Shoulda posted here
-
The very method of the '23 version of this game completely and totally sucks the very life out of much of the fun factor.
First 1-2 weeks of play everyone has at least 97 rated players up and down their roster. So, if you play online you're playing against the same level teams. Mostly identical players. Maybe some 99's thrown in but, in the great scheme of things, how much difference "should" there be between a 97 and 99 player? Very little if the game actually coded things with any sort of real-life consistent algorithm.
What's the purpose of just dummying down every event and making these 90+ players so accessible? It used to be fun those many years ago to still be fighting it out with your favorite 85 rated player (because you might only have one or 2 diamonds) 2 months into game play. Forget about that. 85 players haven't seen my roster since I've loaded it up with entirely 97-99 rated 3 weeks after the game dropped.
It's not a great strategy or motivator for many long-time fans. I'm sure some love it to death. But, it's like the "everyone gets a trophy" vibe. To the truly competitive , or even marginally so player, just sucks the life out of the game.
-
I still like it. I just feel like there’s nothing to grind for since I completed TA. Only so much BR/events/RS a person can take.
I’m still enjoying it though. I’m not gonna share much of an opinion until I see what season 2 and beyond looks like. May surprise us
-
Oh great, another 99s suks thread
-
@ShowProdigy_MLBTS said in Shoulda posted here:
First 1-2 weeks of play everyone has at least 97 rated players up and down their roster. So, if you play online you're playing against the same level teams
So your issue is that you're playing on a level playing field and getting smashed online?
Also, every time i see posts like this, i cant help but think the issue some people have with 99s so early is the fact that they cant just grind BR and events all day while manipulating the market and keeping the prices high for people who dont grind online but still want the cards.
-
-
I’m enjoying it. It’s a shame you aren’t.
-
You know what’s great?
All the people that whined year after year about the game being the same, are now whining about it changing. -
I’m enjoying grinding the programs for now. Played 8 ranked games went 6-2 but then ran into super stacked teams.. my fear is once I get back online I’ll be facing 99 billy Wagner and 99 josh hader every game.. that’s gonna kinda stink
-
@ssamy777_NSW said in Shoulda posted here:
I’m enjoying grinding the programs for now. Played 8 ranked games went 6-2 but then ran into super stacked teams.. my fear is once I get back online I’ll be facing 99 billy Wagner and 99 josh hader every game.. that’s gonna kinda stink
Wagner is a 96. You can get Soto and Chafin for free btw.
-
@Easy_Duhz_It_ said in Shoulda posted here:
@ShowProdigy_MLBTS said in Shoulda posted here:
First 1-2 weeks of play everyone has at least 97 rated players up and down their roster. So, if you play online you're playing against the same level teams
So your issue is that you're playing on a level playing field and getting smashed online?
Also, every time i see posts like this, i cant help but think the issue some people have with 99s so early is the fact that they cant just grind BR and events all day while manipulating the market and keeping the prices high for people who dont grind online but still want the cards.
I did not say I'm getting smashed or smashing. I've won every online game I've played.
It's just boring I suppose. I'll slightly reiterate my point because it appears some (you perhaps) missed it. Within 2-3 weeks after launch of this year's game, pretty much every roster was composed of 97-99 players. That is a ratings range of 3. Which is pretty negligible. At most, if it was to be kept interesting, that range would be no smaller than 10. 90-99 players.
I understand, and you also said, it really doesn't matter in MLB the Show because ratings are barely factored into outcomes. I get that and agree 100%.
However, the first week of the season, when my roster was a fair mix of 80's/90's there was an element of strategy involved. In key situations I would bring in my higher rated relievers. For example, I might have a mop-up game going where I would be winning by 5 runs late and just bring in a 83-86 reliever. But, if I had a 1 run lead I would bring in my 90+ rated stopper/closer. NOW I pop up my bullpen and every single pitcher is in the high 90's. There is no strategy, just grab whatever arm because they're all about the same.
Strategy exits the game when all players are nearly identically ranked. And, again, your point that it doesn't really matter because this game doesn't put a lot of emphasis on ratings anyway is understood. But, at least, you can pretend it matters.
-
@BJDUBBYAH_PSN said in Shoulda posted here:
You know what’s great?
