05:01 PM - March 3, 2016 by Steve_OS
The MLB The Show 16 Twitch stream has begun, post your thoughts here!
For those that miss out, we will update this post with the archive, when it has completed.
UPDATE: Here is the archive.
MLB The Show 16 News Post
05:01 PM - March 3, 2016 by Steve_OSThe MLB The Show 16 Twitch stream has begun, post your thoughts here!
For those that miss out, we will update this post with the archive, when it has completed.
UPDATE: Here is the archive.
MLB The Show 16 Videos
Member Comments
Now that we have expanded stat tracking I have a loony idea. What if there was an option to hide the ratings altogether? I'd love to have that option so I had to scout players based on their statistics. We have all the info we need.. with progression tied to ratings it makes perfect sense. Viewing ratings just takes you out of the immersion but it's hard to avoid it since they are plastered everywhere in franchise and gameplay.
Imagine you are ready to pinch hit for the ptichers but instead of scrolling your bench for the highest contact vs lefty guy, you get information about your bench players AVG vs lefty career, AVG vs lefty season, last month AVG vs lefty. So you still need to know your guys. The highest BA vs lefty isn't necessarily the best guy to pick, perhaps he just happens to be hitting it hot this month or this season but really another guy on the bench is better at the moment. I want to be required to have a feel for my players not looking at some arbitrary ratings that give you the perfect choice 100% of the time. That doesn't feel like managing a baseball team.
Think of how much harder and realistic trading would become! Now when you trade you don't look at overalls or contact or power, you look at their statistics of how they are actually performing.. This leads to increased emergent, dynamic results. I am going to try some house rules this year of not looking at player ratings at any point and just statistics but as I said it is hard when they are everywhere and an option to hide them would be much appreciated.
Getting rid of perfect information truly makes it a Baseball experience and not a Videogame experience.. This would also include hiding the Potential rating of course another option I'd love! I don't want to know a guy has A potential I want to dig for that myself, there is no reason we need to have access to that in the draft or anywhere. Keep it all under the hood, I want to manage a baseball team not a bunch of numbers. As I saw someone else say they feel like robots not players. The morale was a big step forward with improving that and I feel this would be equally as big.
This is my ultimate request for franchise in every game. I know it would be a niche option and I doubt many people would ever use it but to me it would be the greatest single change for immersion. I bring it up because we now have full stat tracking. Just give an option when starting franchise to show or hide ratings defaulted to show. I know this is more of a hardcore feature that only the real knuckle heads like me would use I just think it would be a gamechanger. Hope the devs catch wind of this radical idea and see what they think, I think they said they are already planning for MLB 17 in a few weeks.
Imagine you are ready to pinch hit for the ptichers but instead of scrolling your bench for the highest contact vs lefty guy, you get information about your bench players AVG vs lefty career, AVG vs lefty season, last month AVG vs lefty. So you still need to know your guys. The highest BA vs lefty isn't necessarily the best guy to pick, perhaps he just happens to be hitting it hot this month or this season but really another guy on the bench is better at the moment. I want to be required to have a feel for my players not looking at some arbitrary ratings that give you the perfect choice 100% of the time. That doesn't feel like managing a baseball team.
Think of how much harder and realistic trading would become! Now when you trade you don't look at overalls or contact or power, you look at their statistics of how they are actually performing.. This leads to increased emergent, dynamic results. I am going to try some house rules this year of not looking at player ratings at any point and just statistics but as I said it is hard when they are everywhere and an option to hide them would be much appreciated.
Getting rid of perfect information truly makes it a Baseball experience and not a Videogame experience.. This would also include hiding the Potential rating of course another option I'd love! I don't want to know a guy has A potential I want to dig for that myself, there is no reason we need to have access to that in the draft or anywhere. Keep it all under the hood, I want to manage a baseball team not a bunch of numbers. As I saw someone else say they feel like robots not players. The morale was a big step forward with improving that and I feel this would be equally as big.
This is my ultimate request for franchise in every game. I know it would be a niche option and I doubt many people would ever use it but to me it would be the greatest single change for immersion. I bring it up because we now have full stat tracking. Just give an option when starting franchise to show or hide ratings defaulted to show. I know this is more of a hardcore feature that only the real knuckle heads like me would use I just think it would be a gamechanger. Hope the devs catch wind of this radical idea and see what they think, I think they said they are already planning for MLB 17 in a few weeks.
