Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone
-
@codywolfgang_xbl said in Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone:
@the_joneser_psn said in Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone:
@alpha-wolf-x1x_xbl said in Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone:
Apparently it’s supposed to represent the area that you’re looking at, not an actual baseball bat.
Exactly. And what a stupid mechanic to introduce into a baseball game… Of course a batter is going to look at the ball. While we’re at it, let’s just get rid of the whole PCI…
I get that people want to prove that they’re really good at moving their thumbs around, but, really? Controlling the batter’s eyes? If you’re Rube Waddell and have to struggle to not look for fire engines, then maybe, but otherwise, no.
You are honestly right…every pitch combined with location has an exact timing window to where a batter would make solid contact. I’d be willing to bet most off center contact in real life is the result of incorrect timing of the swing plane in relation to the pitch and not error in the “location of the swing.” I think every MLB player can put the barrel on the ball.
From there they could use real statistics to implement rng on balls put in play. Perfect Perfect…60 percent hit probability…..roll over…20 percent. There would still be a skill gap.
Perfect-perfect at 60% hit probability? Are you trying to get the devs assassinated? Lol...
-
@codywolfgang_xbl said in Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone:
You are honestly right…every pitch combined with location has an exact timing window to where a batter would make solid contact. I’d be willing to bet most off center contact in real life is the result of incorrect timing of the swing plane in relation to the pitch and not error in the “location of the swing.” I think every MLB player can put the barrel on the ball.
From there they could use real statistics to implement rng on balls put in play. Perfect Perfect…60 percent hit probability…..roll over…20 percent. There would still be a skill gap.
I think you’re spot on about timing - the real game is all timing. Using real statistics to determine RNG would be a huge step forward. IMO, can’t do a baseball game without it (the game itself is a lesson in failure despite doing everything right), but what we’re all seeing certainly isn’t based on actual statistical outcomes.
I’d love to see a different mechanic, altogether, but something like analog stride with incredibly unforgiving timing windows based on pitch location would be great (pushing a single button to mimic a swing is lame, too) … and, yes, still plenty of room for a skill gap. As is, we’re left with FPS mechanics jammed in to satisfy all the weirdos who need to prove their “stick skills,” and it comes at the expense of anything resembling the actual game of baseball.
-
@the_joneser_psn said in Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone:
@codywolfgang_xbl said in Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone:
You are honestly right…every pitch combined with location has an exact timing window to where a batter would make solid contact. I’d be willing to bet most off center contact in real life is the result of incorrect timing of the swing plane in relation to the pitch and not error in the “location of the swing.” I think every MLB player can put the barrel on the ball.
From there they could use real statistics to implement rng on balls put in play. Perfect Perfect…60 percent hit probability…..roll over…20 percent. There would still be a skill gap.
I think you’re spot on about timing - the real game is all timing. Using real statistics to determine RNG would be a huge step forward. IMO, can’t do a baseball game without it (the game itself is a lesson in failure despite doing everything right), but what we’re all seeing certainly isn’t based on actual statistical outcomes.
I’d love to see a different mechanic, altogether, but something like analog stride with incredibly unforgiving timing windows based on pitch location would be great (pushing a single button to mimic a swing is lame, too) … and, yes, still plenty of room for a skill gap. As is, we’re left with FPS mechanics jammed in to satisfy all the weirdos who need to prove their “stick skills,” and it comes at the expense of anything resembling the actual game of baseball.
Very well said, get rid of the fps stick stuff and make the timing windows tighter. I completely agree and your suggestion of mixing in analog stride is a great idea….it would fit right in with the Pinpoint Pitching and unforgiving timing windows.
-
@the_joneser_psn said in Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone:
@codywolfgang_xbl said in Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone:
You are honestly right…every pitch combined with location has an exact timing window to where a batter would make solid contact. I’d be willing to bet most off center contact in real life is the result of incorrect timing of the swing plane in relation to the pitch and not error in the “location of the swing.” I think every MLB player can put the barrel on the ball.
From there they could use real statistics to implement rng on balls put in play. Perfect Perfect…60 percent hit probability…..roll over…20 percent. There would still be a skill gap.
