MLB 11 The Show News Post

Four Keys to Success for MLB '11: The Show

08:14 PM - September 2, 2010 by RaychelSnr

Baseball's pennant push is in full swing, and several teams are feverishly trying to claw their way to a division title. For those of us whose teams have already been eliminated from postseason consideration (my beloved Tigers included), the only baseball we really have to look forward to right now is next season's entry of Sony's stellar MLB: The Show franchise. While this year's title was an excellent addition to the series, there are definitely some nagging issues holding the game back from the elusive "GOAT" status.

With plenty of time still left in this year's development cycle, I figured I would put together a couple critical aspects of the game that should be altered for the upcoming season.

Read More - Four Keys to Success for MLB '11: The Show

Game: MLB 11 The ShowReader Score: 8.5/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3Votes for game: 57 - View All

MLB 11 The Show Videos

Member Comments

# 121 swaldo @ 09/22/10 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pared


	Oh no, not a Wikipedia quote! Seriously though, compression of a video doesn't equate with how they are using. We are referring to calculations and such where the values may be used to recreate the scenario, not a literal video recording that is compressed. You can compress a video file, not the actual execution. What they could be doing is recording the ball trajectory somewhat near what happened in real-time to and dropping values in certain areas to save space used on the PS3. Just my speculation here. If 1+2+3=6, then maybe they are doing 2+4=6 and that's why you're seeing the same result, with an off-line replication of the ball trajectory. Just random thoughts being thrown out there.

I see, I thought replays were literal compressed recordings. I never would've thought they are reenactments. The vibe I was getting is that morphing doesn't exist because there are missing frames you can't see in replay, but nobody can really confirm or deny it unless they record live action replay.

# 122 swaldo @ 09/22/10 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cardsleadtheway


	I disagree with you that all fastballs are the same on this game. I have had pitchers throwing in the high 90's that I was able to get around on and crush, while some pitchers with high ratings can throw in the mid 80's and still get me to swing late on it.

Do you think that could be from their whole repertoire though? For example Jamie Moyer slowing your bat down because he's throwing changeups all day. Then, when he finally throws his 80MPH fastball it blows right by you.

One time I did some research on fastball break because I thought it was tied to how the ball moves. I didn't notice any difference in movement at all, and someone told me all the fastball break rating does is effect the CPU batters discipline or something like that.

# 123 Heroesandvillains @ 09/22/10 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swaldo


	I don't know why you say I'm "chasing" a randomness theory when there's obviously some sort of dice roll going on under the hood (based various ratings of the players involved etc.) You even confirmed that in your posts and is similiar to text based games - the only difference being you do have some control over the outcome. Anyway, you can have more user control and still have ratings. It would go something like this. Batters Vision rating: You're going to need to bring in something similiar to MVP's "Hitters Eye" system which turns the baseball different colors in the pitcher's hand and leaves a trail as the ball flies through the air toward the plate to aid in hitting. Good hitters can see the colors longer than poor hitters - and some hitters won't be able to see it at all. Batters Contact rating: This one is simple, you increase or decrease the size of the PCI to reflect their rating. For example pitchers (at bat) will have a tiny PCI while Ichiro types will have a large PCI. Batters Power rating: This will be smaller than the contact PCI and will effect distance and trajectory. Batter Discipline rating: This one is tough because the user is basically in contol of discipline. However, you could tie in check swings here. Good hitters would easily be able to check swing while poor hitters would rarely be able to pull it off. Check swings are best with fully loaded swing animations (ala MVP) that's why 2K initially didn't have CW's this year (because swings are pre-loaded so it was tough to program in check swings.) So maybe you'd have fully loaded swing animations for good hitters who can easily check swing, and pre-loaded animations for poor hitters. Of course there are compications with this but I'm just throwing this out there as an idea. Pitcher ratings: tweaking the fastball is the key since over 90% have that listed as thier #1 pitch in the game. Talk to baseball players and they'll tell you ace pitcher's fastballs "Are hard to see" or "Have extra pop" or "Have excellent or sinking movement." In The Show all fastballs look and act the same. They have to make it harder to hit highly rated fastballs, so maybe make it so you can't see the ball out of the hand, or add some movement, or a little extra zip, or make the ball smaller thus harder to hit. Now do the opposite with poorly rated pitches and if you apply this concept to all pitch types you'll have a real challenge at the plate. And good pitchers in general should be painting corners more often, while poor pitchers should be throwing more over the plate or lose control and issue walks. Meanwhile, stamina ratings could stay the same and you can throw out all those other ratings such as H/9, W/9, SO/9 etc. If you throw in true bat/ball physics what you'll have is a system where the user is in control of his own destiny. Players will still have ratings and will perform as they do in real life without all the dice rolls. Yes this would entail a ton of tweaking and adjusting but it can be done.

