MLB 10 News Post

MLB '10: The Show - Player Potential Fix Coming in Next Roster Update

02:04 PM - March 2, 2010 by Russell_SCEA

If you think someone in the game has a less than desirable player potential post their name and current potential in the game here, thanks.

P.S. Just post their name, potential, and what you think it should be. That is all, please don't clutter the thread.

*Update: It's a bug and it will be fixed in the next roster update.

MLB '10: The Show screenshot gallery - Click to view

Game: MLB '10: The ShowReader Score: 9/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3Votes for game: 66 - View All

MLB '10: The Show Videos

Member Comments

# 141 stormshadow1 @ 03/04/10 10:08 AM

I want to know if patching the "potential" issue in the roster will fix the CPU trading whilst set on manual.

It will prob fix the crazy trades but will it fix the CPU overiding your settings?

Again, this is a HUGE issue and will be a game breaker for me. I do not like to see "IF" there is a 2nd patch, in regards to this problem.

I understand the whole C.Y.A. aspect of the "IF" word, but sorry $60.00 for an "IF" in regard to the CPU screwing up your game does not cut it.

# 142 Knight165 @ 03/04/10 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stormshadow1


	I want to know if patching the "potential" issue in the roster will fix the CPU trading whilst set on manual. It will prob fix the crazy trades but will it fix the CPU overiding your settings? Again, this is a HUGE issue and will be a game breaker for me. I do not like to see "IF" there is a 2nd patch, in regards to this problem. I understand the whole C.Y.A. aspect of the "IF" word, but sorry $60.00 for an "IF" in regard to the CPU screwing up your game does not cut it.

How many other games you paid $60 for even gave you?
1. The opportunity to say.."it doesn't cut it"
2. A response 1 day after release

In regards to the game over riding....what's happening?
Is it when you hit auto to fix something...and the CPU making trades for you.
If so...I think it's been said that they found that bug

M.K.
Knight165

# 143 fenwaymike @ 03/04/10 10:59 AM

Knight,

More importantly...how are those Rosters coming along? lol

On a serious note Knight...are your classic rosters that you made this past year still available and will they work for The Show 10? If so where can I find them in the vault? Enough questions for you? lol Thanks again Knight for all you do

# 144 stormshadow1 @ 03/04/10 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knight165


	How many other games you paid $60 for even gave you? 1. The opportunity to say.."it doesn't cut it" 2. A response 1 day after release In regards to the game over riding....what's happening? Is it when you hit auto to fix something...and the CPU making trades for you. If so...I think it's been said that they found that bug M.K. Knight165

I know it was stated that it was found. I just expected more than an "If there is another patch" after the one just released (that was worked on pre-release).

I guess I am a little disappointed in myself that I bought the game on release day. I should have waited, lesson learned.

# 145 Knight165 @ 03/04/10 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fenwaymike


	Knight, More importantly...how are those Rosters coming along? lol On a serious note Knight...are your classic rosters that you made this past year still available and will they work for The Show 10? If so where can I find them in the vault? Enough questions for you? lol Thanks again Knight for all you do

No..they won't work in '10
There will be a couple of Classic rosters this year.

M.K.
Knight165

# 146 EWRMETS @ 03/04/10 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dmrepsuga5


	Wright and Reyes should both be B's. We've probably seen them have their best years, but they shouldn't degrade at an F clip. An A grade would be too much IMO. Just my 2 cents!!! Go Mets

I agree that Perez, Pellfrey and a lot of the other suggestions are overrating the Mets and I may be OK with B's for Reyes and Wright, but why are you suggesting that a 27 year old (Wright) and 26 year old (Reyes) have already peaked as players?

# 147 Dmrepsuga5 @ 03/04/10 11:32 AM

By saying they've had their best years, I mean they can still consistently have those types of good, big years, but I think they have peaked. That's not a bad thing.

Wright is a .300 hitter able to hit 30 HR, and drive in 100 RBI (see '05-'08). this makes him a GREAT player. but that's his peak (which isn't a bad peak to have). I don't think he'll be a .330 hitter who hits 45+ HR and drives in 150. So, I don't think an A potential is needed, because how much better can he get? I just don't want him to drastically decline with an F rating.

Same with Reyes. I believe his '06 will be his career year. He hit .300, 19 HR, 81 RBI, and stole 64 bags. I think he has the ability to consistently do that (maybe a little less), just not exactly MORE than that. He's a GREAT players if he can do that. Hence a B grade for "future" potential.