I think you’re spot on about timing - the real game is all timing. Using real statistics to determine RNG would be a huge step forward. IMO, can’t do a baseball game without it (the game itself is a lesson in failure despite doing everything right), but what we’re all seeing certainly isn’t based on actual statistical outcomes.
I’d love to see a different mechanic, altogether, but something like analog stride with incredibly unforgiving timing windows based on pitch location would be great (pushing a single button to mimic a swing is lame, too) … and, yes, still plenty of room for a skill gap. As is, we’re left with FPS mechanics jammed in to satisfy all the weirdos who need to prove their “stick skills,” and it comes at the expense of anything resembling the actual game of baseball.
There's no way to replicate what happens in the batter's box with a controller. Stride with a pure timing mechanic and a "more unforgiving" timing window with results based on "real life stats" would be a disaster. The RNG that stats-based outcomes would require would enrage people. You think backlash is bad this year? Just try that.
There are no perfect solutions. The benefit of the PCI is that it gives the user much more control over the situation. Yes, it is "duck hunt," but it has to be seen as a video game convention and not an attempt to replicate real life. The PCI gives the user control over both timing and location, and it seems like the best compromise in an impossible situation.
The problems this year are the outer PCI (foul balls for days) and excellent input resulting far too often in outs -- SDS itself says that in competitive mode "stick skills reign supreme," and they don't.
Excellent input needs to have good results in online competitive mode far more often than it does right now, and outer PCI needs to go (along with outlier, with sinkers even further nerfed). There would be more K's, more consistently "fair" results, and far less whining.
-
The outer PCI as it is now called has always been there. If you remember a few years ago they switched it to "buckshot" feedback to justify the RNG that happens in the game.
All they've done is change what attributes affect the inner portion and outer portion. It's not a design flaw, it's a developed system used to maximize player engagement cloaked as a medium that "produces simulation baseball".
It's purpose is to maximize player engagement. Get as many people to play the game as possible and hopefully purchase stubs along the way.
This game may be shoved in our faces as the lovable first party studio baby that was the cream of the crop for years. That ain't the case anymore. It's entered into the realm of ultimate team modes and micro transactions.
It's still much better than other models in terms of content and the ability to earn it as opposed to paying for it. That's about all we can give them credit for. The majority of their resources are refining DD. RTTS being integrated in DD through "My Ballplayer" tells the whole story.
-
@spc_garza_psn said in Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone:
@balsamicarrow88 said in Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone:
@spc_garza_psn said in Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone:
@balsamicarrow88 said in Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone:
It’s clear SDS literally has zero clue what they are doing. This may be the beginning of the end for this company, they broke a game that didn’t need fixed.
This literally has nothing to do with the post. This bashing will never get nothing done.
Oh you just now know how things work do you? BTW yes it had everything to do with your post. I will say what I want whenever I want.
You sound like a toddler.
But the dude will still buy the game, still pay for stubs, then come here and complain like a kid who didn't get what he wanted. Sds feeds off these kids
-
@wildthingwilly_psn said in Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone:
@spc_garza_psn said in Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone:
Let’s agree on one thing here.
It's sad a game 7 years ago in mlb 15 had better hitting than now
Better pitching in 17, What changed since 17 the 125 attributes.
-
@suntlacrimae50_mlbts said in Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone:
There's no way to replicate what happens in the batter's box with a controller. Stride with a pure timing mechanic and a "more unforgiving" timing window with results based on "real life stats" would be a disaster. The RNG that stats-based outcomes would require would enrage people. You think backlash is bad this year? Just try that.
There are no perfect solutions. The benefit of the PCI is that it gives the user much more control over the situation. Yes, it is "duck hunt," but it has to be seen as a video game convention and not an attempt to replicate real life. The PCI gives the user control over both timing and location, and it seems like the best compromise in an impossible situation.
The problems this year are the outer PCI (foul balls for days) and excellent input resulting far too often in outs -- SDS itself says that in competitive mode "stick skills reign supreme," and they don't.
