MLB The Show 16 Video - Franchise, Player Morale and Much More

[Spokker]

Quote: Originally Posted by TheWarmWind

Umm, Ramone, if you're reading this can I vote against this idea? Pausing the game to make a managerial decision is just fine, and if you map that stuff to the D-pad, I am going to hit it by accident and mess up my games ALL THE TIME. That may be an exaggeration but once would still be too many times. Quick shifts, timeouts, and utility pls, no insta subs.

One idea I had to reduce the amount of cut scenes skipped was to add quick subbing and bullpen menus in the corner of the cut scenes. You could bring them up with the d-pad during cutscenes. Obviously, nothing is changed unless you confirm and you can cancel the changes anytime.

And if you take too long it'll just pause so you don't miss an at-bat or whatever.

What do you think about that.

[bronxbombers21325]

Quote: Originally Posted by Spokker

Different people say different things. The people who wanted more depth and more features are probably not the same ones asking to turn this new feature off. As someone who asks for more off-the-field stuff in franchise, player morale is awesome to have. My guess is that if a player is unhappy in one or two things, it won't matter much. And at the end of the day, SCEA has tweaked the gameplay so that user input matters more. I don't like having control of everything in franchise. If a player does not gel with my team, I like that I'm encouraged to find someone who does. It helps with the role-playing aspect. For example, that compatriot thing. I don't know if that's realistic or not, but let's say the my head cannon is that my organization does not support international players well, which would mean that international players would be less likely to want to sign with my team. It makes sense to me. Maybe in the future they could start looking at metropolitan areas as your market, complete with fan demographics. If my franchise team is the Dodgers, you better have some star Hispanic players on your team or fan interest won't be as high. Okay, they probably won't go that far, but getting back to ticket revenues and combining it with fan interest would be interesting.

My big concern is that is that players are going to be impossible to keep happy. I also don't like it affecting player attributes. I guess we will know more after the franchise stream.

[countryboy]

March 29th cannot get here fast enough.

[tessl]

I'm curious about something I saw on the player morale screen. A couple players had team performance expectation of none and yet they had the red unhappy camper face because the team - if I'm deciphering it correctly - was in 4th place.

If he has no expectation why is he unhappy?

Not being negative, just an observation. It appears they did some serious tinkering with franchise mode.

Another observation...

https://youtu.be/ZNv37mE3ENE?t=1254

Some people who simmed in the Show 15 complained pitchers dominated in the future as too many pitchers progressed into aces. Looking at the player screen of the scouted pitching prospect he is an 80 - maximum - potential and most of his attributes are only projected to increase by 10 points. Perhaps they have corrected this?

[Spokker]

Quote: Originally Posted by bronxbombers21325

My big concern is that is that players are going to be impossible to keep happy. I also don't like it affecting player attributes. I guess we will know more after the franchise stream.

Baseball is a mental game. Think of a reason for why one of your players is unhappy and go with it. I think morale affecting performance is better than hot/cold streaks that are unexplained.

Players do have no-trade clauses. Papelbon has 17 teams he doesn't want to be traded to. Maybe if he were on one of those teams he'd be pissed and would play worse. I don't know.

[MrOldboy]

Quote: Originally Posted by WaitTilNextYear

The problem is when they add depth without fully fleshing it out/considering it fully, we get an inferior scouting system that is almost universally panned. Everyone complains about the draft-generated players looking odd, the generated players don't necessarily 'fit in' ratings-wise with the league and long-term shifts in league stats happen, and the system is too easy to game, your scouts don't really matter, there's no depth at all to the players, no signability/agent/injury considerations, and there are fatal flaws like being able to see 100% accurate ratings without scouting at all...etc etc.. I think everyone wants "more stuff to do" and "more stuff to consider" in franchise mode. But, we don't want new things for the sake of them being able to include just another "back of the box" line item. A player morale system, such as what's been in NBA2K for a while now, is a welcome change. But, the issue I have with such a morale system is that attributes/ratings should not be affected by happiness and comfort level. It is arcade-ish and unrealistic for a guy to go from a 30-HR to a 40-HR guy because he's playing home games within XX miles of home or for a pitcher to potentially add velocity because there's another Canadian on his team. There needs to be a consequence/effect for us to pay attention to morale, but the effect needs to be more subtle and plausibly realistic. These morale issues affecting signability (and even other things) is fine, but I don't think they should go there with ratings.

