Ranked and BR Change Explanation
-
@killerpresence4_MLBTS said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@Firestormx_MLBTS said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
I find the explanation infuriating for the change to Ranked and BR. More snobbish elitism. The basic answer is only those who go 12-0 or make 900 should have stubs. Nobody else is allowed only the 1% is allowed to get richer in stubs. The program is not cost-efficient enough for an average to causal player to do the program. You lose too many stubs with 100 million stubs per attempt cost to enter the BR Program. The stupid pack you get for each entry gives about 150-250 stubs back normally max. This explanation will not help anything but will further divide between snobbish elites and everyone else. Even if those who go 12-0 or make 900 are not snobbish elites, that is the impression. Taking away from those in the middle to bottom to cater to those at the very top seldom goes over well. Take away the ability for anyone to sell or reverse this decision is the only fair answer.
click the link and scroll to the bottom for official explanation of change
https://theshow.com/news/game23-update-7/Dude, give it a rest. We all know what your opinion is on this subject. It’s obvious they don’t give a flying you know what. They explained it very clearly why they did it. There is no amount of whining and crying that is going to change their minds. And why should they. It’s their game. They have every right to limit who gets what in the game. It what you agree to when you accept their terms and conditions for playing the game. It’s called an end user licensing agreement. And you must agree to it if you want to play. If you don’t like it you can go elsewhere to be entertained. Presumably no one is putting a gun to your head and forcing you to play. So get over it or leave. It’s really that simple
Could be wrong but I think a drop in BR numbers will get their attention.
-
@Firestormx_MLBTS said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@Firestormx_MLBTS said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
The program is not cost-efficient enough for an average to causal player to do the program.
It was never supposed to be. The fact is was becoming that is why they changed it.
Want to sell the rewards? Get Gooder. (I'm not. But then again, I was never selling the rewards anyway.)
It was only supposed to be profitable for the 1%? well, let's see...I think I will call that ...Elitist and snobbish
I’d like to know where you are getting this 1% number. Is this an actual stat? And if it is, please leave a citation as to where we can go to find this info. And if it is just some arbitrary number that you pulled from your nether regions please say so so we can move on and completely discount anything you say as bull—— because that’s what people do to those who fudge numbers just to justify their position or make a point.
-
Yeah I was fine with it until reading how they were upset people would get the reward and sell it to use those stubs elsewhere…. You mean playing the game and maybe have 3-4 good players instead of one? Especially it’s bothersome some of these rewards are replacing previous or just not useable
-
@DemIsE4_XBL said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@killerpresence4_MLBTS said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@Firestormx_MLBTS said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
I find the explanation infuriating for the change to Ranked and BR. More snobbish elitism. The basic answer is only those who go 12-0 or make 900 should have stubs. Nobody else is allowed only the 1% is allowed to get richer in stubs. The program is not cost-efficient enough for an average to causal player to do the program. You lose too many stubs with 100 million stubs per attempt cost to enter the BR Program. The stupid pack you get for each entry gives about 150-250 stubs back normally max. This explanation will not help anything but will further divide between snobbish elites and everyone else. Even if those who go 12-0 or make 900 are not snobbish elites, that is the impression. Taking away from those in the middle to bottom to cater to those at the very top seldom goes over well. Take away the ability for anyone to sell or reverse this decision is the only fair answer.
click the link and scroll to the bottom for official explanation of change
https://theshow.com/news/game23-update-7/Dude, give it a rest. We all know what your opinion is on this subject. It’s obvious they don’t give a flying you know what. They explained it very clearly why they did it. There is no amount of whining and crying that is going to change their minds. And why should they. It’s their game. They have every right to limit who gets what in the game. It what you agree to when you accept their terms and conditions for playing the game. It’s called an end user licensing agreement. And you must agree to it if you want to play. If you don’t like it you can go elsewhere to be entertained. Presumably no one is putting a gun to your head and forcing you to play. So get over it or leave. It’s really that simple
Could be wrong but I think a drop in BR numbers will get their attention.
