So, if I fired up MLB 16 or 17...
-
It's the time of year when I see a lot of requests for the upcoming cycle, and requests from the forum members to "go back" to some of the engines of prior years. So...
What would I see compared to MLB 22? I understand the issues around foul balls, weird PCI results, etc. I only played RTTS through 2019. I remember 2018 being "strange". What would I like about 2016/17?
-
Timing windows, better PCI's. Pitching meta was analog and you can hit your spots without the ball floating to the middle of the plate. Input mattered for us mortals. The elite will always be elite but those games allowed you to get better by simply playing online. I won't say that those games didn't have any issues but at least for me the gameplay was so much better that in 17 alone I played 500 online games (I started DD in July of 16) I haven't played 100 games online since 17. 18-22 has been just a different experience for me. I play because its baseball but the game has evolved into something different. Some will see the differences and I guess some won't. I am not so fired up for 23 but I was contacted last night from some really good guys that I played against in league play and I may just get it to play with/against them.
I'm sure raesONE can put a better prospective on those two games as I know he liked them as well.
-
As far as 16 concerned, they didn't have the "real ball physics" (or whatever they chose to call it) yet. Which sounded like an upgrade when they introduced it in 2017, but in reality the game was way more fun before this mechanic was implemented.
Don't get me wrong, 17 was still a lot of fun and a quality game. But the new mechanic introduced topspin on practically every hitter who had a one handed swing or a two handed long swing. Many power hitters would become less effective because the ball would simply jump off the bat and then spin downward into the outfield because of the topspin. So less homeruns, a lot more singles/doubles. It's why everyone stacked their team with guys like LS Seager, who had the 2 handed compact swing. No topspin whatsoever on that animation.
17 also had a little bit of issues with timing. Swinging just late would yield better results than swinging with good timing. It wasn't game breaking for me, but could be a little annoying at times. Still a fantastic feel in that game overall when it comes to hitting and it's the last game I truly enjoyed playing.
16 was even better in my opinion. If you would play it now, it feels outdated. Not just the graphics but also the engine and the mechanics. But when it comes to hitting and timing, that game was the best in the entire series. It was very hard though. Fastballs were really fast. But if you caught one and the PCI was on it, you would get rewarded almost every time. I think that's why many people loved that game so much and want to go back to that core, myself included.
If they could somehow go back to that 16 concept and polish up the graphics and overall performance, I would be very happy. Less RNG and more focus on a true skill gap. But something at SDS happened and they apparantly disagreed with all of this, since they gave us the abomination called MLBTS 18 which practically killed everything that made 16 and 17 so much fun - and continued to build on that instead.
-
Well said Raes. Yes hitting was better in 16 without the ball physics in 17. I guess what I'm trying to convey is that these are the last two games where complete player input mattered. I don't think there can be any argument there if you played those games.
-
@TEXAS10PT_PSN said in So, if I fired up MLB 16 or 17...:
Well said Raes. Yes hitting was better in 16 without the ball physics in 17. I guess what I'm trying to convey is that these are the last two games where complete player input mattered. I don't think there can be any argument there if you played those games.
Agreed.
-
I just wish one pitching interface wasn't better than the other.
I'm meter for life and it was always the worst pitching option. Analog was king until this precision BS and now analog is 3rd behind meter.
How many people use precision pitching, but can't use zone hitting?
-
@CCARR77_PSN said in So, if I fired up MLB 16 or 17...:
I just wish one pitching interface wasn't better than the other.
I'm meter for life and it was always the worst pitching option. Analog was king until this precision BS and now analog is 3rd behind meter.
How many people use precision pitching, but can't use zone hitting?
Actually the worst pitching option is Classic button pitching. That's what I used in 16 and would get hammered. I started using analog in late 16 and that's all I've used since. For me it's better than meter pitching. I have used Zone hitting since I started DD in 16.l
-
@TEXAS10PT_PSN said in So, if I fired up MLB 16 or 17...:
@CCARR77_PSN said in So, if I fired up MLB 16 or 17...:
I just wish one pitching interface wasn't better than the other.
I'm meter for life and it was always the worst pitching option. Analog was king until this precision BS and now analog is 3rd behind meter.
How many people use precision pitching, but can't use zone hitting?
Actually the worst pitching option is Classic button pitching. That's what I used in 16 and would get hammered. I started using analog in late 16 and that's all I've used since. For me it's better than meter pitching. I have used Zone hitting since I started DD in 16.l
Forgot all about classic pitching.
-
Personally I think if you remove 18 altogether as that was a disaster, 20 is where things really went downhill. People talk about 16 and 17 and I agree they were great but 19 was still a solid game. Other than the line outs it played relatively well. I feel like in 19 user input still mattered enough to make the game competitive. Once 20 came things just got ridiculous with pci feedback, constant foul balls, check swings, etc.
-
17 was great. Goes down as one of the greatest baseball video games ever for me. I still own it.
-
@LuvMyXBOX_XBL said in So, if I fired up MLB 16 or 17...:
17 was great. Goes down as one of the greatest baseball video games ever for me. I still own it.
16 and it's not even close
-
@CCARR77_PSN said in So, if I fired up MLB 16 or 17...:
@LuvMyXBOX_XBL said in So, if I fired up MLB 16 or 17...:
17 was great. Goes down as one of the greatest baseball video games ever for me. I still own it.
16 and it's not even close
I think we can all agree that 16 and or 17 were the last of the great games. 19 had its lineouts for sure and I don't remember having that "wow" feeling about it that pfcorporate mentions. He could be right though. It really is too bad that some were not around to experience those renditions. I would take that game engine with the updated graphics/players any day. Especially with the attributes of the time. 95-97 diamonds were just as relevant or more than some of the guys they give 99's to now.
-
@CCARR77_PSN said in So, if I fired up MLB 16 or 17...:
@LuvMyXBOX_XBL said in So, if I fired up MLB 16 or 17...:
17 was great. Goes down as one of the greatest baseball video games ever for me. I still own it.
16 and it's not even close
16 bored me.
-
@TEXAS10PT_PSN said in So, if I fired up MLB 16 or 17...:
@CCARR77_PSN said in So, if I fired up MLB 16 or 17...:
I just wish one pitching interface wasn't better than the other.
I'm meter for life and it was always the worst pitching option. Analog was king until this precision BS and now analog is 3rd behind meter.
How many people use precision pitching, but can't use zone hitting?
Actually the worst pitching option is Classic button pitching. That's what I used in 16 and would get hammered. I started using analog in late 16 and that's all I've used since. For me it's better than meter pitching. I have used Zone hitting since I started DD in 16.l
I use pulse pitching and can get over 800 every year……until I stop caring.
