Artificial Intelligence
-
My recommendation would be to drop the difficulty down a level to HOF or lower until you find a balance that is rewarding. IMO, especially when it comes to franchise, you want a challenge but not necessarily something that’s going to frustrate you and make you not want to play. It seems like you enjoy the game of baseball so why not “tune” the experience to a level where you’re going to enjoy it? If you’re playing offline franchise There’s really no need to frustrate yourself to the point where you’re losing lopsided games and getting nothing out of it. What’s better than seeing your favorite team or players do well, making the playoffs and maybe even winning the World Series? I’d start in a lower difficulty level and progress forward. Enjoy yourself, it’s just a game!
-
@mrwonderful95 said in Artificial Intelligence:
What’s better than seeing your favorite team or players do well, making the playoffs and maybe even winning the World Series? I’d start in a lower difficulty level and progress forward. Enjoy yourself, it’s just a game!
What’s better is that feeling you get when you earn a win (in my opinion). Prior to 18 Franchise wins felt earned, since then they’ve felt noticeably gifted.
But I 100% agree with everything you’ve said (especially that last sentence!).
-
@ComebackLogic said in Artificial Intelligence:
If you think offline feels unrealistic, you should try H2H in DD. It’s a veritable carnival of unrealistic delights, where user input is just one of many decisive factors and not even the most significant at that!
Hahaha that's actually one of the reasons I decided to post this, to get feedback from the community, I know most of the people plays online and I thought it might be different for you... now I know you face the same issues with AI
-
@vinnis1 said in Artificial Intelligence:
Hardball 99??
No, I never got to play that one.
This one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MLB_'99
-
@eatyum said in Artificial Intelligence:
So question.
Why do you think SDS would make a offline game mode where no matter what, you will lose 10-12 games with winning one once in a while? What do they gain by making a offline mode where you literally can't get good enough to stop that?That's a good question. I've been thinking about coming here and making this post for about a month, and until yesterday I decided to get some feedback from the community.
Definitely going to think about what you say. In response, I think it's not the difficulty of Legend, but the way they codded this level of difficulty that makes it senseless for players who spent tons of hours playing the game. Still, going to think about it, don't want to stop having fun at this game, I love baseball and this game really helps me relax from work and all stuff in life.
-
@mrwonderful95 said in Artificial Intelligence:
My recommendation would be to drop the difficulty down a level to HOF or lower until you find a balance that is rewarding. IMO, especially when it comes to franchise, you want a challenge but not necessarily something that’s going to frustrate you and make you not want to play. It seems like you enjoy the game of baseball so why not “tune” the experience to a level where you’re going to enjoy it? If you’re playing offline franchise There’s really no need to frustrate yourself to the point where you’re losing lopsided games and getting nothing out of it. What’s better than seeing your favorite team or players do well, making the playoffs and maybe even winning the World Series? I’d start in a lower difficulty level and progress forward. Enjoy yourself, it’s just a game!
I really appreciate your comment. Empathy is one of the best things in sports and video games.
Actually I started playing this year one season on dynamic difficulty, but I got to All Star a little bit faster than I initially thought and that's when I came up with the idea of challenging myself and upgrading to Legend, and also to get better at the game.
I definitely would try your recommendation, wise words. We love baseball and playing this game it's one of the best parts of my days out of work and all the responsibilities of life, and of course it's wisely to enjoy it. Thanks for giving me perspective.
-
@Red_Ted_is_back said in Artificial Intelligence:
I agree and I’ve felt the same way as you @Danistones7 since I started playing Season mode in The Show 15 and then Franchise in 16+.
I believe the game does this balancing act in modes not tied to DD in any way (Franchise, RTTS) to keep the season stats realistic. A season record of 20-142 isn’t realistic, nor is a record of 142-20. It’s a downside of having so many games in a season - unrealistic stats. An 0-17 record in the NFL isn’t that unrealistic, but anything under 30 wins in baseball just doesn’t happen. For a game that has a history of realism in its season-based modes, The Show’s trade-off is the game’s difficulty being dynamic (behind the scenes, not the ‘dynamic difficulty’ we choose) to adjust to situations.
To draw a comparison as to why it’s done to maintain the integrity of stats, I remember playing Triple Play 96 and scoring 80+ runs in games because the game didn’t stop me. Prior to DD becoming more user-friendly in 14 the former selling point of The Show was its season-based modes RTTS and Franchise and their realism because of the comprehensiveness of player attributes. That realism would be in the gameplay code as well. Is it the wrong or right way to keep it real? I guess it depends on who you talk to.
