MLB The Show 17 Patch 1.03 Available Now, Here Are The Details

[underdog13]

First to get it out of the way, the post I liked in no way bashed non programmers. I definitely feel it to be true though. Many people on here expect things that are way harder than they appear. Something like rotating interleague schedules comes to mind. Creating an algorithm for that would be a huge pain.

I agree they should focus on more franchise modes and more off field things. Personally things like numbers being too low, I've never noticed besides pictures on OS. On the other hand something like mid season contract extensions doesn't matter to me either.

Things that matter to me like profile association in rtts and not hiding stats in rtts, don't get much attention from others because it doesn't effect or matter to them. Just like uniforms and mid season mode extensions don't matter to me.

In the end, everyone should respect each other's opinions. Even if we don't care about what they care about. I know I've never opened the uniform thread because it's not something that interests me.

Quote: Originally Posted by BillPeener

You did a good job explaining why contract extension logic can be so complicated. But even then, we're talking about a game designed to emulate reality. Is it more realistic to not be able to offer a mid-season contract to a player with authentic socks, or is it more realistic to be able to offer a mid-season contract to a player with generic socks? Again, it's not just a matter of socks - there's so many more visual aspects the devs would have to get right to make the game look realistic. But here's the other thing - I don't know about you, but the game itself doesn't really look all that real. It's called the Uncanny Valley effect, and boy does it affect this year's game. Players are becoming so realistic that I'm starting to see how unrealistic they actually are. After playing '16, seeing '17's pitcher deliveries and batter swings made me cringe. The swinging motions, the way the bat hits the ball, and those darn pitchers... It looked really bad until I got used to it. But here's the thing, I don't care about that I don't expect the developers to make the game look as realistic as real life. That's unbelievably hard to do and will never be perfect. In fact, I bet you the Uncanny Valley problem only gets worse as game becomes more realistic. You liked that one guys post bashing people who aren't programmers and thus can't comprehend the magnitude of the problem, but visual realism is a MAJOR programming dilemma that hasn't even come close to satisfying the naked eye. My argument is that they should put less programming effort into socks and more programming effort into actual MLB mechanics. This is not just a baseball game - it's an MLB game, and thus ought to have MLB likeness. For me, contract extensions go far more towards depicting reality than batting gloves on a player who swings so unrealistically. Also, as long as contracts affect player morale and thus player ratings in Franchise mode, then you simply can't justify saying extensions are merely a feature and not a gameplay issue. If the developers added the option to disable player morale, then yes, contracts would no longer affect gameplay. Finally, despite the complications with contract extensions, OOTP has had them for years. No other game has ever had truly realistic socks. So, one could argue that extensions are by default easier to program, seeing as they already have been. (and to critical acclaim)

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[BillPeener]

Quote: Originally Posted by Mav3rek7

As a programmer, I can tell you that changing a visual aspect should be a super simple and quick/easy fix. Changing the way something behaves programmatically is a much more time consuming/deeper issue. I understand people upset that uni-fixes are done before gameplay fixes. But the simple fact of the matter is, that a gameplay fix that would alter the way the game behaves would take a little time to re-program, debug, test, tidy up the programming, and then test again, and then post. It's not just as simple as typing "make (x) do (y) when (z) happens". When you are trying to correct a programming/logic/behavior issue you end up throwing a lot of programming bandaids/bad code at it. Once you have the issue fixed, you have to go back and tidy up the programming. It's a time consuming/involved process. Trust the process.

First you say you're a programmer, then you say visual graphics are "super simple and quick/easy" to fix. If it's so easy, then why didn't games 10-15 years ago have official socks, yet they had contract extensions (or other related logic)?

As a programmer, if Sony came to me right now and said, "you can either program the socks, or you can program the contract extensions", I'm taking the latter every single day. I don't know how SCEA's visual graphics system works. Maybe they've made it relatively simple to add new gloves, shoes, socks, and so on.

Even then, they still have to update that every year as the engine changes. I don't know how you can make the argument that contract logic is significantly more complicated / time-consuming than handling graphic upgrades every single year. Because remember, contract logic doesn't necessarily have to change much, if at all, each year. Once it's done, it's kinda just done.

I'm willing to leave open the possibility that the visuals are actually easier / quicker to implement than particular gameplay mechanisms, but I have a lot of doubt.

[baconbits11]

Quote: Originally Posted by jeffy777

It honestly doesn't matter if The Show has single player modes for that matter. They market it as a multiplayer game and it should deliver on that because there are plenty of people who only buy The Show to play exclusively online. It should be held to the same standard as any other game that has multiplayer. That's the only reason I mentioned other multiplayer games and the fact that there would be a virtual **** storm if their servers were in this state for 2 weeks following release.

I would guess this has more to do with the online code of the game than the servers. I would think this game has a lot of legacy code considering online has been a problem with the Show for a good 5 years.