Excellent input needs to have good results in online competitive mode far more often than it does right now, and outer PCI needs to go (along with outlier, with sinkers even further nerfed). There would be more K's, more consistently "fair" results, and far less whining.
While I agree that there simply isn't a way to replicate an at bat with a controller, there's no logical leap between that and certain "disaster" if the mechanics move toward a better system centered on timing and stats-based results. That you or others here wouldn't like it would be fair to say, but I'd venture to guess that there are plenty of people who are just as unsatisfied with controlling a batter's eyes.
Quite simply, there doesn't need to be some awkwardly contrived system to give the user "more control over the situation"; you don't need to aim a cross-hair at a hoop in a basketball game, or put a reticle on a receiver's chest in a football game... you time it, and so far as I know, those games can still be "competitive." More to the point, that some people need to prove themselves by demonstrating their prowess where little thumbsticks and buttons are concerned should not be the foundation of an enjoyable video game. Again, I'd posit that most people buy and play this game because they like baseball, and they'd like the product to look and behave more like baseball.
I get that you and others may like the little cross-hair-for-eyes mini game, but many of us find it distracting and, quite frankly, stupid. A timing based input that goes beyond a single button press leaves plenty of room for "excellent input," and "unforgiving timing windows" would equate to more K's and more consistently fair results. It may not qualify it for an e-sports competition, but, honestly, who cares?
Personally, I'd like a baseball game where people don't hit .500 and there aren’t more homeruns than singles. I don't care that input isn't rewarded all the time... can't recall how many good swings I took over the years that resulted in an out. Somehow, it all turned out okay.
-
@eatyum_mlbts said in Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone:
I've seen vocal streamers who are unhappy with the game basically saying the same thing. The community will say we want this! And then when they get it, they turn around and reverse course.
This is very much true.
We want new commentators.
Bring back the old commentators.We hate required moments.
Why did you take away the required daily moments program?Pinpoint pitching is too easy
Why did you change pinpoint pitching?This game is cut and paste
Why don't have have the same exact programs you did last year?The list is endless
-
@the_joneser_psn said in Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone:
@suntlacrimae50_mlbts said in Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone:
There's no way to replicate what happens in the batter's box with a controller. Stride with a pure timing mechanic and a "more unforgiving" timing window with results based on "real life stats" would be a disaster. The RNG that stats-based outcomes would require would enrage people. You think backlash is bad this year? Just try that.
There are no perfect solutions. The benefit of the PCI is that it gives the user much more control over the situation. Yes, it is "duck hunt," but it has to be seen as a video game convention and not an attempt to replicate real life. The PCI gives the user control over both timing and location, and it seems like the best compromise in an impossible situation.
The problems this year are the outer PCI (foul balls for days) and excellent input resulting far too often in outs -- SDS itself says that in competitive mode "stick skills reign supreme," and they don't.
Excellent input needs to have good results in online competitive mode far more often than it does right now, and outer PCI needs to go (along with outlier, with sinkers even further nerfed). There would be more K's, more consistently "fair" results, and far less whining.
While I agree that there simply isn't a way to replicate an at bat with a controller, there's no logical leap between that and certain "disaster" if the mechanics move toward a better system centered on timing and stats-based results. That you or others here wouldn't like it would be fair to say, but I'd venture to guess that there are plenty of people who are just as unsatisfied with controlling a batter's eyes.
Quite simply, there doesn't need to be some awkwardly contrived system to give the user "more control over the situation"; you don't need to aim a cross-hair at a hoop in a basketball game, or put a reticle on a receiver's chest in a football game... you time it, and so far as I know, those games can still be "competitive." More to the point, that some people need to prove themselves by demonstrating their prowess where little thumbsticks and buttons are concerned should not be the foundation of an enjoyable video game. Again, I'd posit that most people buy and play this game because they like baseball, and they'd like the product to look and behave more like baseball.
I get that you and others may like the little cross-hair-for-eyes mini game, but many of us find it distracting and, quite frankly, stupid. A timing based input that goes beyond a single button press leaves plenty of room for "excellent input," and "unforgiving timing windows" would equate to more K's and more consistently fair results. It may not qualify it for an e-sports competition, but, honestly, who cares?