That’s my interpretation anyway. I don’t agree with it because that’s why we have difficulty settings (from The Show 18 onwards this intervention has become way too obvious in my opinion, especially in March to October where you can sometimes sense after a single AB whether you’re going to win or lose a game).
Great explanation, now I know is not just me hahaha. But yes, is not about complaining about everything, the game is really great and if you love baseball this is IT, but when you spent so many hours playing the game it become very obvious.
After reading the feedback of the community, what I would like to say (I really hope at least some person from San Diego Studio reads these threads) is that the game is great, one of the best taking in consideration football, NFL, NBA, NHL, F1, etc., we support the work buying it, but if you are going to crush a player in Legend/HOF/All Star difficulty do it in a more realistic way, just that.
-
@Danistones7 said in Artificial Intelligence:
@vinnis1 said in Artificial Intelligence:
Hardball 99??
No, I never got to play that one.
This one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MLB_'99
Ahhh Hardball was a great series it ended on PS w Hardball 99 and on PC w Hardball 6
-
@Danistones7 said in Artificial Intelligence:
@mrwonderful95 said in Artificial Intelligence:
My recommendation would be to drop the difficulty down a level to HOF or lower until you find a balance that is rewarding. IMO, especially when it comes to franchise, you want a challenge but not necessarily something that’s going to frustrate you and make you not want to play. It seems like you enjoy the game of baseball so why not “tune” the experience to a level where you’re going to enjoy it? If you’re playing offline franchise There’s really no need to frustrate yourself to the point where you’re losing lopsided games and getting nothing out of it. What’s better than seeing your favorite team or players do well, making the playoffs and maybe even winning the World Series? I’d start in a lower difficulty level and progress forward. Enjoy yourself, it’s just a game!
I really appreciate your comment. Empathy is one of the best things in sports and video games.
Actually I started playing this year one season on dynamic difficulty, but I got to All Star a little bit faster than I initially thought and that's when I came up with the idea of challenging myself and upgrading to Legend, and also to get better at the game.
I definitely would try your recommendation, wise words. We love baseball and playing this game it's one of the best parts of my days out of work and all the responsibilities of life, and of course it's wisely to enjoy it. Thanks for giving me perspective.
Absolutely! Just to give you a little perspective on how I approach the game...I’ll typically play RS and if I lose a few and start to feel a little frustrated I’ll switch to franchise for a few games (Phillies on HOF). It gives me an appreciation for how well this game plays, how great the graphics are and it’s just the right amount of challenge where I’m not just sitting there, pressing x and hitting home runs. I started a season not too long ago and I think I’m around 12-3. Bryce Harper leads the league in HRs and it makes it enjoyable. If you’re team isn’t going to do it on the real diamond, why not have fun on the virtual diamond and live out the fantasy? Also, I’m 43 years old, own a business, have a wife and kids so the last thing I need is frustration while trying to enjoy a hobby.
PS- ranked is a different animal with its own issues and frustrations
-
I dont know if I am just bad at the game but I struggle to win on anything above HOF for franchise mode. Yet in Madden on the toughest setting I can easily go 16-0
-
@Red_Ted_is_back said in Artificial Intelligence:
I agree and I’ve felt the same way as you @Danistones7 since I started playing Season mode in The Show 15 and then Franchise in 16+.
I believe the game does this balancing act in modes not tied to DD in any way (Franchise, RTTS) to keep the season stats realistic. A season record of 20-142 isn’t realistic, nor is a record of 142-20. It’s a downside of having so many games in a season - unrealistic stats. An 0-17 record in the NFL isn’t that unrealistic, but anything under 30 wins in baseball just doesn’t happen. For a game that has a history of realism in its season-based modes, The Show’s trade-off is the game’s difficulty being dynamic (behind the scenes, not the ‘dynamic difficulty’ we choose) to adjust to situations.
To draw a comparison as to why it’s done to maintain the integrity of stats, I remember playing Triple Play 96 and scoring 80+ runs in games because the game didn’t stop me. Prior to DD becoming more user-friendly in 14 the former selling point of The Show was its season-based modes RTTS and Franchise and their realism because of the comprehensiveness of player attributes. That realism would be in the gameplay code as well. Is it the wrong or right way to keep it real? I guess it depends on who you talk to.
That’s my interpretation anyway. I don’t agree with it because that’s why we have difficulty settings (from The Show 18 onwards this intervention has become way too obvious in my opinion, especially in March to October where you can sometimes sense after a single AB whether you’re going to win or lose a game).