My only disappointment is the lack of non-roster invitees but at this point I just don't really expect to see them get added. If I'm honest with myself, there are likely just far more players who just set their 25 man roster and sim right to Opening Day than there are people who spend any sort of time evaluating rosters and players in spring. I believe the devs even said one year that ST was never meant to be more than a chance to work on your timing/try new settings, difficulties, etc. in games where nothing is at stake.
At least it's an issue that can be worked around, if a bit tedious. You can remove guys from the lower end of your 40-man roster who aren't risks to be claimed by other teams and replace them with prospects or veteran minor leaguers that you want to check out. Then you just cycle those guys periodically before locking in your "real" 40-man roster and formally optioning players to keep it to 25. It involves manipulating your roster a bunch and you need to keep cycling them but it's at least it's something.
But the stuff they did add though sounds very, very promising. I can understand some of the skepticism of player morale but I like that this is going to add real stakes to the players' decisions. This might prevent teams from loading up on star players only to stash them on the bench, which I actually saw quite a bit of in future seasons. And as a big stat geek I'm so glad that career stats are in along with announcer recognition of stuff that happened in seasons before.
Can't wait for this to come out.
At least it's an issue that can be worked around, if a bit tedious. You can remove guys from the lower end of your 40-man roster who aren't risks to be claimed by other teams and replace them with prospects or veteran minor leaguers that you want to check out. Then you just cycle those guys periodically before locking in your "real" 40-man roster and formally optioning players to keep it to 25. It involves manipulating your roster a bunch and you need to keep cycling them but it's at least it's something.
But the stuff they did add though sounds very, very promising. I can understand some of the skepticism of player morale but I like that this is going to add real stakes to the players' decisions. This might prevent teams from loading up on star players only to stash them on the bench, which I actually saw quite a bit of in future seasons. And as a big stat geek I'm so glad that career stats are in along with announcer recognition of stuff that happened in seasons before.
Can't wait for this to come out.
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
'15 went a long way with this...as it seemed to me that there was much more of a chance for a player to play "out of his ratings"....both good and bad.....
Sports games have become more of a number shuffling for who has 1 point more in XX category instead of actually looking at a players performance and acting on that and the reports your scouts/coaches would give you.
I realize that not everyone would want it this way and that's fine....but a simple front end option to "hide ratings"(except in the editor of course...so you could make changes if you want to) would be so nice IMO.
M.K.
Knight165
|
|||||||||||||
|
Having players fight for position battles toward the end of ST is always great to follow in real life.. It makes me wonder, one of the devs said the progression/attribute changes monthly, do you get that at the end of spring training? That would be huge to making spring training somewhat relevant and would bring in this element of position battles. If a guy has a hot spring maybe he played well enough to boost his ratings past his competition at second base. I am not sure if they do adjust after the month of March and I am leaning towards probably not but I would like for them to for the element it would bring to the game.
|
|||||||||||||
|
I am going to try this year in my franchise to avoid ratings as much as I can. I wish there was a filter in the statistics screen for Last 30 days as well as the Career and Season stats. It's getting to the point where avoiding ratings is feasible but I think that would really enable it. Also something NBA2k has which is awesome is in the player cards it shows the players recent performance. Like a game log of his stats in previous games all season. That would be great to have as well as an option to click each game to bring up the full box score for every game that season. While I am dreaming big I also wish we had player awards on player cards something I see a lot of people wish. I want the world and we are getting there I feel like they gave us 3/4ths of it this year I am more than pleased with what they've done I am just greedy!
|
|||||||||||||
|
An idea just popped into my head, but when you have manual injuries on aren't you able to delete injuries/take players off of the DL at any time? Hypothetically you could manually injure a bunch of star players that you don't need to see early in spring and put them on the 60 day DL to free up spots. Haven't tried doing that one but maybe it would work. It's fudging the roster rules but I don't really care as long as everything is back to normal with the real roster by Opening Day.
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 329
Lovesports @ 03/04/16 10:17 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
Here are reasons for why player performance needs to be the primary factor.
