News Post

MLB 12 The Show Franchise Mode Improvements

02:20 PM - January 27, 2012 by tnixen

Playstation.Blog has posted some MLB 12 The Show franchise mode improvements.

Quote:


	One of our goals going into this development cycle was to enhance the trade logic for CPU teams to better mimic their real-life counterparts. In order to do so, we had to examine the current system and identify the faults to then build and improve upon it. This year we are considering more factors in each trade offer, with the end result being more realistic trades. Teams are valuing their rosters much higher this year, and they aren�t going to ship out prospects so easily, nor will they offer up too many players to fill a positional void. You�ll also see more trades that better suit the teams� current strategies (i.e. playoff push vs. rebuilding strategies).

Game: MLB 12 The ShowReader Score: 9/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS Vita / PS3Votes for game: 55 - View All

MLB 12 The Show Videos

Member Comments

# 141 boohays @ 01/30/12 11:07 AM

Hey guys and gals,

Long time reader but first time poster, finally decided to sign up for an account! Huge Show fan, bought a PS3 several years ago strictly so I could play this game haha.

Anyway, I saw this asked in a thread a while back but didn't seem to see an answer. Any word on whether full player stats carry over from year-to-year?

I found that it really ruined the off-season experience (signing free agents, offering arbitration, etc.) not being able to see a player's full stat line. All you could see was a player's average, runs, homers, RBI's, I think that was it. You couldn't even see steals. What I really want is to see OBP/SLG/OPS, but being able to see everything should be included in order to make evaluations on which players you want to go after, which players you can afford to let go, etc.

Has anyone seen anything mentioned regarding this?

# 142 Pared @ 01/30/12 11:30 AM

The amount of stats they track would make it very difficult to track year to year.

We've brought this up time and time again so just filling you in - you're not alone nor have you been the first to mention this.

# 143 boohays @ 01/30/12 11:56 AM

Thanks for the reply Pared, and it's certainly understandable. I guess if they could expand the carry-over stats just a little bit it would make things infinitely better. Or maybe there's a way to export them somehow so we can view them externally (say, on a computer), then they could clear the stats within the game mode but we would still have the exported data as a reference. I'm sure this has been thought about, though.

# 144 nomo17k @ 01/30/12 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boohays


	Thanks for the reply Pared, and it's certainly understandable. I guess if they could expand the carry-over stats just a little bit it would make things infinitely better. Or maybe there's a way to export them somehow so we can view them externally (say, on a computer), then they could clear the stats within the game mode but we would still have the exported data as a reference. I'm sure this has been thought about, though.

Yes, the stats/ratings/whatever exporter/importer would be nice at the very least... I cry every time I wipe out season/postseason stats.

# 145 thaSLAB @ 01/30/12 12:10 PM

First, welcome aboard boohays!

I think this type of stat tracking is a dream for many people. As Pared stated, it is very hard to track that many stats. I'm hoping that some "happy medium" can be met like you said, and that would make some of us even more satisfied. I would definitely recommend mentioning this in the franchise feedback threads. (whenever they open up.)

# 146 Qb @ 01/30/12 12:12 PM

New trade screen is a big improvement with more info and the ability to sort by positions. Hopefully the logic is solid, particularly when it comes to the delicate balance of the values of potential and current ratings. Player cards look much better and should prove more useful. Glad to hear lineups were tweaked; I didn't have a major problem with it, but in the past they didn't quite jive with what most MLB managers do. They almost seemed to be based on "optimized" batting order logic, which is cool, but far friom the norm IRL.

I like the overall look of the menu interface compared to last year -- it looks less "cartoony" -- but I would love to see a new font. Not that it matters in the big picture, but a new font combined with the new design would have really changed the overall look of the game.

# 147 Pared @ 01/30/12 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boohays


	Thanks for the reply Pared, and it's certainly understandable. I guess if they could expand the carry-over stats just a little bit it would make things infinitely better. Or maybe there's a way to export them somehow so we can view them externally (say, on a computer), then they could clear the stats within the game mode but we would still have the exported data as a reference. I'm sure this has been thought about, though.

Yeah - there are a few things proposed but obviously can't be discussed.

But some of the things on the table are exciting.

Already looking forward to next year on possibilities alone - the brain upstairs won't stop firing off ideas.

If there are specific stats that would be good to track y2y, please post them.

# 148 fanofikedavis @ 01/30/12 03:18 PM

im sorry if it has already been revealed and im sorry that i keep asking this, but are there new celebrations. the show has used the same postseason celebrations since the first "the show" game i believe

# 149 saturn2187 @ 01/30/12 04:06 PM

is there going to be online franchise? I understand there will be online co-op franchise but what about franchise with two different human teams?