All the people that whined year after year about the game being the same, are now whining about it changing.You can see all the little brains flock toward the same comments all the time. You can’t even pay enough attention for 10 sentences you have no idea who complained about what last year.
-
I don’t know why people play online if they have issues with it. I don’t play online cause I suck at playing other people, simple as that. I only played online to get my 2 eggs. Other than that I play against the cpu but I keep it fresh by making a crappy team, middle of the road team and a team with one player from each card series. Gotta find what you like and not whine over the little things. Yes, I know I’m losing out on cards but I play just to relax and enjoy my alone time. I’ve collected almost all the cards I need for LS and Set 1 with a few exceptions.
-
@Easy_Duhz_It_ said in Shoulda posted here:
@ShowProdigy_MLBTS said in Shoulda posted here:
First 1-2 weeks of play everyone has at least 97 rated players up and down their roster. So, if you play online you're playing against the same level teams
So your issue is that you're playing on a level playing field and getting smashed online?
Also, every time i see posts like this, i cant help but think the issue some people have with 99s so early is the fact that they cant just grind BR and events all day while manipulating the market and keeping the prices high for people who dont grind online but still want the cards.
How TF do some of you turn these posts into about how skilled/good someone is at the game???
Sorry, his post said NOTHING about winning or losing.
What is fun or strategic about playing with all 97/99's?
I'd really LOVE to see just ONE person who says they LIKE this new way of doing things to give a mature, logical, intelligent explanation as to WHY that's the case.
Nope. It's like you're incapable of it. And then people call me "elitist" for saying that SDS has done nothing but DUMBED DOWN Diamond Dynasty this year. And I think time will tell us that they've done so for one reason - PROFT. But unlike EA and Take2...no one will call them out for it.
-
@ShowProdigy_MLBTS said in Shoulda posted here:
The very method of the '23 version of this game completely and totally sucks the very life out of much of the fun factor.
First 1-2 weeks of play everyone has at least 97 rated players up and down their roster. So, if you play online you're playing against the same level teams. Mostly identical players. Maybe some 99's thrown in but, in the great scheme of things, how much difference "should" there be between a 97 and 99 player? Very little if the game actually coded things with any sort of real-life consistent algorithm.
What's the purpose of just dummying down every event and making these 90+ players so accessible? It used to be fun those many years ago to still be fighting it out with your favorite 85 rated player (because you might only have one or 2 diamonds) 2 months into game play. Forget about that. 85 players haven't seen my roster since I've loaded it up with entirely 97-99 rated 3 weeks after the game dropped.
It's not a great strategy or motivator for many long-time fans. I'm sure some love it to death. But, it's like the "everyone gets a trophy" vibe. To the truly competitive , or even marginally so player, just sucks the life out of the game.
@ShowProdigy_MLBTS said in Shoulda posted here:
@Easy_Duhz_It_ said in Shoulda posted here:
@ShowProdigy_MLBTS said in Shoulda posted here:
First 1-2 weeks of play everyone has at least 97 rated players up and down their roster. So, if you play online you're playing against the same level teams
So your issue is that you're playing on a level playing field and getting smashed online?
Also, every time i see posts like this, i cant help but think the issue some people have with 99s so early is the fact that they cant just grind BR and events all day while manipulating the market and keeping the prices high for people who dont grind online but still want the cards.
I did not say I'm getting smashed or smashing. I've won every online game I've played.
It's just boring I suppose. I'll slightly reiterate my point because it appears some (you perhaps) missed it. Within 2-3 weeks after launch of this year's game, pretty much every roster was composed of 97-99 players. That is a ratings range of 3. Which is pretty negligible. At most, if it was to be kept interesting, that range would be no smaller than 10. 90-99 players.
I understand, and you also said, it really doesn't matter in MLB the Show because ratings are barely factored into outcomes. I get that and agree 100%.
However, the first week of the season, when my roster was a fair mix of 80's/90's there was an element of strategy involved. In key situations I would bring in my higher rated relievers. For example, I might have a mop-up game going where I would be winning by 5 runs late and just bring in a 83-86 reliever. But, if I had a 1 run lead I would bring in my 90+ rated stopper/closer. NOW I pop up my bullpen and every single pitcher is in the high 90's. There is no strategy, just grab whatever arm because they're all about the same.