1. Player A hits .332 with 40 homers and is currently rated as a 60 overall. In reality, the following year he is now viewed as a minimum 80 overall by scouts, coaches etc. What you are saying is that if he's not an A or B potential he should be a no more than a 63-65 overall the following year. This throws off player contracts, their FA worthiness, and their overall importance to the game. If I win The MVP award with a 60 overall player and next year his ratings don't reflect that, then he signs for barely over the league minimum and hits 8th in some crap team's lineup because he's still viewed as a 60 overall player.
# 330
WaitTilNextYear @ 03/04/16 10:18 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
For one, the scouting such that it is in this game right now for the draft is one of the weaker and less-fully fleshed out features in the franchise mode. The scouts don't have much (any?) personality other than a handful of numbers that aren't really well defined. Aside from this, scouting all of the players in the league on a regular basis would be such a tall task for 4 area scouts that you'd need a great expansion in the number of scouts...and you'd want more differentiation/personality in your scouts if they suddenly became much more critical to the player rating mechanic. I wouldn't want my entire knowledge of the MLB, or even a sizable chunk, to hinge on the limited scouting system that is currently in place. Now, if the scouting aspect were to get a lot of love and improve in the future, then I could see the draw to adding in a scouting component to ratings. Ditto for coaching, because the coaches are way too basic as just a source the same attribute boosts/nerfs no matter what player we're talking about.
Secondly, there is already "fog of war" in the current system. I believe you want something a little less cut and dried than looking at a rating number to make all roster decisions? But, even with "100% knowledge" of the ratings, some players will inevitably underperform and some will overperform. You will "like to hit" more with some players than others and some of this already feels quite unrelated to just the raw ratings. For example, sometimes I feel (placebo? perhaps) that I bat better with certain batting stance types than others due to having a larger/smaller strike zone and how the AI pitching attacks that specific player. So things like this, which are not based on ratings, can help drive my decisions on playing time and who gets key at bats. I also think you get a nice variety of outcomes in played and simmed games and it never really feels like because player X has contact rating of Y, player X must hit .260 or whatever.
And on some level, if you feel that just scrolling through for the highest CON vLHP is too boring, wouldn't scrolling for the highest Batting Average vLHP feel much the same? Wouldn't the process still be basically reduced to looking at a single number whether that's a rating or a stat? Wouldn't you still be "managing a bunch of numbers" one way or the other?
I realize that you guys are both advocating for an option to have this and I agree that having an option to hide ratings would be perfectly fine, but I'd only want it as an option and not the only way of doing things. And this POV is coming from a guy (or one of a handful of guys) who (1) enjoys playing a "stats only" set up in OOTP and (2) who's probably done more simming and testing the stats and ratings on recent MLBTS titles than anyone not working for SDS right now.
# 331
Lovesports @ 03/04/16 10:31 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
One guy could have a higher contactvL rating (the only thing that matters and the right choice) but perhaps another guy has a higher avgvL the season or last month because he is warm, but a lower contactvL at that moment. It let's you make the 'wrong' choice when currently that's impossible to do. Limited information is realistic.
And there is 0% chance they would ever remove the ratings from franchise mode because it would cause a riot. I don't see the logic in arguing for giving people less ways to play more options are always good.
Sent from my LGLS660 using Tapatalk
# 333
WaitTilNextYear @ 03/04/16 11:22 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 334
TheWarmWind @ 03/04/16 11:28 PM
I know it's off topic but it seems to be the hot issue in this thread right now.
I just want to say that if they made a switch in game that could turn off ratings and instead have all of your players scouted on the 20/80 scale with no overall and potential inaccuracies based on the quality of your scouts (or coaches), I would totally play that way.
I'm not saying it's a priority for me to put in the game though, I have other things higher on my list (no need to get into that here). Just saying if it was there I would definitely use it. I only use ratings as a guideline and to help with trades anyways, so a mode like this would just add to the authenticity.
It'd be even cooler if they showed stats like sprint times, avg bat speed, avg pitch velocities etc. But again, not a priority of mine.
I just want to say that if they made a switch in game that could turn off ratings and instead have all of your players scouted on the 20/80 scale with no overall and potential inaccuracies based on the quality of your scouts (or coaches), I would totally play that way.
I'm not saying it's a priority for me to put in the game though, I have other things higher on my list (no need to get into that here). Just saying if it was there I would definitely use it. I only use ratings as a guideline and to help with trades anyways, so a mode like this would just add to the authenticity.