Thanks Guys

# 150 Bobhead @ 01/30/12 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Legionnaire


	A guy who only hits 10 homers a year, but they're all insanely huge ones, shouldn't have a low "power rating" because he only hits 10 a year. He should have a high power rating because he clearly has the muscle to put them into orbit -- he should just have something else in his ratings that explains why he falls short of his own ceiling so often.

Excellent post, and I agree (with all of it, but I only quoted the part I'm directly responding to). The issue is already partially addressed, as the necessary attributes already exist, I just feel they aren't being used properly. In the case you described, you have Plate Discipline, Contact, and Plate Vision to compensate for having a lot of power but struggling to hit home runs frequently. It would depend on what he was doing when he wasn't hitting home runs. If his home run percentages (ratio of home runs to hits that are not home runs) are fine and he just has trouble consistently putting the ball into play, it should be his vision or contact, etcetera...

I feel a perfect example is Alex Rodriguez (if we pretend he is still in his prime). I don't remember what his power rating has been in The Show, but it was definitely up there in the 80's if not the 90's. Now I'm no Yankee fan so I might be mistaken, but with all the home runs he has hit, I've never really seen too many breathtaking ones. It isn't his power that is exceptional, his talent is that he's just really good at hitting home runs at a fairly reliable rate. On the other hand, you have guys like Carlos Delgado, Matt Stairs, etc... (I'm dating myself with these examples lol). Always seemed to post a batting average that was... well... average, but boy could they get it over the fence.

I have to go, so I'll close by playing devil's advocate for a minute. There is a definitive possibility that SCEA are already miles ahead of us, and that this is already how the attributes work. In that case, the real issue would be that they (the attributes) are incorrectly titled. Instead of "power" perhaps it should be called "likelihood of the player hitting a home run if he successfully hits the ball." Just rolls right off the tongue, no?

# 151 nomo17k @ 01/30/12 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobhead


	... I have to go, so I'll close by playing devil's advocate for a minute. There is a definitive possibility that SCEA are already miles ahead of us, and that this is already how the attributes work. In that case, the real issue would be that they (the attributes) are incorrectly titled. Instead of "power" perhaps it should be called "likelihood of the player hitting a home run if he successfully hits the ball." Just rolls right off the tongue, no?

All this time I thought that was exactly what Power attribute did. I'm fairly confidence it is.. (except it should be "likehood of hitting a long ball, not necessarily a HR") though I don't have much to back that up. It just makes sense that way. Also the game doesn't predetermine if a solid hit is HR or not... and that makes it possible to naturally introduce the park factor, which the game already does.

Agree with the way to introduce inconsistency... in a longer run, that probably leads to a system that more closely resembles reality.

# 152 nomo17k @ 01/30/12 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenngoldbaseball


	Are you sure about this? If so, then does this only apply to played games or sim games as well? ...

The fact that a HR is not predetermined is a frequent trivia in this game. So I'm sure... At least in gameplay, it's not predetermined. It's physics based there (ball flight path, air condition, park dimension, etc.).

I know the sim engine is different from gameplay engine. From what I gather from a bunch of older Brian@SCEA posts that I've read recently, these two modes even get worked on by different engineers (Brian does the gameplay).

I think the sim engine is not as elaborate for sure... so I wouldn't be surprised park factor and such are not taken into account, although it could be done in theory...

# 153 nomo17k @ 01/30/12 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenngoldbaseball


	I used to think it was all physics based, until I kept seeing inside pitches hit for home runs...to opposite field. I questioned the physics a lot, like many others I saw on this site. People were told many times by people that supposedly know that the physics were just fine and everything was in their heads. So I took it as it was all in my head. Then they [SCEA] come out with this new revamped physics that is supposed to be more true to life and so great that the few that have seen it can't even go back to 11. So now I don't know what to think.

In games like this, physics-based means certain parts of the game are dictated by very well understood (and reasonably simple) physics. Computing ball physics *in the air* can be well approximated given all the knowns... and that's why I presume the devs can now do a very good job of replicating how it travels with the new engine.

I think computing how the bat contact leads to the initial condition of the ball flight is an entirely different matter, because there are a lot more unknowns you need to deal with (e.g., angle at which the ball hits certain part of round bat, how the wood/ball compresses, etc., etc.).... so I wouldn't be surprised figuring out how to realistically simulate (lack of) opposite field power was a more difficult problem

Quote:


	As for the sim stuff, what you said makes sense. I was trying to figure out in my head how long it would take a computer to calculate every single pitcher versus batter matchup for every single AB for every single game for every single team and I didn't get very far. I don't think even Watson would be able to do that at the speed in which I can sim through a whole season.