Personally, I'd like a baseball game where people don't hit .500 and there aren’t more homeruns than singles. I don't care that input isn't rewarded all the time... can't recall how many good swings I took over the years that resulted in an out. Somehow, it all turned out okay.
I personally hate online competitive, so I'm on your side theoretically. But you're still wrong
For RS, BR, and Events, there needs to be a system that gives maximum control so that user input reigns supreme. That's what we have now with the PCI. Of course, it's "broken," but in theory that's what we have.
In 2K shooting is as artificially conventional for that sport as zone hitting is for MLBTS. Hitting a green release while remembering all the different stick moves for different shots with different timings for different players based on shooting skills...you get it. There's as much going on there, if not more, than there is with aim and press while batting.
And look, if SDS says that competitive mode is a stick skills mode, then perfect-perfects should be good results like 90% of the time if not always. So they're the ones backing themselves in a corner on that.
I couldn't care less about competitive online play, but it has to consistently reward stick skills.
I spend most of my time in single player mode, but I can still be fair to those who play online competitively. There are different ways to play -- they're there, so you can use them if you want.
-
@suntlacrimae50_mlbts said in [Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone]
For RS, BR, and Events, there needs to be a system that gives maximum control so that user input reigns supreme. That's what we have now with the PCI. Of course, it's "broken," but in theory that's what we have.
In 2K shooting is as artificially conventional for that sport as zone hitting is for MLBTS. Hitting a green release while remembering all the different stick moves for different shots with different timings for different players based on shooting skills...you get it. There's as much going on there, if not more, than there is with aim and press while batting.
And look, if SDS says that competitive mode is a stick skills mode, then perfect-perfects should be good results like 90% of the time if not always. So they're the ones backing themselves in a corner on that.
I couldn't care less about competitive online play, but it has to consistently reward stick skills.
I spend most of my time in single player mode, but I can still be fair to those who play online competitively. There are different ways to play -- they're there, so you can use them if you want.
I appreciate the good-natured disagreement
Again, though, I think this is more a matter of you not liking what I'm saying, rather than me being wrong (hard for either of us to be right or wrong, here - we’re just stating our opinions). I actually like online competitive play, and have logged many hundreds of games over many years (I’m 48 – been playing this since it was a thing).
And who says stick skills aren’t reigning supreme, currently? Those who are consistently good at manipulating the current stick scheme are consistently going to perform better than players who aren’t. Someone who consistently makes WS is going to beat the snot out of someone who lives in the 600s nine times out of ten… or more. That they might lose a game to a lesser opponent here and there does not mean that stick skills aren’t rewarded. It just means that they aren’t rewarded every time, without exception. That was never promised, and if it did work that way, some people would be hitting .800 and averaging 15 HRs a game. Maybe some of these crybabies want that, but I imagine that’s a pretty small minority.
SDS never put a percentage on how often stick skills would be rewarded, they just said they would be. Why does that necessitate a high success rate? That could be 90%, or it could be 60%. [censored], this being at least loosely based on baseball, it could be 30%. The determining factor is how often a player gets to that max-chance threshold; if it's 60% on perfect-perfect, then players with good stick skills are going to get their chance at a 60% success rate far more often than someone who simply can’t use the PCI well. The lesser player may fail miserably 90% of the time (succeeding at a small clip anyway, because that’s life), and only get their crack at the 60% threshold 10% of the time. That might win them a game here and there, but over many games, it settles where it should. In the moment, some people might cry a little bit because they lined out a lot and lost a game they could have won, but the better player usually wins. I think we're seeing a lot of the Dunning-Kruger effect here.
And timing with a stick-swing is input. Throw in a little influence (push up and left for a righty swinging at an inside pitch, right for outside) and it gets more complex, widening the skill gap. Punish more often people who can’t time the window precisely, and it gets wider still. That may not be the type of input we have now, but it is still input, and mastering it is skill with the stick.