An 0-17 season in the NFL would be a historic season. Mostly bc they only play 16 games.
-
@Speedy44 said in Artificial Intelligence:
@Red_Ted_is_back said in Artificial Intelligence:
I agree and I’ve felt the same way as you @Danistones7 since I started playing Season mode in The Show 15 and then Franchise in 16+.
I believe the game does this balancing act in modes not tied to DD in any way (Franchise, RTTS) to keep the season stats realistic. A season record of 20-142 isn’t realistic, nor is a record of 142-20. It’s a downside of having so many games in a season - unrealistic stats. An 0-17 record in the NFL isn’t that unrealistic, but anything under 30 wins in baseball just doesn’t happen. For a game that has a history of realism in its season-based modes, The Show’s trade-off is the game’s difficulty being dynamic (behind the scenes, not the ‘dynamic difficulty’ we choose) to adjust to situations.
To draw a comparison as to why it’s done to maintain the integrity of stats, I remember playing Triple Play 96 and scoring 80+ runs in games because the game didn’t stop me. Prior to DD becoming more user-friendly in 14 the former selling point of The Show was its season-based modes RTTS and Franchise and their realism because of the comprehensiveness of player attributes. That realism would be in the gameplay code as well. Is it the wrong or right way to keep it real? I guess it depends on who you talk to.
That’s my interpretation anyway. I don’t agree with it because that’s why we have difficulty settings (from The Show 18 onwards this intervention has become way too obvious in my opinion, especially in March to October where you can sometimes sense after a single AB whether you’re going to win or lose a game).
An 0-17 season in the NFL would be a historic season. Mostly bc they only play 16 games.
-
@Danistones7 said in Artificial Intelligence:
Background: My first baseball game was MLB 99 on PS1, then MLB The Show 15 which I played a lot since it was like the most realistic thing ever (compared to 99), then The Show 19 which I just played a little bit (20-25 games) and this year for well-known reasons I have played a lot The Show 20. I play offline, franchise.
This year I decided to push it and play in Legend mode. As expected I've been crushed in every way possible: 5-39 season (one of the 3 seasons I've started), games of 21-0 with almost 30 hits allowed, ERA's of 15.00 to 18.00 for some pitchers and all the ridicule stats you could imagine. Still, in some way I still see this normal because of all the aforementioned.
Thread: I know that AI is a tricky subject in the video games business (been reading about it on the web), but because of the many hours I've spent playing this game I have realized certain things about AI. It has become clear to me that AI "forces" outcomes in the game, constantly. I have no issues on been crushed constantly despite the efforts to get better, but I do have issues when no matter how good I play a game everything favors the CPU, batters hit HR's out of everything, pitches landed everywhere but where expected, etc., and THEN after losing 8-9 games in a row I win a game with half the efforts on my pitching and hitting (still in Legend mode), throwing strikes in the middle of the plate that are fouled most of the times, hitting easily fastballs, etc.
In one game today (the reason of the existence of this post) I was doing pretty decently until 3rd inning (0-0), and in the following two innings I received 10 runs, very forced most of them, and then magically, still with the same pitcher I regain control while being effortless. Like if AI thought I had received enough punishment. It felt VERY unrealistic. And I'm not even going into the ratings issues (most of the time I have harder games against the Orioles than the Dodgers).
So, I've started feeling like it doesn't matter how good I want to be at this game, that I invest a ridiculous amount of time, is just forced to lose every time as AI "dictates", and win once every 10 -12 loses when AI "dictates", no matter what I do as a player, no matter how good or bad I do. That definitely kills the fun and everything else, that sort of weird "predestination".
I know no game is perfect. I know this is a pretty good sports game. I'm in love with the graphics, the old timers cards, and a lot of the stuff they put into it. Also there is a lot of things to improve. But the fundamental reason of the existence of this game and us buying it is the gameplay. And if I had to choose, I will start improving the game by working on the AI making sense.
I am very eager to read everybody else opinion, if this is just me, If I'm completely wrong, if there are things I need to understand better to really enjoy this game, if it's absurd to spent a lot of hours trying to get better against the CPU, I don't know.
Ya it does seem unrealistic. Every time I give up a bomb in a huge game changing moment for them to take the lead. 96% of the time I strikeout the next batter as if the cpu is trying to console me....smh....years and years of playing you start to pick up patterns
-
A admin locked this topic on
