'm just throwing this out there as an idea. Pitcher ratings: tweaking the fastball is the key since over 90% have that listed as thier #1 pitch in the game. Talk to baseball players and they'll tell you ace pitcher's fastballs "Are hard to see" or "Have extra pop" or "Have excellent or sinking movement." In The Show all fastballs look and act the same. So they need to make it harder to hit highly rated fastballs, so maybe make it so you can't see the ball out of the hand, or add some movement, or a little extra zip, or make the ball smaller thus harder to hit. Now do the opposite with poorly rated pitches and if you apply this concept to all pitch types you'll have a real challenge at the plate. And good pitchers in general should be painting corners more often, while poor pitchers should be throwing more over the plate or lose control and issue walks. Meanwhile, stamina ratings could stay the same and you can throw out all those other ratings such as H/9, W/9, SO/9 etc. If you throw in true bat/ball physics what you'll have is a system where the user is in control of his own destiny. Players will still have ratings and will perform as they do in real life without all the dice rolls. Yes this would entail a ton of tweaking and adjusting but it can be done.

With all that you mentioned, ratings are going to play a part and therefore there will be, whats the term you use, "dice rolls".

You cannot separate good players from bad players by user input and changes to the aids. You can't. Ratings have to be used and therefore the game will always have a "randomness" to it. They have, I'm guessing, formulas in place for how each rating is used in any given situation. And thus far, thru countless games, I'd say that its working pretty well.

As for your suggestions, I like some of them, but again, they are nothing more than aids that express the player's rating visually. Ratings will always be, and have to be, a part of the game.

[cardsleadtheway]

I agree with you CB. I think the problem most people have is that it is too easy to see the wizard behind the curtain. I also agree with you that the the game plays out pretty well on the whole. There may be the occasional game where the control is taken completely out of the users hands. But for us franchise players, it is only one game in a very long season. I am sure there are times in real baseball where the game feels preordained and that control is taken completely out of the player's hands. You move on and play the next game.

To reiterate on the visual aids for the pitches, I really liked the way MVP 05 did it with the colors. I remember facing Curt Schilling (way back when he was good lol) and I would rarely see a brief flash, whereas a bad pitcher would show his hand sooner and longer. I don't know that the use of color is the best idea out there, but it seems to be the closest so far. Guess pitch falls far short.

Really though what I would prefer the developers to spend time on is the broken fielding system. The batting and pitching may not be perfect, but it certainly isn't that worst thing out there. It is hard to argue that it doesn't make for a pretty damn good game of baseball. Fielding on the other hand is borderline ridiculous. We keep making MVP 05 references here. And while that was a great game for its time, The Show has surpassed it on so many levels. Unfortunately, fielding is not one of those levels. I think people have so many issues with fielding not just because it is so bad, but because a game that is five years older (several lifetimes in software doggie years) was able to do it so much better. The Show would be nearly perfect if it could just get to that level, let alone surpass it like it has done with all the other aspects of the game.