# 148 fenwaymike @ 03/04/10 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knight165


	No..they won't work in '10 There will be a couple of Classic rosters this year. M.K. Knight165

You are a good man my friend

# 149 shoe @ 03/04/10 11:55 AM

Casey McGehee (Milwaukee) should not be an F.

He hit .301 last year with 16 home runs and was in contention for Rookie of the Year.

# 150 mikemulloy @ 03/04/10 12:59 PM

It seems like people are posting that all the players that are already currently stars should have A potential ratings. Is Dustin Pedroia still going to develop so much that he deserves an A rating? (I'm a Red Sox fan, I'm picking one of my own to show I'm not biased) Isn't potential grading the ability to improve their current skills?

Chances are, a guy like Albert Pujols has maxed out his potential at his age. Will he improve? Maybe. Could he decline? Maybe. Guys like that should have C potential, because there isn't that much room to grow.

Am I misunderstanding? Is saying a player has B potential just mean that the max he could reach as a player is having his rating bar filled 80-89%?

# 151 Microsoft_Works @ 03/04/10 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikemulloy


	It seems like people are posting that all the players that are already currently stars should have A potential ratings. Is Dustin Pedroia still going to develop so much that he deserves an A rating? (I'm a Red Sox fan, I'm picking one of my own to show I'm not biased) Isn't potential grading the ability to improve their current skills? Chances are, a guy like Albert Pujols has maxed out his potential at his age. Will he improve? Maybe. Could he decline? Maybe. Guys like that should have C potential, because there isn't that much room to grow. Am I misunderstanding? Is saying a player has B potential just mean that the max he could reach as a player is having his rating bar filled 80-89%?

Logically one would think that potential ratings in any game would be to show a players ceiling. However in this game, for some reason, they made it so potential affects the players staying power at the rating they start out with.

Hope that helps.

# 152 ocho cuatro @ 03/04/10 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Microsoft_Works


	Logically one would think that potential ratings in any game would be to show a players ceiling. However in this game, for some reason, they made it so potential affects the players staying power at the rating they start out with. Hope that helps.

Plus, it really affects how teams value their players. That's why when you sim/play through a season with the default rosters, the Twins are desperate to trade/release Joe Mauer, and the Red Sox place Jon Lester on the trading block immediately.

# 153 Flaxseed Oil @ 03/04/10 07:10 PM

Mark Melancon is one of the Yankees best prospects. His potential on TS10 is all D's. I'd say he is a least a B prospect and his velocity is 94-95.

# 154 cibo2 @ 03/04/10 07:56 PM

Alfredo Aceves D, B
Chad Gaudin D, C
Mark Melancon D, B
Francisco Cervelli D, B
Ramiro Pena D, B
Brett Gardner C, B
Randy Winn B, C
Greg Golson D, C
Jamie Hoffman D, B
Shelley Duncan D, C
Juan Miranda D, C
Nick Swisher C, B
Ian Kennedy D, B
Robinson Cano D, A
Kei Igawa D, C

# 155 econoodle @ 03/04/10 08:48 PM

oh lordie, this whole thread no one has recommended that any of their teams players potential go DOWN.
homerism is in da houuuuuse

# 156 Knight165 @ 03/04/10 09:19 PM

For me...
David Wright is an F should be a B
Jose Reyes is an F...should be a B or an A

The main thing I hope for is this.
Fake players...about 30 A potential players...any more and that would be too many IMO.
Tough to say on the B guys...maybe 100-150?
Plenty of C's...and some D's and F's

M.K.
Knight165

# 157 faster @ 03/04/10 09:49 PM

David Wright should be a B? Don't you think he's as good as he's going to get? If he's at his highest point, he should be an F then, meaning he has no potential to develop further. That's the way I always read potential.

# 158 Microsoft_Works @ 03/04/10 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by faster


	David Wright should be a B? Don't you think he's as good as he's going to get? If he's at his highest point, he should be an F then, meaning he has no potential to develop further. That's the way I always read potential.

That is not the way SCEA reads potential however.

# 159 BatsareBugs @ 03/04/10 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by econoodle


	oh lordie, this whole thread no one has recommended that any of their teams players potential go DOWN. homerism is in da houuuuuse

Yeah, my post is being drowned out by a ton.

# 160 bxgoods @ 03/04/10 10:20 PM

potential rating also affects trade value, a player with a F potential rating have very low trade value. I can't trade Jose Reyes for a bag of peanuts because his potential is so low.

« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 789 10 11 12 Next »

More Links

MLB '10: The Show - Player Potential Fix Coming in Next Roster Update