Why are certain player retirements hardwired into the game?

[BoSoxPujols]

I have a 22 year old B potential pitcher. He's the 7th best pitcher in my entire organization yet he wants to retire due to a "poor free agent market". What? Even if I go in and bump him to 99's across the board(just to test it) he still retires.

Why would the game be designed so that no matter what certain guys retired regardless of potential/skill/etc?

[yanksrule4ever]

I don't know why he would retire in the first place, but if you are past the draft, that is why he always retires. After the draft, the game locks retirements.

[BatsareBugs]

Retirements are looked in on players after the draft is done. Before when the draft was placed in the offseason you could always reload it to change who retired, but since it was moved to June, that's when the game determines who the new players are going to replace.

It isn't perfect, but hey, it's not like it can't happen in real-life as well (just change the reason for retirement).

[mondoguitar]

Quote: Originally Posted by Rag3vsW0rld

Retirements are looked in on players after the draft is done. Before when the draft was placed in the offseason you could always reload it to change who retired, but since it was moved to June, that's when the game determines who the new players are going to replace. It isn't perfect, but hey, it's not like it can't happen in real-life as well (just change the reason for retirement).

Like Manny retiring instead of serving his 100 game suspension. LOL Who could've seen that coming. haha

[BoSoxPujols]

Quote: Originally Posted by yanksrule4ever

I don't know why he would retire in the first place, but if you are past the draft, that is why he always retires. After the draft, the game locks retirements.

Quote: Originally Posted by Rag3vsW0rld

Retirements are looked in on players after the draft is done. Before when the draft was placed in the offseason you could always reload it to change who retired, but since it was moved to June, that's when the game determines who the new players are going to replace. It isn't perfect, but hey, it's not like it can't happen in real-life as well (just change the reason for retirement).

The game "locking in" retirements is one of the dumbest things I've seen it do. Jim Thome retired due to "ability" when he hit .275 with 48HR's and 124RBI's.

The difference with the guy you posted is my guy was pitching at AA ball and was a September call up and started 3 games going 1-1 with an ERA around 3.15. He was going to be in the starting rotation next season. Him retiring due to "lack of a FA market" is absurd since he is a minor leaguer and is under team control. The FA market would have nothing to do with him. He was making 130k this past year.

The Show does a lot of things really well but like most sports games the franchise and dynasty logic on some of the most basic levels is just beyond awful.

The 22 year old B potential MLB pitcher retires....however Polin Trinidad, an F potential AAA pitcher who is also a FA doesn't?

Wut?

Quote: Originally Posted by mondoguitar

Like Manny retiring instead of serving his 100 game suspension. LOL Who could've seen that coming. haha

Well Manny was washed up and done. So it really wasn't that surprising.

[Knight165]

He was definitely at least a "B".
Deal with it....

....http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4849432


M.K.
Knight165

[thaSLAB]

Quote: Originally Posted by Knight165

He was definitely at least a "B". Deal with it.... ....http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4849432 M.K. Knight165

This is the first thing I thought of when I saw this thread, lol. Couldn't remember the name tho.


Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

[BoSoxPujols]

Quote: Originally Posted by Knight165

He was definitely at least a "B". Deal with it.... ....http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4849432 M.K. Knight165

1. Desme never saw the majors. In fact he never played above High-A ball. My player was actually in the big leagues.

2. The "logic" was a "poor free agent market". As I've already covered this player should have been under team control for years. Free agency wouldn't have been an issue.

"Deal with it" isn't a solution to the underlying issue of SCEA not having the player under team control issue correct and their retirement logic being absurd.(ie basing it off the draft results...what sense does that make?) Also, it's not even consistant across the board. I can sim to retirements from the end of the season and see Jeff Baker(torn achillies) and Adam Wainwright retire due to injury....yet sometimes they don't

The retirement logic of this game is a joke. "Deal with it" doesn't actually address the problem or even acknowledge there is one...when there is.