Swaldo, I fully agree on your contact and power assessments for what you'd like to see in the future. Especially the part in your power write up, where you indicate it would have less of an impact than contact.

I'm a little mixed on the 4-seam fastball revamping. As we all know, movement is already an editable attribute for that pitch. For instance, I can rake all day long against Wade Davis. K-Rod on the other hand...I just can't pick up that guy's number one. I don't see his fastball very well upon release. I'm not certain, but I'd gather his fastball has a higher rated movement.

Granted, predetermined SCEA deliveries, as well as velocity add to this deception. All in all, in response to what you said above, I'd welcome any new addition to the games engine for deception. Currently, there's not enough factors to seperate between top/bottom tier pitchers. A color-trail system and/or a change in ball size is a great idea.

Also, wouldn't it simply make more sense to make pitches rather than a 4-seam fastball some guy's number one. SCEA already does a decent job in pitch selection for aces, but instead of reworking how the 4-seamer moves, how about eliminating it for some guys and replacing it with a cutter, or sinker, or 2-seamer. Or, make the 4-seam the number 4 or 5 pitch when applicable.

I don't think removing the H/9 rating will do anyone any good. No matter how spanked, if a ball is hit directly to one of the eight men in the field, more often then not, that ball is caught. Why isn't H/9 essential for balance?

# 124 swaldo @ 09/22/10 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heroesandvillians


	Swaldo, I fully agree on your contact and power assessments for what you'd like to see in the future. Especially the part in your power write up, where you indicate it would have less of an impact than contact. I'm a little mixed on the 4-seam fastball revamping. As we all know, movement is already an editable attribute for that pitch. For instance, I can rake all day long against Wade Davis. K-Rod on the other hand...I just can't pick up that guy's number one. I don't see his fastball very well upon release. I'm not certain, but I'd gather his fastball has a higher rated movement. Granted, predetermined SCEA deliveries, as well as velocity add to this deception. All in all, in response to what you said above, I'd welcome any new addition to the games engine for deception. Currently, there's not enough factors to seperate between top/bottom tier pitchers. A color-trail system and/or a change in ball size is a great idea. Also, wouldn't it simply make more sense to make pitches rather than a 4-seam fastball some guy's number one. SCEA already does a decent job in pitch selection for aces, but instead of reworking how the 4-seamer moves, how about eliminating it for some guys and replacing it with a cutter, or sinker, or 2-seamer. Or, make the 4-seam the number 4 or 5 pitch when applicable. I don't think removing the H/9 rating will do anyone any good. No matter how spanked, if a ball is hit directly to one of the eight men in the field, more often then not, that ball is caught. Why isn't H/9 essential for balance?

Movement for a 4-seamer is not editable, check my last post. I tried minimizing and maximizing the break rating and there was no difference in movement at all. The only factors you can change is speed and control - with control probably being the most important unless you're talking about 95MPH plus speed. The only player differences I see with the fastball is location, speed and as you mentioned player specific pitching motions which can throw you off. Most pitchers though have the generic 3/4 motion if I remember correctly.

Fastballs are an interesting thing, catchers will tell you some pitchers throw a "soft ball" and others throw a "hard ball" even though they're the same speed. So I find it amazing when a catcher says a 93MPH fastball lands in his glove nice and softly. I think somehow it would be cool if they can capture the differences with this pitch in the game. Not soft/hard but movement, deception, pop etc.

