MLB The Show 16 News Post

MLB The Show 16: The Little Things in This Year's Game

11:33 AM - February 15, 2016 by RaychelSnr

In the latest stream, some MLB 16 The Show developers revealed some of the "little things" we can expect to see improved this year.

-The Operation Sports community got some love from the developers when they (re)introduced "Sounds of the Show" on the PS4. I am excited to see customized soundtracks, walk-up music and chants return because these things really help create an authentic atmosphere. The feature has been sorely missed this generation, and its inclusion seems like a real labor of love for the developers.

-Sounds of the Show looks to be as fully featured as we remember, and doesn't seem too difficult to use. The number of tracks and sounds seems suitable for most users, and using a webcam or other device for chants is a reasonable hurdle to clear.

-Interactive and context-sensitive tutorials are something all games should have. While this might not be the biggest addition for longtime users, those of us with kids appreciate the help they provide for the youngest fans.

Read More - MLB The Show 16: The Little Things in This Year's Game

Game: MLB The Show 16Reader Score: 8/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / PS4Votes for game: 23 - View All

MLB The Show 16 Videos

Member Comments

# 1 Joho16 @ 02/15/16 12:01 PM

Looking forward to the release. Always a great time and a sign that Spring is near!

# 2 jkra0512 @ 02/15/16 12:20 PM

I haven't been paying too much attention this cycle, but they ever announce anything about new guys in the booth? Love Matty V., but I'd like to hear somebody else. I don't mind Lyons, but Karros is cringe-worthy.

# 3 zukes @ 02/15/16 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jkra0512


	I haven't been paying too much attention this cycle, but they ever announce anything about new guys in the booth? Love Matty V., but I'd like to hear somebody else. I don't mind Lyons, but Karros is cringe-worthy.

Not blasting you specifically here, just the idea in general. Why do people want to change the people so bad? Think of how long these guys have been in the "booth" on this game. Now think of how many lines they have added year by year. If SCEA were to switch the announcing team, they would need to start completely from scratch, so yes, we would have new voices, but commentary would take a HUGE step back as there is only so much content that can be added in one development cycle.

I think maybe a better solution is to continue to revamp how and when the lines these guys have laid down are implemented. For example, last year one of the additions is Matt cutting off whoever is talking (hilariously sometimes himself) at the end of an inning..."we'll have to leave it right there"

Adding things like this and maybe some more natural back and forth and anecdotal conversations would be preferable to having to start from scratch.

# 4 jkra0512 @ 02/15/16 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zukes


	Not blasting you specifically here, just the idea in general. Why do people want to change the people so bad? Think of how long these guys have been in the "booth" on this game. Now think of how many lines they have added year by year. If SCEA were to switch the announcing team, they would need to start completely from scratch, so yes, we would have new voices, but commentary would take a HUGE step back as there is only so much content that can be added in one development cycle. I think maybe a better solution is to continue to revamp how and when the lines these guys have laid down are implemented. For example, last year one of the additions is Matt cutting off whoever is talking (hilariously sometimes himself) at the end of an inning..."we'll have to leave it right there" Adding things like this and maybe some more natural back and forth and anecdotal conversations would be preferable to having to start from scratch.

For me, it's nice to change it up every once in a while. It's not that I don't think they're good, it's merely to have a fresh perspective of the action. The same recycled lines year after year are a complete bore and this part of the game is in need of a makeover. Is anyone really that enthralled by the boring monotoned Eric Karros? I cringe anytime he chimes in and drones on and on, it's Campbell-worthy. Steve Lyons has a little conviction behind his lines and Matty V.'s dry humor is great, and I love him as the play-by-play, but I would like to see some more enthusiasm in key moments. Genuine excitement (which is probably very hard to capture when not in the moment, I'll admit) is needed overall.

That said, I'm down with revamping lines and stitching them into more of a conversation, but I think even then you'd have to record said lines, when it might be easier to start anew with a fresh team and have them come into it like that, rather than trying top pigeon-hole a few lines here and there into combine them into a pseudo-conversation.

