MLB 13 The Show - The Player Ratings Algorithm Has Changed, 17 Players Rated 99

[nomo17k]

Quote: Originally Posted by pistolpete

It's kind of like a class in college. How are we to differentiate from a student who really excels to a student who is pretty good if any reasonable effort results in an A. Is Stephen Strasburg as good Justin Verlander? No. What probably happened is they ran their algorithm and these guys didn't come in as 99s, but guys like Verlander and Braun probably came in as 110s, but since the ratings go only up to 99 they are lumped in with Strasburg and Carlos Gonzalez. I have always felt statistically the Show has had an amazing stat engine, and I am 100% certain they didn't screw it up. It just feels like Paula Abdul on American Idol loving everyone. *What would be cool is if they didn't cap OVR and if someone's skill set is so complete that they come in at a 120 then they come in at 120.

You can think of this way......

Individual player attribute ratings (Contact, Vision, etc.) are true reflection of the player ability in the game.

OVR, on the other hand, is on a curve.... and SCEA *happens* to create a curve such that about 15 - 20 players are rated at very excellent (OVR 99). It makes sense more, if we think that the SCEA curve was meant to very roughly produce one OVR 99 player on a team. OVR, by definition here, only means that an OVR 99 player is probably the best player in a team. Hence you can expect about 30 players to have OVR 99 on that curve.

If SCEA instead created a curve for OVR to mean the best player on the whole baseball universe (think Babe Ruth) to be deserving of OVR 99, then that will be what that means.

It really means only that much.... like school grades, they only make sense relative to others, and what the curve means.

[nomo17k]

Quote: Originally Posted by seanjeezy

I wish the scale was more (for the lack of a better term) consistent across attributes. If you look at Knight's charts, 70 contact projects out to ~.270, which would be a 5 on the 2-8 scale, aka ML average. Look at power though, 70 power projects out to ~30 HR's, which would be a 7, or plus-plus. Ideally I would like to move over to the 2-8 scale, unless the letter grades covered a wider range, maybe something like this: A: 85-99 B: 70-84 C: 55-69 D: 40-54 That way, "average" would truly mean average, and hopefully the disparity between the best and the rest would increase... I hate that everything is bunched up at the top like a school grading system, not good for a sport with such a wide range of variability...

College grades have been inflated to cater to the students who insist on maintaining a decent GPAs solely for the purpose of moving on to the next phase of their lives (getting jobs, going to med schools, etc.). Higher education has become business....

Perhaps there are so many OVR 99 players in The Show to cater to the fragile egos of MLB players of recent years..... who knows MLBPA might be insisting that about 50% of all players to be rated at 99 OVR for MLB 14... and the SCEA shills in the forum defending the game saying SCEA cannot do anything about it because it's a contractual thing..... hahahaha.......

(that might actually propel the devs team to abandon number rating system ... okay I stop again....)

[nomo17k]

Quote: Originally Posted by tvman

If scea has some players rated higher than 99 doesn't that make roster editing pointless when we can only go to 99?

I believe those with a rating higher than 99 are ceiled at having a 99 rating for that attribute. From what Ramone said earlier it probably is the same for OVR.

[MetsFan16]

How about instead of complaining about how so many guys are 99's, when you get the game, the first thing you do is change the attributes...

[pistolpete]

Quote: Originally Posted by tvman

If scea has some players rated higher than 99 doesn't that make roster editing pointless when we can only go to 99?

Obviously they would have to allow for higher editing. Come on man.

Imagine someone runs a 4.20 40-yard dash and is therefore a 99 speed. What if in ten years guys are running 4.10 40s? Why not keep the same scale and they can now be 105 speeds.

The smartest people in comp science program these games, handling something like this they could do on a sheet of toilet paper.

[nomo17k]

I'm actually curious who the hell came up with this 0 - 99 rating system that appears so prevalent among sports games in the past 10 - 20 years or so. The first game that I've played which uses this system was Front Page Sports Baseball.

Another old school manage-only type baseball game that I really enjoyed when I was a kid used letter grades (A, B, C, D, E ... that's it!) and it played very nice simulation baseball (for that generation).

In terms of programming, there really is no reason to keep numbers between 0 and 99 (although there is a reason that you might want to keep within 0 - 255... one byte to optimize memory usage).

I want to read a book titled "The History of Baseball Video Gaming" or something like that hahahaha.

[sink4ever]

Quote: Originally Posted by MrOldboy

I think part of it is that people feel a player does not deserve a 99 or another player deserves it because that 99 will reflect in the simmed stats. They see Strasburg at 99 and expect him to have 99 type stats, like a pitcher like Verlander who is also 99. It brings about comparisons when players max out at 99 like this I can understand why people would feel that way. Is it not understandable that a person would be upset about Chapman and Strasburg being 99 and potentially having 99 type stats when they do not believe they will have those type of stats this season? Its a thread on a forum dedicated to a sports game, this is what people want to argue about so what's the harm in letting them do so?

Remember, my statement was if the stats work out correctly, is there any reason to be upset that Player Q has X OVR rating? I'm not saying people can't complain (although I know I'm personally sick of the incessant whining), I was just asking why get your panties in a bunch before knowing how these ratings translate to stats/gameplay.

[pistolpete]

Quote: Originally Posted by nomo17k

In terms of programming, there really is no reason to keep numbers between 0 and 99 (although there is a reason that you might want to keep within 0 - 255... one byte to optimize memory usage).

No, it's all for the sake of communicating their skill. Just the idea of it makes sense. Percentages are done out of 100, so it's easy for people to understand.