It'd be even cooler if they showed stats like sprint times, avg bat speed, avg pitch velocities etc. But again, not a priority of mine.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Now in that same situation if you saw your player A had 40 HR and player B had 35 HR who would you choose? Well that's much different because perhaps player A had more ABs, perhaps player B had a poor start to his season and has picked it up lately. To me choosing player and only knowing/viewing their statistics is infinitely more authentic. I know it is a radical idea I just wish developers and everyone saw how great it could be. Take us away from judging numbers and instead judge players.
There is variability in the at-bat but there is no variability in the decision making process of who to use to pinch hit. The contact/power ratings are their current rating. If it showed their beginning of season ratings which can change month to month it would be better because it requires you to know how your player has been playing recently but to me the best is fully judging off statistics. Showing the current ratings of every player for every situation just makes it more videogame and less baseball. I have no problem if anyone likes the current way I just am arguing for another option.
Imagine having Big Papi on 2nd base with 2 outs bottom 9 down 1 run to the Yankees. On your bench it doesn't show you each players Speed rating it just shows their steals and triples and whatever else. With the current system you absolutely pick the highest Speed rated player to pinch run but in a statistic based system it requires you to understand the players much more.
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
This is one of the major reasons why I have not really been able to get into a franchise type of mode in a game that exposes the true drivers of in-game performance. When true attributes of players are not obscured in any way, then the game is actually tipping what *truly* your best option is (in choosing players, for example), and our best strategy would always be what the in-game ratings tell us, and, probability wise, there really isn't any other options that make more sense.
In that sense, we are being deprived of what would be rather fun opportunities to "evaluate" our players, based on whatever criteria *we* think to be the best. In real life, that guessing game itself is an enjoyable game itself.
If we really truly knew what OVR (or more precisely, their individual attirubtes) all these minor leaguers have in real-life, there would be nothing to enjoy in creating top-prospect rankings, etc. But that's what the game is basically doing, when it exposes their true attribute values.
# 339
WaitTilNextYear @ 03/05/16 12:48 AM
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
And if we are looking at historical stats or at a scouting report that is basically saying the same thing as ratings (all of them answer the basic question: how good is this player?), how is that different really? If you have a choice between 40 HR guy and 35 HR guy and you need a homer, you pick the 40 HR guy much like you'd choose a 95 POW guy over a 90 POW guy. In both cases, the weighted dice roll is in your favor. In both cases, you are basing your decision on a number. In both cases, your decision still might not work out. And if you're making decisions on who to play based on scouting, you simply go with the guy with the most glowing report from your scout. No matter the system, there is not a way for the game (remember it's a game and we can't have real life uncertainty in there sorry to say) to completely hide its dealings from us. We'd either see the advantageous choice/player in numerical ratings (like we do now), or we'd see this same thing in stats--pick the guy with the better stats--(like what BrianU is proposing), or we'd see it in the language in scouting reports (as others have proposed), or we'd see it in some combination of the three.
I don't think anyone's really made it clear exactly how a ratings-less system fundamentally changes what you are doing when managing a team. Your data is just different, but it's still interpretable data that serves the same purpose. You can't really have a true mystery unless inputs and outputs are completely unrelated. People have made the case that ratings are tacky or that they prefer looking at different sets of numbers, but they haven't made a credible case that going from ratings to the vast 'other' in order to evaluate players is actually apples vs oranges, imo.
|
|||||||||||||
|
The problem is not the variance in results (which everyone seems plenty in the game), but the way *expected* results can be rather accurately derived from in-game attributes, when those are the true drivers of the simulation engine (which they are in The Show). Inferring ability to perform in future from past performance (stats, memory, etc.) or by subjective impression (e.g., scouting) is entirely different from looking directly at the true ability.
For statisticians, those are basically the differences between sample mean (something like scouting), population mean (perhaps stats like WAR), vs "true" population mean (attributes).
Basically scouting and advanced stats like WAR are trying very hard, from different perspectives, to estimate what that "true" talent level is for a player. The game, on the other hand, is actually giving us THE truth.
And a whole a lot of people enjoy doing scouting and calculating WARs. No need to do so in a game that provides the truth upfront.
Post A Comment
Working...