In the end, I can always mute them now that we have SOTS back

# 5 dran1984 @ 02/15/16 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jkra0512


	For me, it's nice to change it up every once in a while. It's not that I don't think they're good, it's merely to have a fresh perspective of the action. The same recycled lines year after year are a complete bore and this part of the game is in need of a makeover. Is anyone really that enthralled by the boring monotoned Eric Karros? I cringe anytime he chimes in and drones on and on, it's Campbell-worthy. Steve Lyons has a little conviction behind his lines and Matty V.'s dry humor is great, and I love him as the play-by-play, but I would like to see some more enthusiasm in key moments. Genuine excitement (which is probably very hard to capture when not in the moment, I'll admit) is needed overall. That said, I'm down with revamping lines and stitching them into more of a conversation, but I think even then you'd have to record said lines, when it might be easier to start anew with a fresh team and have them come into it like that, rather than trying top pigeon-hole a few lines here and there into combine them into a pseudo-conversation. In the end, I can always mute them now that we have SOTS back

As has been stated before, the commentary/lines themselves aren't the issue. The issue is the programming and logic of the lines, that is what leads to them becoming stale and repetitive. In a stream last year they discussed that they wanted to improve in that area. I'm looking forward to see what they have done with it. The main thing here is, they can do other things to improve the commentary aspect without starting from scratch and bringing in a new broadcast team.

# 6 Turbojugend @ 02/15/16 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zukes


	Think of how long these guys have been in the "booth" on this game. Now think of how many lines they have added year by year. If SCEA were to switch the announcing team, they would need to start completely from scratch, so yes, we would have new voices, but commentary would take a HUGE step back as there is only so much content that can be added in one development cycle.

Totally agreed. Anyone who wants a new team in the commentary booth would probably end up disappointed with the results, at least initially. They've spent years building up an asset library, to scrap everything and rebuild from the ground up would be a massive undertaking and we wouldn't see the benefits for years to come.

# 7 jkra0512 @ 02/15/16 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dran1984


	As has been stated before, the commentary/lines themselves aren't the issue. The issue is the programming and logic of the lines, that is what leads to them becoming stale and repetitive. In a stream last year they discussed that they wanted to improve in that area. I'm looking forward to see what they have done with it. The main thing here is, they can do other things to improve the commentary aspect without starting from scratch and bringing in a new broadcast team.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turbojugend


	Totally agreed. Anyone who wants a new team in the commentary booth would probably end up disappointed with the results, at least initially. They've spent years building up an asset library, to scrap everything and rebuild from the ground up would be a massive undertaking and we wouldn't see the benefits for years to come.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree here. While I think a move to a more conversational commentary would be great and most feasible, I'd like to hear new voices in the game with a fresh perspective.

# 8 dran1984 @ 02/15/16 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jkra0512


	I guess we'll have to agree to disagree here. While I think a move to a more conversational commentary would be great and most feasible, I'd like to hear new voices in the game with a fresh perspective.

So you would be fine taking multiple steps back in that area just to hear new voices broadcast the game?

# 9 jkra0512 @ 02/15/16 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dran1984


	So you would be fine taking multiple steps back in that area just to hear new voices broadcast the game?

If it meant we'd be in a better position in a year or two, yes. Thankfully, this is a part of the game that can be turned off and/or somewhat improved with SOTS. Lucky for you, I'm in the minority, apparently.

Also, what multiple steps are you talking about? I'd rather them focus on gameplay, franchise, and RTTS, but if we're going to go ahead and improve on some things, the commentary is somewhere that could use some TLC.

# 10 dran1984 @ 02/15/16 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jkra0512


	If it meant we'd be in a better position in a year or two, yes. Thankfully, this is a part of the game that can be turned off and/or somewhat improved with SOTS. Lucky for you, I'm in the minority, apparently. Also, what multiple steps are you talking about? I'd rather them focus on gameplay, franchise, and RTTS, but if we're going to go ahead and improve on some things, the commentary is somewhere that could use some TLC.

If they ripped out all existing audio like was mentioned they could not possibly replace it all in one cycle. The lines in the game have been compiled over several years. So you would basically have "bare-bones" commentary. It would also cause more problems with repetitive lines, dead air, and such because there would only be so many lines to chose from. They certainly would not have any kind of stat based commentary and conversational value included. On top of all of that they would have to re-record every name in the data base.

This would be a massive undertaking and would take hours and hours of recording and engineering time. There are many other ways they could enhance what they have now that would require less time and fewer resources. Another possible issue, they could have the current broadcast team under contract, we will never know.

The commentary may not be perfect now, but its a hell of a lot better then it would be if they started from scratch.

# 11 Factzzz @ 02/15/16 04:52 PM

Meh, if we're thinking this way, as in there's so much lines of commentary, that it makes no sense to get rid of them, then we'd literally never get new commentators. Because the lines are just going to continue to pile up over time.

The Show got rid of Rex Hudler in 2011 and added Eric Karros, then they got rid of Dave Campbell in 2013 and added Steve Lyons. So it's not they like they haven't proven capable of adding a new commentator into the game already.

Besides, adding a new commentator, and replacing one would add a whole new feel to the game, because we wouldn't be hearing some of the same lines we've been hearing for so many years. As well as the fact that it'd be a new voice all together.