[Mav3rek7]

Quote: Originally Posted by BillPeener

First you say you're a programmer, then you say visual graphics are "super simple and quick/easy" to fix. If it's so easy, then why didn't games 10-15 years ago have official socks, yet they had contract extensions (or other related logic)? As a programmer, if Sony came to me right now and said, "you can either program the socks, or you can program the contract extensions", I'm taking the latter every single day. I don't know how SCEA's visual graphics system works. Maybe they've made it relatively simple to add new gloves, shoes, socks, and so on. Even then, they still have to update that every year as the engine changes. I don't know how you can make the argument that contract logic is significantly more complicated / time-consuming than handling graphic upgrades every single year. Because remember, contract logic doesn't necessarily have to change much, if at all, each year. Once it's done, it's kinda just done. I'm willing to leave open the possibility that the visuals are actually easier / quicker to implement than particular gameplay mechanisms, but I have a lot of doubt.

I say I'm a programmer because I am a programmer...

The point I was making is that visual issues are usually just a simple matter of updating the overlay for that particular part. The basic programming structure of the jersey is there, the colors are just simply overlays for those pieces. The issue of an incorrect uniform part could be as simple as changing one line of code. Instead of leftUniSleeve = "12345" it needed to be leftUniSleeve = "12346". Those types of programming issues are quick/easy related to visual aspects.

Official uniform sock choices weren't in the game 10-15 years ago because of memory space. It's 2017, we have more space on things than ever before and can add in the little things that had to be omitted previously.

As for contract extensions, I'm going to make some assumptions here...

1) I'd say each year with each new iteration of MLB the Show they probably start with a bare bones template (for lack of a better term) and build from the ground up. If they were simply reusing all the code from last year and just updating rosters, then we'd get a new game every month, or not at all.

2) There is turnover in any company. Maybe the same guys who worked on it last year aren't 100% the same guys who worked on it this year. Maybe they switched roles, who knows.

3) Sometimes in code you don't really know how adding in one thing may affect another. Or it changes it in a way you didn't expect. You can plan/code/test till you're blue in the face, but something seemingly trivial can greatly change something else and you may have never seen it coming. It happens.

4) Contract logic is infinitely more complicated than visual aspects. Logic in general is infinitely more complicated. The graphics are nothing but skins on top of 1's and 0's. The actual 1's and 0's themselves are the hard part. Putting a pretty bow on something in the programming world is a trivial task.

I understand your frustration. I get it. You paid 60 bucks for something and it's not working the way you want and you can't really do much about it. I get that. But I also think you may not quite realize how much more difficult something is than what you think.

[mike24forever]

^ This is how you respond. Well done and I like your explanation.

[OtherMoon2]

Quote: Originally Posted by Armor and Sword

Game has been out 2 weeks. 2 weeks. A much larger and far reaching patch is in the works. Patience. Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

But what standard are they being held to when they release a half baked product or a product with several bugs that affect the game across the board?

[WaitTilNextYear]

Quote: Originally Posted by Mav3rek7

I say I'm a programmer because I am a programmer... The point I was making is that visual issues are usually just a simple matter of updating the overlay for that particular part. The basic programming structure of the jersey is there, the colors are just simply overlays for those pieces. The issue of an incorrect uniform part could be as simple as changing one line of code. Instead of leftUniSleeve = "12345" it needed to be leftUniSleeve = "12346". Those types of programming issues are quick/easy related to visual aspects. Official uniform sock choices weren't in the game 10-15 years ago because of memory space. It's 2017, we have more space on things than ever before and can add in the little things that had to be omitted previously. As for contract extensions, I'm going to make some assumptions here... 1) I'd say each year with each new iteration of MLB the Show they probably start with a bare bones template (for lack of a better term) and build from the ground up. If they were simply reusing all the code from last year and just updating rosters, then we'd get a new game every month, or not at all. 2) There is turnover in any company. Maybe the same guys who worked on it last year aren't 100% the same guys who worked on it this year. Maybe they switched roles, who knows. 3) Sometimes in code you don't really know how adding in one thing may affect another. Or it changes it in a way you didn't expect. You can plan/code/test till you're blue in the face, but something seemingly trivial can greatly change something else and you may have never seen it coming. It happens. 4) Contract logic is infinitely more complicated than visual aspects. Logic in general is infinitely more complicated. The graphics are nothing but skins on top of 1's and 0's. The actual 1's and 0's themselves are the hard part. Putting a pretty bow on something in the programming world is a trivial task. I understand your frustration. I get it. You paid 60 bucks for something and it's not working the way you want and you can't really do much about it. I get that. But I also think you may not quite realize how much more difficult something is than what you think.

This post is written like someone who has teaching experience...This post belongs in the OS Hall of Fame for posts. One of the best posts I've seen on here in quite some time.

[HolyStroke3]

Quote: Originally Posted by kehlis

They should wear the green helmet with the yellow brim for all games but they wear an all green helmet for away games. This changed IRL 3 or 4 years ago I believe and the Show never changed it.

The Show did fix it last year (or maybe 15 I don't remember) but last year they wore the green helmet/gold bill for with all their uniforms. This year they have reverted back to all green helmet with the road grey and alternate green uniforms.

They haven't worn the all green helmet since ~2010 when they added a black helmet to match their black alternate and went with the green helmet/yellow bill for all their other uniforms. And it's even worse because the A's don't even wear the solid green hat with gold logo on the road anymore so now they have a helmet they don't use that matches a hat they no longer wear