Regarding #1 pitches I think you're right. The problem is they only allow 5 pitches in the game so that's why most are stuck with the 4 seamer. It's kinda like asking Mariano Rivera "Which would you rather have - your 4 seam, 2 seam or cutter? You can only have one." I didn't even bother mentioning this because Russ said the pitch limitation is not going to change anytime soon. If they opened that up then you could really pimp out some of these pitchers.

Regarding removing the misc stats such as H/9 - As I understand it those are in the game to make the stats more realistic. Basically, it's a big part of the "dice roll" factors going on under the hood. If you have a physics based ball-to-bat engine you wont need them. And fielders would have their own separate ratings. Well actually you'd have to keep them for the sim engine I guess but not live action.

Example: You have a good batter at the plate with good vision and has a nice plump PCI. The pitcher sucks so you see the ball well out of his hand and it's green so you know it's a changeup. The location is good (low & away) but his changeup rating is bad so the size of the ball is large and easier to hit. So you wait on it and swing late hitting the ball to the opposite field for a single. In this scenario what good is a H/9 rating? You controlled the outcome, no calculation was needed.

Now reverse the above scenario - a poor hitter vs a good pitcher with a high rated changeup. The batter doesn't see the color of the ball at all and the size of your PCI and the ball is very small. You swing early and hit a weak grounder off the end of the bat for an out. Big difference here and the best thing is that you can still get a hit if you do everything right! It wouldn't be easy though because your aim and timing would have to be precise, especially with a top changeup with good break and speed.

# 125 Heroesandvillains @ 09/22/10 06:07 PM

Swaldo, good post.

The color indicator is very intriguing. As well as ball size advice.

Your comparison of the "good/bad hitter vs. good/bad pitcher" scenario is great.

Question: How do you account for the average hitter vs. average hitter scenario? How do you ensure that the pitcher still has the advantage, which he should? How do you make for certain, and most importantly, that simply mastering the L-Stick won't make my team bat .290?

You're on the right path here Swaldo. I just don't want to be king because I put 50 hours in the cages.

# 126 swaldo @ 09/22/10 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heroesandvillians


	Swaldo, good post. The color indicator is very intriguing. As well as ball size advice. Your comparison of the "good/bad hitter vs. good/bad pitcher" comparison is great. Question: How do you account for the average hitter vs. average hitter scenario? How do you ensure that the pitcher still has the advantage, which he should? How do you make for certain, and most importantly, that simply mastering the L-Stick won't make my team bat .290? You're on the right path here Swaldo. I just don't want to be king because I put 50 hours in the cages.

That's a good question, and in my post I mentioned it would take alot of tweaking/testing to get it just right. And that's exactly how you do it (by starting with average vs average.) To start this would entail adjusting the PCI size until it feels right, then work in the other factors you put in to make the ratings stand out during live play.

And yea, mastery can't happen. Just leave it the way it is until you can do it right. If SCEA puts me on their payroll and sends me a prototype I'll fire it up.

# 127 major major @ 09/22/10 07:40 PM

Would welcome scaling down the size of hitters PCI's, but would not welcome the ball size increasing or decreasing. If the Show were to implement an oscillating ball size, then please allow it to be turned off.

# 128 Heroesandvillains @ 09/22/10 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by major major


	Would welcome scaling down the size of hitters PCI's, but would not welcome the ball size increasing or decreasing. If the Show were to implement an oscillating ball size, then please allow it to be turned off.

I find the ball size thing to be intriguing, more than I find it to be ideal.

I guess to underlying point is to come up with some way to add a greater deal of deception/advantage to really good pitchers. The ball literally changing is one idea. I'd personally prefer just giving their pitches more movement and depth next year.

# 129 major major @ 09/22/10 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heroesandvillians


	I find the ball size thing to be intriguing, more than I find it to be ideal. I guess to underlying point is to come up with some way to add a greater deal of deception/advantage to really good pitchers. The ball literally changing is one idea. I'd personally prefer just giving their pitches more movement and depth.

For sure.

