The current state of sport simulation games
-
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
Ive been saying cards aren't content since last year. Everyone goes on about how great the content is, but putting cards or packs in the store isn't content. Giving you something to do with those cards once you have them is content, giving you a gameplay related path to earning them is content. Simply selling you a new card isn't content.
Getting rid of features is pretty bad here too, even in DD. In 17 and 18 they had stat grinds, collections, and game missions all working together. In 19 they added moments, which would have been fine, but the scuttled almost everything from the previous games. Is that really adding content? Or is it replacing what they already had instead of improving upon it?
I would even be okay if they decided to give us less playable content, if that would be a result of them putting extra time and effort into polishing the engine and the mechanics of the game. But like I said earlier, barely anything has changed over the years other than minor tweaks, the adjustment of sliders and some added animations.
I agree. But I'm not sure what the answer is. I have a feeling that this is how they want the game to play. It's a fine line between making a game that rewards good players without excluding mediocre players.
You can still implement that ideology while upgrading your game engine and mechanics overall. And this game is very due for a complete overhaul in my opinion.
For sure. I just think a lot if people want them to put out a heavily skill based game and I just can't see that happening.
They could easily satisfy both sides by creating separate game modes for the more casual players and the competitive players. Yet another fine example of innovative possibilites and untapped potential in my opinion.
Not sure how well that would work. Nobody wants to admit they suck and if the good rewards are in the competitive mode people are going to gravitate to that.
You may be right. I wouldnt personally be against it.
But in my vision of how the game should be there are no "rewards". That's typical DD/Ultimate Team ideology, they need to feed you "rewards" to open up your wallet if you miss out on any of them. You're hitting the nail on the head with what I'm arguing against, if there are no rewards in the form of player cards with preset attributes, then it doesn't matter on what level you compete; it's about having fun and having the experience of playing a simulation sports game.
Maybe I've just become too accustomed to it, but it would be boring for me if I wasn't working towards something, if there wasn't rewards. Maybe I'm just a gullible consumer, but I enjoy the chase.
Additionally, there is no going back from micro-transactions, gaming companies make more off that there the initial game purpose. They will never get rid of rewards or "card content", it brings in to much revenue.
They scale back if they receive backlash, but there is no way they companies ever go back to just accepting the initial purchase of the majority of games.
-
@eatyum said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
Ive been saying cards aren't content since last year. Everyone goes on about how great the content is, but putting cards or packs in the store isn't content. Giving you something to do with those cards once you have them is content, giving you a gameplay related path to earning them is content. Simply selling you a new card isn't content.
Getting rid of features is pretty bad here too, even in DD. In 17 and 18 they had stat grinds, collections, and game missions all working together. In 19 they added moments, which would have been fine, but the scuttled almost everything from the previous games. Is that really adding content? Or is it replacing what they already had instead of improving upon it?
I would even be okay if they decided to give us less playable content, if that would be a result of them putting extra time and effort into polishing the engine and the mechanics of the game. But like I said earlier, barely anything has changed over the years other than minor tweaks, the adjustment of sliders and some added animations.
I agree. But I'm not sure what the answer is. I have a feeling that this is how they want the game to play. It's a fine line between making a game that rewards good players without excluding mediocre players.
You can still implement that ideology while upgrading your game engine and mechanics overall. And this game is very due for a complete overhaul in my opinion.
For sure. I just think a lot if people want them to put out a heavily skill based game and I just can't see that happening.
They could easily satisfy both sides by creating separate game modes for the more casual players and the competitive players. Yet another fine example of innovative possibilites and untapped potential in my opinion.
Not sure how well that would work. Nobody wants to admit they suck and if the good rewards are in the competitive mode people are going to gravitate to that.
You may be right. I wouldnt personally be against it.
But in my vision of how the game should be there are no "rewards". That's typical DD/Ultimate Team ideology, they need to feed you "rewards" to open up your wallet if you miss out on any of them. You're hitting the nail on the head with what I'm arguing against, if there are no rewards in the form of player cards with preset attributes, then it doesn't matter on what level you compete; it's about having fun and having the experience of playing a simulation sports game.
