Am I in the wrong here ?
-
Was chatting with a few MLB buddies online and was wondering if I was reasonably in the wrong for purchasing MLB 20 with the expectation to use cards that were in MLB 19 that SDS retained the rights to ? As a Pirates fan this list includes SS Willie Stargell, SS Bill Mazeroski and SS Dave Parker. Other cards on this list include 85 AS Mark Melancon, 81 AS Tony Watson and 81 Oliver Perez. People can argue Dave Parker received a prime 97 card but, the reality is it's much worse than the SS 99 he had last year which was a more accurate representation of his career in Pittsburgh. To this point Willie Stargell and Bill Mazeroski are still missing with no explanation as to why ?
This issue can apply to almost every team that was under respresented, not just the Pirates. Thoughts ?
-
Both Stargell and Maz are in the game but with cards that are more or less unplayable
-
The post specified SS Stargell, Parker and Maz. Technically they're in the game but, not useable at all. They arguably never were useable all year if we're being honest.
-
Well in that case, I don’t know why you’d expect every single thing from a prior game to be in the new game. That would be a poor strategy for the company. What would be the incentive to buy the new game and stubs just to get the exact same cards?
-
Yes you’re wrong
-
@Hikes83 said in Am I in the wrong here ?:
Well in that case, I don’t know why you’d expect every single thing from a prior game to be in the new game. That would be a poor strategy for the company. What would be the incentive to buy the new game and stubs just to get the exact same cards?
To be fair the cards are already in the game offline and they still have the players rights. Not to mention they've released plenty of content from years past. There's zero benefit to not releasing them. Not asking for 99's by any means either. What's even more mind boggling is how the content team goes out of their way to make cards historically inaccurate for literally no reason at all making them even more unusable in some cases. Look at Ralph Kiner and Honus offline and compare them to their DD counterparts. Interestingly enough Honus forgot how to play 3 positions for some reason that are on his other diamond that's in the same game ... Oh well.
-
@AftershockFx said in Am I in the wrong here ?:
@Hikes83 said in Am I in the wrong here ?:
Well in that case, I don’t know why you’d expect every single thing from a prior game to be in the new game. That would be a poor strategy for the company. What would be the incentive to buy the new game and stubs just to get the exact same cards?
To be fair the cards are already in the game offline and they still have the players rights. Not to mention they've released plenty of content from years past. There's zero benefit to not releasing them. Not asking for 99's by any means either. What's even more mind boggling is how the content team goes out of their way to make cards historically inaccurate for literally no reason at all making them even more unusable in some cases. Look at Ralph Kiner and Honus offline and compare them to their DD counterparts. Interestingly enough Honus forgot how to play 3 positions for some reason that are on his other diamond that's in the same game ... Oh well.
Parker has a 97 card in the game it was a BR reward. Honus is interesting because his rookie card he is a CF but I think SDS said only the Sig cards are the ones that will have every position they played. Thus the reason people were excited to see the Babe and Foxx have 1st and C postions as secondarys
-
@Boneman05 said in Am I in the wrong here ?:
@AftershockFx said in Am I in the wrong here ?:
@Hikes83 said in Am I in the wrong here ?:
Well in that case, I don’t know why you’d expect every single thing from a prior game to be in the new game. That would be a poor strategy for the company. What would be the incentive to buy the new game and stubs just to get the exact same cards?
To be fair the cards are already in the game offline and they still have the players rights. Not to mention they've released plenty of content from years past. There's zero benefit to not releasing them. Not asking for 99's by any means either. What's even more mind boggling is how the content team goes out of their way to make cards historically inaccurate for literally no reason at all making them even more unusable in some cases. Look at Ralph Kiner and Honus offline and compare them to their DD counterparts. Interestingly enough Honus forgot how to play 3 positions for some reason that are on his other diamond that's in the same game ... Oh well.
Parker has a 97 card in the game it was a BR reward. Honus is interesting because his rookie card he is a CF but I think SDS said only the Sig cards are the ones that will have every position they played. Thus the reason people were excited to see the Babe and Foxx have 1st and C postions as secondarys
Parker's 97 is criminally underrated and a poor representation of his entire career compared to his SS card last year. Also, Ruth and Foxx are awards cards, not SS cards. It makes zero sense why Foxx has C and 1B secondary considering that year he played 149 games at 3B and 1 at SS ... If the award card is specific to that card year it should be historically accurate. If they want Foxx to have those positions than cards like Honus and Kiner should have all of their positions too.
-
82 Andy Van Slyke
-
44 Mario Mendoza
-
A admin locked this topic on
