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
|
|||||||||||||
|
The only potential problem with this is....the game FIRST looks at ratings to
derive stats....so the chance to see a player that hits .330 then .280 then .330 is less likely(impossible with a heavy stat driven progression....but I don't see that and the Show uses a good dose of "chance" or "randomness" under the hood IMO)....
In your case....it would go.... .280.... .300 ....then .330.
Players hitting 20 HR's....then 45...then 30 would also be nearly impossible in the game with stat based progression.
Look at David Ortiz as an example....and tell me how you would justify stat based progression/regression in him from 2003 to 2012.
(without other factors such as random chance....etc)
M.K.
Knight165
There are so many people coming up with strawman arguments against the idea I had it's redic. Of course you are never going to have ultra realistic scouting or player eval, but you can have more realistic then is in the game presently.
A simple change of hiding the ratings and showing statistics on those screens would work just fine for evaluating players in terms of who to pinch hit/pinch run/trade away or trade for/set your lineups and rotation. You can do all of that simply from statistics provided in the game.
Of course it wouldn't be forced on people, the developers are not stupid it would kill sales of the game if people were forced to not be able to see ratings. It's an option you must toggle on to use that only a very small but passionate branch of franchise players would use. These points make no sense.
A simple change of hiding the ratings and showing statistics on those screens would work just fine for evaluating players in terms of who to pinch hit/pinch run/trade away or trade for/set your lineups and rotation. You can do all of that simply from statistics provided in the game.
Of course it wouldn't be forced on people, the developers are not stupid it would kill sales of the game if people were forced to not be able to see ratings. It's an option you must toggle on to use that only a very small but passionate branch of franchise players would use. These points make no sense.
|
|||||||||||||
|
New Player models would be nice
Franchise mode, to a lesser degree than commentary is another area where I feel like, no matter what they do to improve it, it won't be enough.
I haven't been able to find it, so forgive me please if it's been answered, but has the year-to-year schedule as far as interleague and whatnot been fixed or addressed at all? That's about the only thing I've got left on my "gripe" list. Everything else looks phenomenal!
# 405
HustlinOwl @ 03/06/16 02:30 AM
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 407
Lovesports @ 03/06/16 07:12 AM
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
I doubt the percentage of people getting past year one in offline franchise is that far off from the percentage of those in online franchise. It's not like every single online franchise makes it past year one and every offline one doesn't...
|
|||||||||||||
|
I had a nice corollary to this but lost it cause I got logged out before I submitted.
In short, my concern is that the natural variance found within player performance will suffer in favor of the new system which will alter the players' arcs too much based on one year.
It's fairly common for a .260 hitter to have a great season and bat .300. It's less common for a .260 hitter to develop into a .300 for the remainder of his career. I fear we will see more of the second at the expense of the first.
You can see the variance in almost every major league player, and as you said, this variance was already built into the game, and its present even when you are in control. Now we seem to be moving in the direction where this natural variance will be used to boost or penalize ratings even more. At best this seems superfluous, at worst illogical.
Perhaps I'm in the minority, but in franchise mode I want my own effect over player progression to be more limited. This move seems like it will turn your franchise into a RTTS experience with your entire roster. I'd prefer more emphasis on the managerial aspect, which means less control over progression arcs. There seems to be a number of different ways one might affect player progression without resorting to statistical performance.
As you point out, and this seems to be getting lost, the ratings are prerequisite - they come first. I see many folks characterizing the ratings as a type of report card. To me this is backwards, but I think it derives from the RTTS approach in a way. And perhaps the fundamental disagreement lies in how we're viewing franchise mode altogether.
In any case, it would be nice if the devs could shed more light on all this. Perhaps some of our concerns can be put to rest.
|
|||||||||||||
|
If you really feel they owe you something then I'm just going to keep shaking my head
|
|||||||||||||
|
I finally got a chance to actually watch the stream and thought it was funny that in the 4 innings that the guys played of the Marlins/Rockies games, there were 2 balls hit off the pitcher and the runner was thrown out both times.
I guess there's still some tuning that will need to be done regarding that.
I guess there's still some tuning that will need to be done regarding that.
Will young quick developed players still start regresing at 28? It was one of the worst things on past the shows. I like to play and sim 50-50%, I love draft, develope the farm and the offseasons, but when I get to.. 2021 for example, Mookie Betts or Bogaerts, just in their prime start losing, 5-6 overall points.
Aside that every pitcher 4 years into the franchise throws 100mph fb and is 85+ overall at least.
Aside that every pitcher 4 years into the franchise throws 100mph fb and is 85+ overall at least.
# 415
bronxbombers21325 @ 03/06/16 12:35 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 416
Maverick09 @ 03/06/16 12:41 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 419
torpidbeaver @ 03/06/16 01:42 PM
I wasn't sure it was addressed, but does player morale take small sample size into consideration?
Like, if we've only played 2 games all season, is my team going to implode because everyone is freaking out that we're in last place? And if Robbie Cano also starts the year 0-10... God help me.
I hope different players react with more/less emotion than others. It'd probably have to just be a hidden number; I think Ramone said in a stream, long long ago, that MLBPA had a problem with assigning "emotional attributes" to players. For example, the union could/would object to one player being "volatile" or "vocal" while another is labeled "mellow" or "quiet."
I'd be interested to know how the NBA2K team got around that. Different unions, but still.
Like, if we've only played 2 games all season, is my team going to implode because everyone is freaking out that we're in last place? And if Robbie Cano also starts the year 0-10... God help me.
I hope different players react with more/less emotion than others. It'd probably have to just be a hidden number; I think Ramone said in a stream, long long ago, that MLBPA had a problem with assigning "emotional attributes" to players. For example, the union could/would object to one player being "volatile" or "vocal" while another is labeled "mellow" or "quiet."
I'd be interested to know how the NBA2K team got around that. Different unions, but still.
Post A Comment
Working...