Maybe I've just become too accustomed to it, but it would be boring for me if I wasn't working towards something, if there wasn't rewards. Maybe I'm just a gullible consumer, but I enjoy the chase.
Additionally, there is no going back from micro-transactions, gaming companies make more off that there the initial game purpose. They will never get rid of rewards or "card content", it brings in to much revenue.
They scale back if they receive backlash, but there is no way they companies ever go back to just accepting the initial purchase of the majority of games.
There are other ways to achieve rewards though if you want to implement such a mode. And that isn't even my biggest gripe, I specifically mentioned that multiple times already. I don't hate the idea of DD or Ultimate Team. I hate 2 results of those modes, one being the pay wall and 2 being the fact that developers become lazy and only care about adding player cards and programs into those modes because that's bringing in the money. Game quality suffers because of it, that's undeniable. I made cases for both Madden and MLBTS where the game has not improved at all over multiple years and sometimes it even got worse. If they would actually use their extra generated revenue to keep the game top notch state of the art, I'd be fine with that. But that's not happening, it's a copy/paste fest.
-
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@eatyum said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@maskedgrappler said in The current state of sport simulation games:
Ive been saying cards aren't content since last year. Everyone goes on about how great the content is, but putting cards or packs in the store isn't content. Giving you something to do with those cards once you have them is content, giving you a gameplay related path to earning them is content. Simply selling you a new card isn't content.
Getting rid of features is pretty bad here too, even in DD. In 17 and 18 they had stat grinds, collections, and game missions all working together. In 19 they added moments, which would have been fine, but the scuttled almost everything from the previous games. Is that really adding content? Or is it replacing what they already had instead of improving upon it?
I would even be okay if they decided to give us less playable content, if that would be a result of them putting extra time and effort into polishing the engine and the mechanics of the game. But like I said earlier, barely anything has changed over the years other than minor tweaks, the adjustment of sliders and some added animations.
I agree. But I'm not sure what the answer is. I have a feeling that this is how they want the game to play. It's a fine line between making a game that rewards good players without excluding mediocre players.
You can still implement that ideology while upgrading your game engine and mechanics overall. And this game is very due for a complete overhaul in my opinion.
For sure. I just think a lot if people want them to put out a heavily skill based game and I just can't see that happening.
They could easily satisfy both sides by creating separate game modes for the more casual players and the competitive players. Yet another fine example of innovative possibilites and untapped potential in my opinion.
Not sure how well that would work. Nobody wants to admit they suck and if the good rewards are in the competitive mode people are going to gravitate to that.
You may be right. I wouldnt personally be against it.
But in my vision of how the game should be there are no "rewards". That's typical DD/Ultimate Team ideology, they need to feed you "rewards" to open up your wallet if you miss out on any of them. You're hitting the nail on the head with what I'm arguing against, if there are no rewards in the form of player cards with preset attributes, then it doesn't matter on what level you compete; it's about having fun and having the experience of playing a simulation sports game.
Maybe I've just become too accustomed to it, but it would be boring for me if I wasn't working towards something, if there wasn't rewards. Maybe I'm just a gullible consumer, but I enjoy the chase.
Additionally, there is no going back from micro-transactions, gaming companies make more off that there the initial game purpose. They will never get rid of rewards or "card content", it brings in to much revenue.
They scale back if they receive backlash, but there is no way they companies ever go back to just accepting the initial purchase of the majority of games.
There are other ways to achieve rewards though if you want to implement such a mode. And that isn't even my biggest gripe, I specifically mentioned that multiple times already. I don't hate the idea of DD or Ultimate Team. I hate 2 results of those modes, one being the pay wall and 2 being the fact that developers become lazy and only care about adding player cards and programs into those modes because that's bringing in the money. Game quality suffers because of it, that's undeniable. I made cases for both Madden and MLBTS where the game has not improved at all over multiple years and sometimes it even got worse. If they would actually use their extra generated revenue to keep the game top notch state of the art, I'd be fine with that. But that's not happening, it's a copy/paste fest.