I don’t believe in keeping a failing system simply because it’s what we have. Let’s be bold, and say no to controlling eye balls.
-
@the_joneser_psn said in Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone:
@suntlacrimae50_mlbts said in [Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone]
For RS, BR, and Events, there needs to be a system that gives maximum control so that user input reigns supreme. That's what we have now with the PCI. Of course, it's "broken," but in theory that's what we have.
In 2K shooting is as artificially conventional for that sport as zone hitting is for MLBTS. Hitting a green release while remembering all the different stick moves for different shots with different timings for different players based on shooting skills...you get it. There's as much going on there, if not more, than there is with aim and press while batting.
And look, if SDS says that competitive mode is a stick skills mode, then perfect-perfects should be good results like 90% of the time if not always. So they're the ones backing themselves in a corner on that.
I couldn't care less about competitive online play, but it has to consistently reward stick skills.
I spend most of my time in single player mode, but I can still be fair to those who play online competitively. There are different ways to play -- they're there, so you can use them if you want.
I appreciate the good-natured disagreement
Again, though, I think this is more a matter of you not liking what I'm saying, rather than me being wrong (hard for either of us to be right or wrong, here - we’re just stating our opinions). I actually like online competitive play, and have logged many hundreds of games over many years (I’m 48 – been playing this since it was a thing).
And who says stick skills aren’t reigning supreme, currently? Those who are consistently good at manipulating the current stick scheme are consistently going to perform better than players who aren’t. Someone who consistently makes WS is going to beat the snot out of someone who lives in the 600s nine times out of ten… or more. That they might lose a game to a lesser opponent here and there does not mean that stick skills aren’t rewarded. It just means that they aren’t rewarded every time, without exception. That was never promised, and if it did work that way, some people would be hitting .800 and averaging 15 HRs a game. Maybe some of these crybabies want that, but I imagine that’s a pretty small minority.
SDS never put a percentage on how often stick skills would be rewarded, they just said they would be. Why does that necessitate a high success rate? That could be 90%, or it could be 60%. [censored], this being at least loosely based on baseball, it could be 30%. The determining factor is how often a player gets to that max-chance threshold; if it's 60% on perfect-perfect, then players with good stick skills are going to get their chance at a 60% success rate far more often than someone who simply can’t use the PCI well. The lesser player may fail miserably 90% of the time (succeeding at a small clip anyway, because that’s life), and only get their crack at the 60% threshold 10% of the time. That might win them a game here and there, but over many games, it settles where it should. In the moment, some people might cry a little bit because they lined out a lot and lost a game they could have won, but the better player usually wins. I think we're seeing a lot of the Dunning-Kruger effect here.
And timing with a stick-swing is input. Throw in a little influence (push up and left for a righty swinging at an inside pitch, right for outside) and it gets more complex, widening the skill gap. Punish more often people who can’t time the window precisely, and it gets wider still. That may not be the type of input we have now, but it is still input, and mastering it is skill with the stick.
I don’t believe in keeping a failing system simply because it’s what we have. Let’s be bold, and say no to controlling eye balls.
Yep, gotcha. 47 here, but I will not bow down to my elders.
Agree to disagree. SDS's problem, and the problem with a lot of live service games these days, is that they're at the mercy of "community feedback." I miss the days when a game was made, and you had to live with it. There's a close-endedness there that helped you just accept things and move one.
Good swapping opinions with you, even if mine is always the right one...!
-
@the_joneser_psn said in Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone:
@alpha-wolf-x1x_xbl said in Can we all agree that The OUTER PCI should be gone:
Apparently it’s supposed to represent the area that you’re looking at, not an actual baseball bat.
Exactly. And what a stupid mechanic to introduce into a baseball game… Of course a batter is going to look at the ball. While we’re at it, let’s just get rid of the whole PCI…
I get that people want to prove that they’re really good at moving their thumbs around, but, really? Controlling the batter’s eyes? If you’re Rube Waddell and have to struggle to not look for fire engines, then maybe, but otherwise, no.
Preach
-
A admin locked this topic on