Yeah I don’t think it’s going to matter, and I don’t think that there will be a significant drop in how many people play BR. You know why? Because these kids who scream the loudest about this stuff always come back for more. Then they get mad and come crawling to the forums to complain some more. It’s a vicious cycle of self depreciation.
-
@Firestormx_MLBTS said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
I find the explanation infuriating for the change to Ranked and BR. More snobbish elitism. The basic answer is only those who go 12-0 or make 900 should have stubs. Nobody else is allowed only the 1% is allowed to get richer in stubs. The program is not cost-efficient enough for an average to causal player to do the program. You lose too many stubs with 100 million stubs per attempt cost to enter the BR Program. The stupid pack you get for each entry gives about 150-250 stubs back normally max. This explanation will not help anything but will further divide between snobbish elites and everyone else. Even if those who go 12-0 or make 900 are not snobbish elites, that is the impression. Taking away from those in the middle to bottom to cater to those at the very top seldom goes over well. Take away the ability for anyone to sell or reverse this decision is the only fair answer.
click the link and scroll to the bottom for official explanation of change
https://theshow.com/news/game23-update-7/I like the change, now I have a reason to grind to 900. I can get the stubs to complete the collections for free. For me it brought life to ranked. I definitely am not elite at this game by any means but I have a reason to play that mode. 99 Lou for 30k is a joke.
-
@nashbandicoot1_PSN said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
Exclusivity is a good thing. I want to be able to use a card that not many others have. Game was watered down and constantly catering to the general public. This is a massive W
AGREED!
-
I really can see the point of both sides, but I feel that the biggest problem goes back to the programs have been there for three years. BR especially has been a well designed program. RS has never quite found the correct design...wins, innings, points, etc. Season one was way too easy and then significant overcorrection occurred.
I think the bigger issue with this game is with what it is doing to the player base. There have always been disagreements, but these forums are like a Civil War now. There are a few on here that will defend at all costs and some that will express their issues at all costs, but it really seems like more are unhappy than happy. I would imagine this game has already lost more of the player base than normal, but that may not be an issue for SDS if their profits are higher. There is still an issue though if the player base is daily engaging in a war of words. They obviously have a formula that is not working for a decent percentage of the player base, which is causing the other side to defend. It just doesn't seem like a good look.
-
@aam34_PSN said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@nashbandicoot1_PSN said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
Exclusivity is a good thing. I want to be able to use a card that not many others have. Game was watered down and constantly catering to the general public. This is a massive W
AGREED!
i agree completely too with Nash - i am tired of everyone thinking they can just grind to get the best cards - there should be rewards for those who achieve great results in game - everyone else can either practice, cry about it, or both
-
@killerpresence4_MLBTS said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@Firestormx_MLBTS said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@Firestormx_MLBTS said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
The program is not cost-efficient enough for an average to causal player to do the program.
It was never supposed to be. The fact is was becoming that is why they changed it.
Want to sell the rewards? Get Gooder. (I'm not. But then again, I was never selling the rewards anyway.)
It was only supposed to be profitable for the 1%? well, let's see...I think I will call that ...Elitist and snobbish
I’d like to know where you are getting this 1% number. Is this an actual stat? And if it is, please leave a citation as to where we can go to find this info. And if it is just some arbitrary number that you pulled from your nether regions please say so so we can move on and completely discount anything you say as bull—— because that’s what people do to those who fudge numbers just to justify their position or make a point.
If you really want, you could look at the number of people that make WS and then look at all the people that that have played an RS game. This doesn't even include the offline people. I think you would find that number less than 1%. 12-0 is even a more rare accomplishment.
There really is no reason to make both of those programs non-sellable. BR program was fine. RS program was too easy and that is why the rewards were 30k. They just needed to make the RS program a little tougher which they did while also making reward unsellable. The end result will be the elite gets richer and less people will play those modes.