While I definitely agree that game developers, especially sports games, get lazy because they know people will still buy, I also think part of it has to do with the yearly cycle of sports games.
Call of Duty comes out every year, but has multiple studios, so one studio gets 2-3 years to work on theirs, if it was only one, we'd see the copy/paste stuff there to.
And honestly, Idk how that issue gets solved, they aren't just going to stop doing yearly releases.
And don't get me wrong, they could still do way more then they are now even with the yearly releases, but it's a complicated issue.
-
If you want some entertainment, head over to reddit on the latest release of 2k21. It seems they may have overlooked that shooting a basketball into the basket higher than 20% of the time would make the game more appealing.
-
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
I agree that Madden and Fifa or any other EA product is worse. But the evolution of MLB The Show has come to an unnecessary standstill, they can innovate in so many areas but they intentionally choose to play it safe and stick with what they know. There's a Japanese baseball game on the market, Healy has made some videos about it on YouTube, which is not how I envision MLBTS should be but it does put you out of your comfort zone and opens your eyes to how a baseball game could be developed differently. I highly suggest you go check one of those videos just to get an idea of what it looks like. Now again, I'm not advocating them to go that direction but it is refreshing to see things handled way differently as I do feel that game is more up to date technically than the current day MLBTS mechanics.
I agree with a lot of your points, but the show being at a standstill I don’t really agree with. I think there are a lot of issues with their rng coding and sliders they use in a lot of different areas of the game, but I think at least sds is trying to move forward compared to other companies and games. Just look at changes to this game this year. A new game mode in showdown I think is a great addition, but needs an overhaul in terms of their sliders and mechanics of the mode, but it’s also the first year of implementation so that’s common. Last year they introduced moments so the last 2 years they have added a new mode to the game, yes these modes are not perfect, but to me that shows they are trying to keep the game fresh and new additions. In terms of gameplay this year, pitch speeds were increased, defense was made more of a priority, the button accuracy speed was increased as well as adding a Perfect throw meter with catching and outfield that implements a perfect input for the best possible throw. And of course the biggest gameplay change of perfect/perfect.
Yes this game has many gameplay issues but, for me at least, SDS has shown they are trying to push the game forward without a complete overhaul. In my opinion the biggest issue is in the coding, sliders, and rng formulas. I think they put a coding in the game similar to racing games “rubber banding” to help lower players feel more comfortable and not get blown out so they can have more retention, but they clearly messed up in the programming department. And honestly if this game played well, in coding terms, this would be an amazing game.
In terms of DD and cards, yes this is a mode designed for monetary gain but at the same time, it’s what actually sells a good majority of copies of the game. I remember growing up with baseball/sports games before online was used, and unless you were a die hard fan or there were major graphical/game mode changes, there was no real reason to go and buy the newest addition of the game because all it really was is just an update of rosters. So you would buy a brand new game just for a new roster, for most consumers this isn’t worth it. Especially now with people being able to create their own rosters and edit players stats and share these rosters online, there would be no reason to buy a new game, unless there is Major graphical/gameplay changes.
Simply put, their programming department needs an overhaul and needs to create and adjust new rng formulas to create better game play
-
@CCCStunna30 said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
I agree that Madden and Fifa or any other EA product is worse. But the evolution of MLB The Show has come to an unnecessary standstill, they can innovate in so many areas but they intentionally choose to play it safe and stick with what they know. There's a Japanese baseball game on the market, Healy has made some videos about it on YouTube, which is not how I envision MLBTS should be but it does put you out of your comfort zone and opens your eyes to how a baseball game could be developed differently. I highly suggest you go check one of those videos just to get an idea of what it looks like. Now again, I'm not advocating them to go that direction but it is refreshing to see things handled way differently as I do feel that game is more up to date technically than the current day MLBTS mechanics.