Strategy exits the game when all players are nearly identically ranked. And, again, your point that it doesn't really matter because this game doesn't put a lot of emphasis on ratings anyway is understood. But, at least, you can pretend it matters.
Bravo. Exactly what I've been saying for a couple weeks now. Just more polite.
When every player on everyone's roster is 97/99 (which are basically the same thing)...any sort of strategy is gone.
Sure...there is still some in-game strategy when it comes to hitting and pitching...but not in terms of anything else.
Pinch hitting and bullpen use...who cares. Everyone is awesome, and almost without a flaw.
Same goes for building a roster. No need to sacrifice a bit of power at the plate in exchange for better fielding...everyone is a 5-tool player at every position.
Shoot even Ozzie Smith...with his 28 CAREER HRs...and .328 career SLUG has a 71 and 65 POWER!
LOL!
Those ratings make Jeter's 99/88 Power splits look REALISTIC....I mean the guy hit a whopping 24 HR's one season...what an absolute beast.
They've bent the knee to their "lowest common denominator" gamers. Pokemon players who don't even know the basic rules of baseball...and who just want to play a FPS where they get to hit HR's.
It's a shame. This mode could be sooooooo much more.
They've made it dull and boring.
-
@BrikMahorn_XBL said in Shoulda posted here:
Nope. It's like you're incapable of it. And then people call me "elitist" for saying that SDS has done nothing but DUMBED DOWN Diamond Dynasty this year. And I think time will tell us that they've done so for one reason - PROFT. But unlike EA and Take2...no one will call them out for it.
People call you elitist because you talk down to and insult people who don't agree with your definition of fun. Fun is subjective for each person but you are trying your best to make it seem like some objective, measurable thing.
They could spend all day explaining to you why they may like it personally and why they think it is fun an I can tell that you would just dismiss them out of hand because your mind is made up. You're right. Everyone else is wrong. You are somehow the arbiter of what is "fun".
I am not a big fan of Sets and Seasons and I do think it is a more aggressive monetization push than SDS have ever had before and I still want to disagree with you because of the insults and general condescending attitude.
-
@Mazter-Baitur_XBL said in Shoulda posted here:
I don’t know why people play online if they have issues with it. I don’t play online cause I suck at playing other people, simple as that. I only played online to get my 2 eggs. Other than that I play against the cpu but I keep it fresh by making a crappy team, middle of the road team and a team with one player from each card series. Gotta find what you like and not whine over the little things. Yes, I know I’m losing out on cards but I play just to relax and enjoy my alone time. I’ve collected almost all the cards I need for LS and Set 1 with a few exceptions.
Sorry...but there is just something more interesting about playing another HUMAN, and not the CPU.
There's also something interesting and strategic when the creative part of having to build a roster you use against other PEOPLE factors into it.
The solution is actually incredibly simple - a capped mode that's 9 innings with cards you own...but with restrictions like we already have in events and BR.
-
@Dolenz_PSN said in Shoulda posted here:
@BrikMahorn_XBL said in Shoulda posted here:
Nope. It's like you're incapable of it. And then people call me "elitist" for saying that SDS has done nothing but DUMBED DOWN Diamond Dynasty this year. And I think time will tell us that they've done so for one reason - PROFT. But unlike EA and Take2...no one will call them out for it.
People call you elitist because you talk down to and insult people who don't agree with your definition of fun. Fun is subjective for each person but you are trying your best to make it seem like some objective, measurable thing.
They could spend all day explaining to you why they may like it personally and why they think it is fun an I can tell that you would just dismiss them out of hand because your mind is made up. You're right. Everyone else is wrong. You are somehow the arbiter of what is "fun".
I am not a big fan of Sets and Seasons and I do think it is a more aggressive monetization push than SDS have ever had before and I still want to disagree with you because of the insults and general condescending attitude.
I'm fully able to admit it's subjective.
I'm also able to understand that, in most cases, someone who finds something that is very childish and simple to be "fun"...is not operating at a very high level intellectually. That's fine. Nothing wrong with that. But it still means it's DUMB and operating at a low level of intelligence.
The fact is, many of us are looking for "fun" from something with more depth and strategy. We don't find something so simple to be challenging...it's not enjoyable...and therefore not "fun".