-
@TheHungryHole said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@aam34_PSN said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@nashbandicoot1_PSN said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
Exclusivity is a good thing. I want to be able to use a card that not many others have. Game was watered down and constantly catering to the general public. This is a massive W
AGREED!
i agree completely too with Nash - i am tired of everyone thinking they can just grind to get the best cards - there should be rewards for those who achieve great results in game - everyone else can either practice, cry about it, or both
Actually, the best card in the game is behind a 75k pack with a horrible chance to get this reward. Mantle is hands down the best card in the game right now imo.
-
@Dolenz_PSN said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
I have used the phrase before and I am sure that I will use it again.
Aggressive Monetization.
Everything about this years game seems to be pushing people to buy stubs.
- 99's in very expensive packs that are sold for a very short time, ensuring their rarity and higher prices.
- Expiration dates on cards, which means you may have to pay a lot of stubs for a 99 of your favorite players multiple times.
- No Sell POTM cards
- No Sell BR program rewards
- Pitiful Stubs payouts in programs, moments, and now Showdowns. In showdown you used to be able to make your stubs back after three or four bosses. Not so in the Kaiju showdown.
So more expensive cards than ever before + less opportunities to earn stubs = Aggressive Monetization.
i noticed that too. The stub rewards are smaller than last year. If i buy a pack or a card off the market it seems to take me twice as long to recover it. My pack luck has sucked for the most part, so that doesnt help either lol. I did manage to pull trout, but none of the other gatekeepers so far. I am normally done with collections by now but the stubs just arent there this year.
-
@DemIsE4_XBL said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@killerpresence4_MLBTS said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@Firestormx_MLBTS said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@Firestormx_MLBTS said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
The program is not cost-efficient enough for an average to causal player to do the program.
It was never supposed to be. The fact is was becoming that is why they changed it.
Want to sell the rewards? Get Gooder. (I'm not. But then again, I was never selling the rewards anyway.)
It was only supposed to be profitable for the 1%? well, let's see...I think I will call that ...Elitist and snobbish
I’d like to know where you are getting this 1% number. Is this an actual stat? And if it is, please leave a citation as to where we can go to find this info. And if it is just some arbitrary number that you pulled from your nether regions please say so so we can move on and completely discount anything you say as bull—— because that’s what people do to those who fudge numbers just to justify their position or make a point.
If you really want, you could look at the number of people that make WS and then look at all the people that that have played an RS game. This doesn't even include the offline people. I think you would find that number less than 1%. 12-0 is even a more rare accomplishment.
I’m not saying that this isn’t true, but if we are going to use numbers and percentages then it is always best to include where this info can found otherwise we probably shouldn’t be using statistical information because it just doesn’t make your argument plausible. It’s more likely he just made this number up to justify his point which makes his argument implausible. I’ve made this point numerous times. There is a way to present a legitimate argument without using statistics that haven’t been vetted. For example, the OP could have used the term “Majority” rather than assigning an exact value. But this particular poster has used multiple threads to pedal this temper tantrum they are having even after the explanation was delivered by the company that makes this title. It has gotten old.
-
@darkblue1876_PSN said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@Pergo_MLBTS said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@darkblue1876_PSN said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@baseball229056_XBL said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
Why is everyone so against SDS turning a profit? People always seem to go nuts if there is even the idea of SDS doing anything that could cause people to choose to spend a few dollars.
Well, to me it is a bad thing. I am old enough to remember when you bought a baseball game and you got the ENTIRE GAME upon purchase. None of this, well, you paid full price, but unless you are part of the 1% of online players, you only get 60% of the game, despite paying full price.
In addition to that, they released a half completed game this year, but charged everyone full price. That screams RIP OFF to me. So glad I dodged that bullet. Sure, they are saying "we are aware of the problem, and are looking into it", but the fact that we are 2 months into the season and stuff that was not done on launch is still broken tells me that have zero intention of fixing it now, and why would they? They already suckered everyone into full price.
It's like buying a car online, having the car delivered, and when you get inside you find out "oh, you need to pay us an additional amount for the engine, some more for tires, and a little more for the transmission."