Agree on these things not affecting ratings. I would rather see a much more fleshed out progression system that takes into account playing time and performance more. I want to see a scenario like Steve Pearce play out to where a guy gets hot and stays hot and for that period his ratings are affected. Then next season comes and he's back at his true "skill" level ratings wise.

When I hear people talk about adding in more depth, micro-management if you want to call it, I think of things like this:

- Contract extensions
- Actual rating incentives (wide +/- in some cases if they are hot/cold for extended period) to use players that are hot and give a break to those who are cold. i.e. Steve Pearch situation or oppositely Starlin Castro. One player you'd want to get in the lineup more and the other deserves a break. But if you get into game and their ratings are basically the same as before why alter your lineup? I see the notifications/recommendations in franchise that a player is cold, but I just ignore them.
- More variation and depth in contract negotiations. No trade clauses, opt-outs, back-loading/front-loading, etc. I'd love to get stuck with a bad contract with a no trade clause since that was a decision I made to sign that player.
- Larger pool of minor league players (Single A) with many more busts and only a few booms in progression.
- Prospect progression tied to more than just their progression rating. For instance: How many at bats do I need to get him? Should I only platoon him vs LHP to so he can improve against LHP specifically?
- Evolving secondaries. If I start playing Javier Baez at CF at AAA will he progress enough to be competent enough to get an OF secondary? Can I develop the next Zobrist.

These are all things I think of when I see people wanting more depth in franchise/RTTS. Not making sure I have at least pairs of players from the same country to get a ratings bonus. Or making sure to overpay a player so that they are happy with their contract. Again, is Anthony Rizzo a worse player skill-wise because he's playing under a team-friendly contract? Are these really the type of decisions we want to be worrying about when playing the game?

[Cowboy008]

Can't wait to hear more about franchise. Only thing is I don't like that a players morale is going to affect his ratings. I like that they have added player morale in and will make signing players more realistic. Hopefully we get more answers during the franchise stream.

[eric7064]

Quote: Originally Posted by WaitTilNextYear

The problem is when they add depth without fully fleshing it out/considering it fully, we get an inferior scouting system that is almost universally panned. Everyone complains about the draft-generated players looking odd, the generated players don't necessarily 'fit in' ratings-wise with the league and long-term shifts in league stats happen, and the system is too easy to game, your scouts don't really matter, there's no depth at all to the players, no signability/agent/injury considerations, and there are fatal flaws like being able to see 100% accurate ratings without scouting at all...etc etc.. I think everyone wants "more stuff to do" and "more stuff to consider" in franchise mode. But, we don't want new things for the sake of them being able to include just another "back of the box" line item. A player morale system, such as what's been in NBA2K for a while now, is a welcome change. But, the issue I have with such a morale system is that attributes/ratings should not be affected by happiness and comfort level. It is arcade-ish and unrealistic for a guy to go from a 30-HR to a 40-HR guy because he's playing home games within XX miles of home or for a pitcher to potentially add velocity because there's another Canadian on his team. There needs to be a consequence/effect for us to pay attention to morale, but the effect needs to be more subtle and plausibly realistic. These morale issues affecting signability (and even other things) is fine, but I don't think they should go there with ratings.

I agree scouting needs massive improvement to how players look and there sizes no doubt. But Baseball is 100% a very mental gm. It certainly Makes sense that those things could effect there play. And again a 10 hr difference is drastic when your considering plsying close to home. But if you check off all the moral things it Makes more sense.