Maybe something that allows the hitter to see the ball more clearly=Laces seen quicker or something. I can see them now, but the ball is always on top of the plate.

# 130 countryboy @ 09/22/10 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swaldo


	I don't know why you say I'm "chasing" a randomness theory when there's obviously some sort of dice roll going on under the hood (based on various ratings of the players involved etc.) You even confirmed that in your posts and is similiar to text based games - the only difference being you do have some control over the outcome. Anyway, you can have more user control and still have ratings. It would go something like this. Batters Vision rating: You're going to need to bring in something similiar to MVP's "Hitters Eye" system which turns the baseball different colors in the pitcher's hand and leaves a trail as the ball flies through the air toward the plate to aid in hitting. Good hitters would be able to see the colors longer than poor hitters - and some hitters won't be able to see it at all. Batters Contact rating: This one is simple, you increase or decrease the size of the PCI to reflect their rating. For example pitchers (at bat) will have a tiny PCI while Ichiro types will have a large PCI. Batters Power rating: This will be smaller than the contact PCI and will effect distance and trajectory. Batter Discipline rating: This one is tough because the user is basically in contol of discipline. However, you could tie in check swings here. Good hitters would easily be able to check swing while poor hitters would rarely be able to pull it off. Check swings are best with fully loaded swing animations (ala MVP) that's why 2K initially didn't have CW's this year (because their swings are pre-loaded so it was tough to program in check swings.) So maybe you'd have fully loaded swing animations for good hitters who can easily check swing, and pre-loaded animations for poor hitters. Of course there are compications with this but I'm just throwing this out there as an idea. Pitcher ratings: tweaking the fastball is the key since over 90% have that listed as thier #1 pitch in the game. Talk to baseball players and they'll tell you ace pitcher's fastballs "Are hard to see" or "Have extra pop" or "Have excellent or sinking movement." In The Show all fastballs look and act the same. So they need to make it harder to hit highly rated fastballs, so maybe make it so you can't see the ball out of the hand, or add some movement, or a little extra zip, or make the ball smaller thus harder to hit. Now do the opposite with poorly rated pitches and if you apply this concept to all pitch types you'll have a real challenge at the plate. And good pitchers in general should be painting corners more often, while poor pitchers should be throwing more over the plate or lose control and issue walks. Meanwhile, stamina ratings could stay the same and you can throw out all those other ratings such as H/9, W/9, SO/9 etc. If you throw in true bat/ball physics what you'll have is a system where the user is in control of his own destiny. Players will still have ratings and will perform as they do in real life without all the dice rolls. Yes this would entail a ton of tweaking and adjusting but it can be done.

With all that you mentioned, ratings are going to play a part and therefore there will be, whats the term you use, "dice rolls".

You cannot separate good players from bad players by user input and changes to the aids. You can't. Ratings have to be used and therefore the game will always have a "randomness" to it. They have, I'm guessing, formulas in place for how each rating is used in any given situation. And thus far, thru countless games, I'd say that its working pretty well.

As for your suggestions, I like some of them, but again, they are nothing more than aids that express the player's rating visually. Ratings will always be, and have to be, a part of the game.

# 131 major major @ 09/22/10 08:44 PM

Off the hip.

Maybe you could have the left stick act as the hitter's eyes. Meaning as the ball leaves the pitchers hand u track the balls trajectory with the left stick. If ur left stick tracking is spot on, u see the laces or pitch type. This also may allow the user to release his top hand if tracking the outside even if the ball is not.

Sorry fellas, just really into this game. Trying to help LOL!

# 132 Heroesandvillains @ 09/22/10 08:59 PM

Cards, all I can say to your post is thank goodness for auto field. I simply can't do it on my own. I'm 100% on board with you there.

# 133 Manmade Disaster @ 09/23/10 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dannyray64


	I like the playoff mode idea. What the game really needs is a create a stadium and create a team mode.

I second this. I would love to see a create a stadium feature for the first year in franchise mode. This is particularly true for those of us who use Oakland

# 134 rsox @ 09/23/10 08:13 PM

So... no one liked my idea to include Hazel Mae?