What they should be doing is waiting until the entire game is good to go, tested, and any bugs found FIXED, then put to market. We can still play other years versions of the game until then. Then charge ONE price for ALL CONTENT up front.
This eliminates the need to even have a market, and those of us who despise the toxic online experience can play offline and be happier. Those who want that head to head experience, or those who like to be toxic and see what they can get away with will also be happier.
But corrupt greedy SDS will never do that when they can vampire 10 times as much for "early access" or microtransactions.
Are you old enough to remember that those games you bought didn't have anything close to a mode like Diamond Dynasty that had a full content team employed to release new content throughout the season?
Also, wait until you find out what car companies are doing now with subscriptions to use certain features!
And yet they still released a half complete game for full price. Sorry, not sure having broken content is better than a fully functional game at the prices SDS is charging.
I would be completely satisfied with a return to the older way of games that actually worked with less features at a smaller price.
Are you seriously going to try and say that older games "actually worked"? There were never any bugs or issues with older games? That's just crazy.
Look you don't have to like what they are doing with Ranked and BR rewards, but when you make stuff up like this it just makes your whole argument look weak.
-
@DemIsE4_XBL said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@TheHungryHole said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@aam34_PSN said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@nashbandicoot1_PSN said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
Exclusivity is a good thing. I want to be able to use a card that not many others have. Game was watered down and constantly catering to the general public. This is a massive W
AGREED!
i agree completely too with Nash - i am tired of everyone thinking they can just grind to get the best cards - there should be rewards for those who achieve great results in game - everyone else can either practice, cry about it, or both
Actually, the best card in the game is behind a 75k pack with a horrible chance to get this reward. Mantle is hands down the best card in the game right now imo.
i hear you - and so many cards i am loving to play with in RS that maybe aren't everyone go to's - i love my team and got all of NL done too by just playing
-
@killerpresence4_MLBTS said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@DemIsE4_XBL said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@killerpresence4_MLBTS said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@Firestormx_MLBTS said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@Firestormx_MLBTS said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
The program is not cost-efficient enough for an average to causal player to do the program.
It was never supposed to be. The fact is was becoming that is why they changed it.
Want to sell the rewards? Get Gooder. (I'm not. But then again, I was never selling the rewards anyway.)
It was only supposed to be profitable for the 1%? well, let's see...I think I will call that ...Elitist and snobbish
I’d like to know where you are getting this 1% number. Is this an actual stat? And if it is, please leave a citation as to where we can go to find this info. And if it is just some arbitrary number that you pulled from your nether regions please say so so we can move on and completely discount anything you say as bull—— because that’s what people do to those who fudge numbers just to justify their position or make a point.
If you really want, you could look at the number of people that make WS and then look at all the people that that have played an RS game. This doesn't even include the offline people. I think you would find that number less than 1%. 12-0 is even a more rare accomplishment.
I’m not saying that this isn’t true, but if we are going to use numbers and percentages then it is always best to include where this info can found otherwise we probably shouldn’t be using statistical information because it just doesn’t make your argument plausible. It’s more likely he just made this number up to justify his point which makes his argument implausible. I’ve made this point numerous times. There is a way to present a legitimate argument without using statistics that haven’t been vetted. For example, the OP could have used the term “Majority” rather than assigning an exact value. But this particular poster has used multiple threads to pedal this temper tantrum they are having even after the explanation was delivered by the company that makes this title. It has gotten old.
Not only has SDS referenced these numbers in the past, but anyone could look at the ranked standings last season and see just how few “top end” players there are. Even if you added up everyone in CS and WS, it was still less than 1% of the number of say P1 Loasinga WBC cards (using this to get an estimate of player base). The reality is, these changes were only made after streamers cried like babies and no PR damage control statement is going to change that.
SDS is going to find out why business schools still use New Coke as a case study on why you don’t listen to the squeaky wheel to make changes.