The idea that SDS should DUMB DOWN the entire mode for those looking to have the absolute LOWEST LEVEL of "fun" intellectually is nonsense.
Especially when providing a solution would be incredibly simple and easy to do...and expand the mode.
There are many players who won't play online because of this. Give them a capped mode where they know they can build a team around their strengths and weaknesses...and jump online and play someone else who has to build their team given the same restrictions...and then you've got something.
The current way of doing things is so incredibly boring. The SAME THING could be accomplished by simply letting everyone play online with teams full of players with maxed out Ratings in every category. Then we'd see who the "best player" truly was.
Is that really what the mode is about though?
That's a pretty SHALLOW idea of what this mode should be. About as shallow as possible.
-
@BrikMahorn_XBL said in Shoulda posted here:
The idea that SDS should DUMB DOWN the entire mode for those looking to have the absolute LOWEST LEVEL of "fun" intellectually is nonsense.
That phrase is the perfect example of what I am talking about. Anytime you use the phrase "dumb down" you are automatically insulting everyone who enjoys it. Elevating yourself above them.
You make some good points, and even in your post you offered up some ideas on how it could be resolved, but you ruin them when you use phrases like "dumb down" and "those looking to have the absolute LOWEST LEVEL of "fun" intellectually". Calling people stupid is always going to raise their hackles.
When you can address your issues with the mode without including phrases that automatically insult everyone who does like it then maybe you would see less push back from people about your attitude and more discussion of the actual issues.
-
@Dolenz_PSN said in Shoulda posted here:
@BrikMahorn_XBL said in Shoulda posted here:
The idea that SDS should DUMB DOWN the entire mode for those looking to have the absolute LOWEST LEVEL of "fun" intellectually is nonsense.
That phrase is the perfect example of what I am talking about. Anytime you use the phrase "dumb down" you are automatically insulting everyone who enjoys it. Elevating yourself above them.
You make some good points, and even in your post you offered up some ideas on how it could be resolved, but you ruin them when you use phrases like "dumb down" and "those looking to have the absolute LOWEST LEVEL of "fun" intellectually". Calling people stupid is always going to raise their hackles.
When you can address your issues with the mode without including phrases that automatically insult everyone who does like it then maybe you would see less push back from people about your attitude and more discussion of the actual issues.
I didn't call anyone stupid.
How else would you like me to phrase it?
It's been "dumbed down". There is no other way to put it. It's been made far too simple and unstrategic. That's the same thing as DUMBED DOWN.
Just look at the Ozzie Smith example...
65/71 in POWER?!?!?!
The Joe Morgan card is in the very same Charisma series. Both cards are 99s.
Smith has 65/71 in Power....Morgan has 83/72.
Smith hit 28 HR's in his career. Morgan hit 27 in 1976 alone...which was 5th in the NL. And hit 268 in his career.
Morgan slugged .427 career...Smith was .328. And peaked at .383. That Morgan card is supposed to represent his best years as a Red, when his SLUG was right around .500, with a peak at .576 in '76 when he led the MLB in Slugging.
And yet these cards have a negligible difference in POWER?
Smith hit over .300 a total of ONCE in his entire 19 year career.
But...SDS has to DUMB DOWN the mode and boost The Wizard's stats or else almost no one would actually USE his card.
And because they give other marginally talented defensive players juiced fielding Ratings...there isn't enough of a benefit to Smith's fielding to actually make it worthwhile to play him...so they purposely DUMB IT DOWN and boost his Power ratings, so his card isn't unplayable.
Again...I'm sorry if you don't like the phrase "dumb down", but it's exactly what is going on here.
And the entire mode is like this now.
By the end of the year, 2/3 of current everyday players in baseball will have a 97 or above card. The most popular historic and current players will have 3 or 4.
What else would you call a mode like that?
You sure as heck can't call it realistic or strategic...or intelligent.
-
So the real complaint seems to be that it “ruined” the first 3-4 weeks of a 52 week game. And lol at strategy. Online players use the best cards they can get their hands on. Period. Hence the “its boring playing the same lineup” posts we get at the start of every season.
Lol at the intellectual aspects of a baseball video game. Calm down, Einstein.