I agree with a lot of your points, but the show being at a standstill I don’t really agree with. I think there are a lot of issues with their rng coding and sliders they use in a lot of different areas of the game, but I think at least sds is trying to move forward compared to other companies and games. Just look at changes to this game this year. A new game mode in showdown I think is a great addition, but needs an overhaul in terms of their sliders and mechanics of the mode, but it’s also the first year of implementation so that’s common. Last year they introduced moments so the last 2 years they have added a new mode to the game, yes these modes are not perfect, but to me that shows they are trying to keep the game fresh and new additions. In terms of gameplay this year, pitch speeds were increased, defense was made more of a priority, the button accuracy speed was increased as well as adding a Perfect throw meter with catching and outfield that implements a perfect input for the best possible throw. And of course the biggest gameplay change of perfect/perfect.
Yes this game has many gameplay issues but, for me at least, SDS has shown they are trying to push the game forward without a complete overhaul. In my opinion the biggest issue is in the coding, sliders, and rng formulas. I think they put a coding in the game similar to racing games “rubber banding” to help lower players feel more comfortable and not get blown out so they can have more retention, but they clearly messed up in the programming department. And honestly if this game played well, in coding terms, this would be an amazing game.
In terms of DD and cards, yes this is a mode designed for monetary gain but at the same time, it’s what actually sells a good majority of copies of the game. I remember growing up with baseball/sports games before online was used, and unless you were a die hard fan or there were major graphical/game mode changes, there was no real reason to go and buy the newest addition of the game because all it really was is just an update of rosters. So you would buy a brand new game just for a new roster, for most consumers this isn’t worth it. Especially now with people being able to create their own rosters and edit players stats and share these rosters online, there would be no reason to buy a new game, unless there is Major graphical/gameplay changes.
Simply put, their programming department needs an overhaul and needs to create and adjust new rng formulas to create better game play
I'm talking about real engine/mechanical changes though. This game has been the same for many years in that regard, no matter how many moments/showdowns or other stuff is added. That is content, the meat on the bones. I'm talking about the bones of the game, the core of it all. Even though the game plays very differently these last few years, that is all achieved by tweaks and slider adjustments because the core of the game, the bones, is still the very same and it desperately needs a complete overhaul.
-
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
I'm talking about real engine/mechanical changes though. This game has been the same for many years in that regard, no matter how many moments/showdowns or other stuff is added. That is content, the meat on the bones. I'm talking about the bones of the game, the core of it all. Even though the game plays very differently these last few years, that is all achieved by tweaks and slider adjustments because the core of the game, the bones, is still the very same and it desperately needs a complete overhaul.
So when I was describing the programming and coding, I’m kinda including the game engine to an extent because to me they are somewhat one in the same. I’m not a programmer or have any real knowledge of coding, but in my mind, and I could be completely wrong, but the game engine can only do what it’s programmed and coded to do. So no matter what engine is being used, if the programming and coding of how the game determines results is messed up, the game engine won’t undue that. So in my mind there is no real point changing the game engine unless the formulas for determining results are changed. Kinda like dropping a Ferrari engine in a Toyota Celica without modifying the celica to accommodate the Ferrari engine.
-
@CCCStunna30 said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
I'm talking about real engine/mechanical changes though. This game has been the same for many years in that regard, no matter how many moments/showdowns or other stuff is added. That is content, the meat on the bones. I'm talking about the bones of the game, the core of it all. Even though the game plays very differently these last few years, that is all achieved by tweaks and slider adjustments because the core of the game, the bones, is still the very same and it desperately needs a complete overhaul.
So when I was describing the programming and coding, I’m kinda including the game engine to an extent because to me they are somewhat one in the same. I’m not a programmer or have any real knowledge of coding, but in my mind, and I could be completely wrong, but the game engine can only do what it’s programmed and coded to do. So no matter what engine is being used, if the programming and coding of how the game determines results is messed up, the game engine won’t undue that. So in my mind there is no real point changing the game engine unless the formulas for determining results are changed. Kinda like dropping a Ferrari engine in a Toyota Celica without modifying the celica to accommodate the Ferrari engine.