-
I love how people use the argument of participation trophy and compare this to real life or real baseball in general. It’s a video game, a temporary escape, where we can shut down and chill. I’m not looking to make it my life’s goal. To those that choose to be super competitive that’s great for you but most of us are just trying to relax not compete at the highest level. Stub vouchers would be more than sufficient. Shutting out players based on skill level is ridiculous and has shown to create a huge divide in the player base between those that live and die by the game and those just looking to play video game baseball with their favorite players and legends. Never gonna make everyone happy but catering to the minority and taking away from the majority to simply have access to the best players in the game is not a good business strategy long term. Those that think it is are clearly on the competitive player side of the fence or striving to get there. Not all of us play for extreme competition, we might just be playing for fun, because at the end of the day it is just a video game.
-
@TripleH-4481_PSN said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
I love how people use the argument of participation trophy and compare this to real life or real baseball in general. It’s a video game, a temporary escape, where we can shut down and chill. I’m not looking to make it my life’s goal. To those that choose to be super competitive that’s great for you but most of us are just trying to relax not compete at the highest level. Stub vouchers would be more than sufficient. Shutting out players based on skill level is ridiculous and has shown to create a huge divide in the player base between those that live and die by the game and those just looking to play video game baseball with their favorite players and legends. Never gonna make everyone happy but catering to the minority and taking away from the majority to simply have access to the best players in the game is not a good business strategy long term. Those that think it is are clearly on the competitive player side of the fence or striving to get there. Not all of us play for extreme competition, we might just be playing for fun, because at the end of the day it is just a video game.
Its kind of interesting, because I share the same mindset as you in terms of it just being a video game and I just play for fun and as an escape, but that's why I don't really care about this change all that much. If a card is released in Ranked or BR that I really want, I'll work through the program and get it and use it. If there isn't a card I want I just won't bother doing the program and will just continue playing for fun. Whether or not I can sell them is kind of irrelevant to me. I just play for fun and try to get the cards I want to use and don't try to get the cards I don't want to use.
-
@Pergo_MLBTS said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
Are you seriously going to try and say that older games "actually worked"? There were never any bugs or issues with older games? That's just crazy.
Yes, that's exactly what I am saying. Thanks for paying attention. In the days before online play I NEVER had any crashing, grinding for access to cards, etc. because you got it all UP FRONT.
But as usual the "get gud" bullies who think this game is for them and ONLY them want to leave it where it is headed because so long as they get access to everything then that's fine.
Please don't bother with a reply because I don't feel like dealing with people who feel that they are superior to everyone else and therefore their opinion is the only one that should be heard.
-
I'm going to put my tinfoil hat on for a second.
SDS had to know that the 1st ranked season program was wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy to easy right? They are pretty smart. So doing that to tank WS card prices and then saying, "hey we noticed a problem, so this is why we changed it." seems a bit convenient no?
interesting theory, not even sure I believe the above, but ya never know
-
@darkblue1876_PSN said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
@Pergo_MLBTS said in Ranked and BR Change Explanation:
Are you seriously going to try and say that older games "actually worked"? There were never any bugs or issues with older games? That's just crazy.
Yes, that's exactly what I am saying. Thanks for paying attention. In the days before online play I NEVER had any crashing, grinding for access to cards, etc. because you got it all UP FRONT.
But as usual the "get gud" bullies who think this game is for them and ONLY them want to leave it where it is headed because so long as they get access to everything then that's fine.
Please don't bother with a reply because I don't feel like dealing with people who feel that they are superior to everyone else and therefore their opinion is the only one that should be heard.
First off I don't feel I am superior to anyone and I am all for everyones opinion being heard. Interesting that you then tell me not to reply, kind of sounds like you don't want everyones opinion to be heard?
And I am not one of the "get gud" guys, so I have no idea where you got that from. I'm average at the game and struggle to get much higher then the 600s in ranked and have never even come close to going flawless in BR. Maybe you got me confused with someone else.
But now you're moving the goalposts and talking about grinding for content, when I was replying to your statement that older games just always worked. That's simply not the case. Older games had TONS of bugs. Its always been a part of all video games. That's just the reality of the situation.