I'm not saying i want new commentators or anything (although it might be cool), as i don't have any problem with the current commentators. I actually like Matt Vasgersian, in real life he has some really good calls, especially during the playoffs. But i'm just saying i don't like the excuse about there being so much lines of commentary already in the game.

Sometimes you just have to take the plunge for the betterment of the game in future iterations (*cough* player models *cough*).

# 12 dran1984 @ 02/15/16 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Factzzz


	Meh, if we're thinking this way, as in there's so much lines of commentary, that it makes no sense to get rid of them, then we'd literally never get new commentators. Because the lines are just going to continue to pile up over time. The Show got rid of Rex Hudler in 2011 and added Eric Karros, then they got rid of Dave Campbell in 2013 and added Steve Lyons. So it's not they like they haven't proven capable of adding a new commentator into the game already. Besides, adding a new commentator, and replacing one would add a whole new feel to the game, because we wouldn't be hearing some of the same lines we've been hearing for so many years. As well as the fact that it'd be a new voice all together. I'm not saying i want new commentators or anything (although it might be cool), as i don't have any problem with the current commentators. I actually like Matt Vasgersian, in real life he has some really good calls, especially during the playoffs. But i'm just saying i don't like the excuse about there being so much lines of commentary already in the game. Sometimes you just have to take the plunge for the betterment of the game in future iterations (cough player models cough).

Some very valid points.

I am no way saying that the commentary doesn't need improvement. I'm just looking at what it would take to actually implement a new team/announcer. For all we know they could have added someone new this year. I just think there are so many things that could be improved, commentary shouldn't be at the top of the to do list for 16.

# 13 Jeffrey Smith @ 02/15/16 07:51 PM

Perhaps they have a multi year deal with the commentators and no change will come until the contract expires.

Might be as simple as that.

# 14 kehlis @ 02/15/16 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dran1984


	Some very valid points. I am no way saying that the commentary doesn't need improvement. I'm just looking at what it would take to actually implement a new team/announcer. For all we know they could have added someone new this year. I just think there are so many things that could be improved, commentary shouldn't be at the top of the to do list for 16.

Yea, sadly it's not as simple as we all would like.

I think most agree that while Matty V is good in person he can come off a bit bland in the game.

In a perfect world they could spend three years recording new lines behind the scenes with a new crew and then implement it fully in the future but that's just not the reality of the video game world we live in.

# 15 eric7064 @ 02/15/16 08:50 PM

This is why I would love commentators that were just for this game. I could care less if they are real play by play guys or not. If it makes the commentary better.

# 16 aguero90 @ 02/15/16 09:40 PM

I don't think changing would make pbp worse at all. If Matt can't recreate energy on demand, then they need a new guy. As I've said before, he may be a good pbp guy in reality, but not a good voice actor, and that's the type of guy you need in a video game. Good examples of guys who would be good are Indians radio Tom hamallton, Giants Miller, Yankees Sterling, SEA radio, Nats radio. And when 2k changed from Miller to Thorn in 09, his pbp wasn't lacking on the first year at all. After all, it has to happen at some point, every game eventually changes pbp guy. Guess we'll see if Matt has improved soon enough.

# 17 dran1984 @ 02/15/16 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aguero90


	I don't think changing would make pbp worse at all. If Matt can't recreate energy on demand, then they need a new guy. As I've said before, he may be a good pbp guy in reality, but not a good voice actor, and that's the type of guy you need in a video game. Good examples of guys who would be good are Indians radio Tom hamallton, Giants Miller, Yankees Sterling, SEA radio, Nats radio. And when 2k changed from Miller to Thorn in 09, his pbp wasn't lacking on the first year at all. After all, it has to happen at some point, every game eventually changes pbp guy. Guess we'll see if Matt has improved soon enough.

It's not that simple

# 18 aguero90 @ 02/15/16 11:19 PM

I have to respectively disagree. It's not, as some have stated, the script he's given, it's how he does it in such a bland way. I can do his exact lines 100 times better, and it would be a major improvement. Would bringing in a new pbp guy mean less lines for a bit? Yes, but it could be much improved in the first year. It didn't hurt when Matt first started in 06, he had more than enough lines in the first year. It comes down to how you deliver your lines, and Matt, in my opinion, is just not a good "video game announcer."

# 19 Knight165 @ 02/15/16 11:21 PM

I'd like to hear you some of you guys do Matt's lines....

I say...contest!

M.K.
Knight165

# 20 FBPro @ 02/15/16 11:22 PM

For me, features...yes Commentary, I turn it down as low as I can just listen to the game sounds...

« Previous12 Next »

More Links

MLB The Show 16: The Little Things in This Year's Game