# 135 Heroesandvillains @ 09/23/10 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rsox


	So... no one liked my idea to include Hazel Mae?

Okay...

Fielding revamp, pitcher deception...

And Hazel Mae! ... And Heidi Watney!

# 136 swaldo @ 09/24/10 03:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by countryboy


	With all that you mentioned, ratings are going to play a part and therefore there will be, whats the term you use, "dice rolls". You cannot separate good players from bad players by user input and changes to the aids. You can't. Ratings have to be used and therefore the game will always have a "randomness" to it.

I'm not following you on this, please let me know what I am not understanding...

Pitcher A has a 100 rated fastball and throws a golf ball.
Pitcher B has a 50 rated fastball and throws a beach ball.

The user aims then a physics engine kicks in which displays the result. This is a calculation not a dice roll. And which pitcher would you rather face? I'll take the beach ball and would probably sprain my back from swinging so hard.

Changing the size of the ball may not seem realistic...or is it? Like Vin Scully (Dodgers announcer who's been around 1000 years) likes to say about the knuckleball - "It's like hitting a ping-pong ball in a windstorm." And having colored balls is not realistic either but it replicates real life abilties. Take for example Ted Williams who probably saw the ball as if it was in slow motion.

I do wonder though if any game implimented something like the "Hitters eye" would it be a liability? In other words could they get sued by EA for ripping off the idea?

# 137 cheechoo98 @ 09/24/10 04:09 PM

The 'batter's eye' or 'hitter's eye' with coloured balls is TOTALLY not realistic - and should have never been implemented in a baseball game.

In The Show they already have 'hitter's eye' when you guess pitch correctly, you get a visual cue that you've guessed the correct pitch... Please no.

And the Hazel Mae thing? While she is a plus broadcaster, ( She was great here in Toronto ) I don't get how she makes it onto the 'pretty' broadcasters lists all the time... Her successor on Sportsnet, Martine Gaillard.. and Laura Daikun from theScore, good looking sports ladies... Google it!

ok. back to topic.

# 138 countryboy @ 09/24/10 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swaldo


	I'm not following you on this, please let me know what I am not understanding...

What you're not understanding is that what you are asking for are different visual aids to display the ratings. But the ratings will still play a part, which is something you were seemingly complaining about earlier in the thread saying they caused "random" outcomes.

No matter what you do, what visual aids you implement, ratings will ALWAYS be part of the equation.

I'm not sure I can make it any clearer than that.

# 139 countryboy @ 09/24/10 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MLB01


	I agree that ratings must be a part of the outcome because if they didn't and you put too much control in the user's hands, then a bad player could play like a superstar. Ya know what I mean ?

I know what you mean as that is what I have been saying.

Quote:


	On the other hand, Swaldo was talking about removing some player ratings from the coded equation and putting them into visual aids instead of being hard coded into the engine. I actually like that idea, but some player ratings must stay hard coded in the engine or the simulation aspect of The Show will be lost and that just wouldn't be right in my opinion.

Visual aids are nothing more than a representation of ratings. I fail to understand the logic of removing ratings and making them nothing more than visual aids. If the ratings are removed, then how do players progress/regress? What aspect of the player is the game going to evaluate in order to determine if he gets better as a contact hitter, worse as a pitcher, etc....?

Ratings are a vital part to the game. Removing them, in my opinion, makes no sense. I know you're not talking about all ratings, but even some. The game is designed to take all ratings into account for their given situation. Removing any of them, not only causes players to lose "significance", but also causes the dev team to completely re-write how situations are now handled without those ratings.

How is that a good idea? Why try to re-invent the wheel? The Show has the simulation aspect of the game down pretty well. Can it get better? Sure, but completely undoing what they have spent numerous years "perfecting" isn't the answer, at least I sure as hell hope it isn't. (see Madden series for example)

# 140 HustlinOwl @ 09/24/10 08:46 PM

hitter's eye = gimmick

« Previous 1 2…4 5 678 9 10…13 14 Next »

More Links

Four Keys to Success for MLB '11: The Show