It's the other way around, the engine comes first and then the additional coding and programming follows.
-
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
It's the other way around, the engine comes first and then the additional coding and programming follows.
I can understand that, but what I'm saying is whether or not the engine comes first does not matter to their mindset. If they like their current coding and hitting results, then the new engine wont matter because they will code it to get similar results. The fact that they have not adjusted hitting in a long time and the last time they even addressed the community about hitting they they provided stats that basically came across as well we dont care what you think you know or feel about how the game plays, here is our "statistics" and were basically gloating about how the game is playing how they want it to play. This tells me that no matter what engine is used, their programmers think the game is playing how it is supposed to and will use whatever engine to continue to get the same statistical results. That is my point about their programming and coding needing to change.
-
@CCCStunna30 said in The current state of sport simulation games:
@raesONE said in The current state of sport simulation games:
It's the other way around, the engine comes first and then the additional coding and programming follows.
I can understand that, but what I'm saying is whether or not the engine comes first does not matter to their mindset. If they like their current coding and hitting results, then the new engine wont matter because they will code it to get similar results. The fact that they have not adjusted hitting in a long time and the last time they even addressed the community about hitting they they provided stats that basically came across as well we dont care what you think you know or feel about how the game plays, here is our "statistics" and were basically gloating about how the game is playing how they want it to play. This tells me that no matter what engine is used, their programmers think the game is playing how it is supposed to and will use whatever engine to continue to get the same statistical results. That is my point about their programming and coding needing to change.
I think you make a fair point but I also think they're limited in their options due to their engine and what they have. Due to these limitations they need to find middle ground to keep everyone engaged just enough throughout the year and they accept the constant complaints that are a result of it under the mindset that the community "will never be happy and complain about everything". This whole industry needs a wakeup call.
-
All sports games are a joke. This year has been sad. MLB failed, PGA failed, and Madden failed. I guess Apex and Zelda is all we got. Apex pushes the limit on packs, as well.
-
@TooGood3434 said in The current state of sport simulation games:
All sports games are a joke. This year has been sad. MLB failed, PGA failed, and Madden failed. I guess Apex and Zelda is all we got. Apex pushes the limit on packs, as well.
But at least Apex is free to play. They can do whatever they want in their game because of that in my opinion. But we pay a full Triple A price for MLB The Show, Madden and NBA2K.
-
Oh dont get me wrong, I crush at Apex. The Show is my baseball fix. I agree the price doesnt match the quality from the SDS team. If I showed that effort at my job, I would be let go. It truly unacceptable for a game/engine to be this bad.
-
I cant wait till Cyberpunk drops. I wasn't planning to buy MLB 20 but then Cyberpunk got delayed
I try to fight my way through an entire game but i just cant because the scripting is too obvious. Thats my issue. Not saying that games are fixed, thats not it. The better player still wins in the end as it balances out but the experience is horrible. The game plays you, not the other way around.
- Not reward good hits because you are in the lead, only until the later innings so your opponent is engaged. If your opponent is better, its the opposite.
- When your behind, you get hits off the crappiest PCI placements.
- Pitches that magically hang with perfect release ALWAYS get destroyed for moonshots
- Crappy forced errors by good fielders are almost always followed by a homerun.
- When your ahead, any mistimed swing is an instant flyout, popup or ground out, but your opponent who cant hit [censored] gets foul off, foul off, foul off, check swing, check swing, sitting fast ball but still fouls off change ups as very early? or vice versa.
i could go on and on...
my suspension of disbelief is completely gone
-
@flavs83 said in The current state of sport simulation games:
I cant wait till Cyberpunk drops. I wasn't planning to buy MLB 20 but then Cyberpunk got delayed
Can't wait for Cyberpunk either!
-
A admin locked this topic on