I actually like to play all my game using the gameplay engine and simulate franchise, haha. It can certainly run within 20 - 25 min per game on Vita, but that's with presentation. If you just run a game without presentation (with presentation, the game needs to *slow down* at 30 - 60 frames per sec), then each game should finish much faster under the hood. I can surely wait a minute or so to finish one game if I have the option....

# 154 jeremym480 @ 01/30/12 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomo17k


	Yes, the stats/ratings/whatever exporter/importer would be nice at the very least... I cry every time I wipe out season/postseason stats.

Sorry if this has been addressed before as I haven't been following The Show too closely this year, but they still haven't added historical stat tracking? I don't expect them to track all the advanced stats, however the major ones would be nice.

# 155 nomo17k @ 01/30/12 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeremym480


	Sorry if this has been addressed before as I haven't been following The Show too closely this year, but they still haven't added historical stat tracking? I don't expect them to track all the advanced stats, however the major ones would be nice.

According to posts earlier in this thread, the amount of historical stats stays the same as in previous years...

Hope the devs can figure this one out!! I really enjoy looking at how players progress/regress in year-to-year stats...

# 156 tabarnes19_SDS @ 01/30/12 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeremym480


	Sorry if this has been addressed before as I haven't been following The Show too closely this year, but they still haven't added historical stat tracking? I don't expect them to track all the advanced stats, however the major ones would be nice.

Not this year. But they do know we want it...It comes down to the standard they have for save files. I was really trying to get team names added on stat lines when I was there. Even little things like that are harder to put in than the average person believes.

# 157 nomo17k @ 01/30/12 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tabarnes19


	Not this year. But they do know we want it...It comes down to the standard they have for save files. I was really trying to get team names added on stat lines when I was there. Even little things like that are harder to put in than the average person believes.

Do you know if the restriction is on the *size* of save file? If they cannot go over 22 - 23MB of the current save file, then I can almost surely bet historical stats of the magnitude we are hoping to have won't happen.... hope that's not the case..............

# 158 tabarnes19_SDS @ 01/30/12 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomo17k


	Do you know if the restriction is on the size of save file? If they cannot go over 22 - 23MB of the current save file, then I can almost surely bet historical stats of the magnitude we are hoping to have won't happen.... hope that's not the case..............

Kolbe PM'd me before saying it was a size issue, that after a few seasons the save files would be huge. Now that does not mean more cannot be saved.

I am guessing it depends on how files are saved, compression etc... Again that is a guess, because he did mention before that they are always looking into ways to expand stat tracking.

# 159 Knight165 @ 01/30/12 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenngoldbaseball


	I used to think it was all physics based, until I kept seeing inside pitches hit for home runs...to opposite field. I questioned the physics a lot, like many others I saw on this site. People were told many times by people that supposedly know that the physics were just fine and everything was in their heads. So I took it as it was all in my head. Then they [SCEA] come out with this new revamped physics that is supposed to be more true to life and so great that the few that have seen it can't even go back to 11. So now I don't know what to think. As for the sim stuff, what you said makes sense. I was trying to figure out in my head how long it would take a computer to calculate every single pitcher versus batter matchup for every single AB for every single game for every single team and I didn't get very far. I don't think even Watson would be able to do that at the speed in which I can sim through a whole season.

I think what most guys were saying was "in their heads" was the supposition that the outcomes were predetermined. They were/are not.

....and yes...the gameplay sim engines are different in some senses....but both rely heavily on the attributes for their outcomes.

M.K.
Knight165

# 160 Knight165 @ 01/30/12 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenngoldbaseball


	Thanks for that. I can understand how difficult it must be to replicate actually physics when there are no physics in the game. There is no ball traveling at 95 miles per hour and there is no bat to meet it. Rather, we have pixelated versions of each that make us fall into the illusion, and very well done if we can have these physics debates like we do. I don't quite understand what you mean with your last paragraph, but that is probably because it is a bit too technical for me. Knight, I would assume that in the sim engines the results would be 100% attribute driven wouldn't it? I mean with game play you get user imput to some extent, but not in sim so what else would it be that determines the outcomes? Maybe I am not fully understanding your statement.

Okay...I'm going to go into the wayback time machine here with myself....I guess it would have to be three years ago in speaking with Brian, but I seem to remember him saying that it is indeed 100% attribute driven. I definitely could have worded my reply a bit better.
But..I'd have to ask him again if the sim engine uses the actual park data, wind and manager/coaches(modifiers) as I do remember someone asking that in the Q&A at one time....and I asked him. I cannot remember distinctly, so I'd rather not hazard as to what I THINK the answer is(yes?

)

M.K.
Knight165

« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 789 Next »

More Links

MLB 12 The Show Franchise Mode Improvements