Another DDA (comeback logic) post
-
@fubar2k7 Homeboy....they dropped it and haven't mentioned it since because they settled.
-
@SkunkyTrees1977 said in Another DDA (comeback logic) post:
@fubar2k7 Homeboy....they dropped it and haven't mentioned it since because they settled.
It’s a 2 minute read. Maybe 10 minutes for you. It was just dropped.
-
@fubar2k7 "While EA does own a patent for DDA technology".....
Odd that you'd own a patent on something you say you don't utilize.
-
@SkunkyTrees1977 said in Another DDA (comeback logic) post:
How do these random events get into each individual game? Is this game programmed to play a certain way or is each game sprinkled with it's own randomness?
And are you positive they are random and not some part of programming that "changes parameters, scenarios, and behaviors in a video game IN REAL-TIME, based on the player's ability, in order to avoid making the player bored or frustrated"
Randomness equals RNG. Just as bad.
Did you know EA was sued by people claiming DDA and that EA settled out of court with them people. Them people haven't said a word since about it. I wonder why....
That lawsuit also stated that due to EA's use of DDA, players were forced to spend money on Loot Boxes to even the playing field. A random meatball doesn't warrant forcing someone to go spend money on packs.
And BTW, it wasn't settled out of court it was dropped.
-
@GixxerRyder750 If you read more than a article on a gaming site that most likely gets money from EA you'd learn that these people haven't spoke about the lawsuit since. That tells me they settles and signed a NDA. Real world stuff we're talking about.
Kinda like how the US government owns the patent on marijuana while saying it has no benefits. You're crazy to believe the government. Even crazier to believe a billion dollar corporation.
-
Well, it seems pretty clear that you two aren’t going to agree on this. Honestly, as long as you enjoy playing the game, it ultimately doesn’t matter IMO.
I think there’s a lot of evidence to support the idea OP is suggesting. I ask myself why there are so many players I face in ranked lately that have played hundreds of games online, and yet have a record around .500, especially now when the idea is that only really good players are still on the game.
As you go up the leader boards, you find more players with winning records, but there are WAY fewer pages of those.
Why is that? The obvious answer is that there are less players that good at the game, and far more that are just so so.
Can a player play 3-400 online games and still just be half decent skill-wise? Maybe.
Personally, I think the game is engineered to give results that are around a .500 record, and box scores that seem consistent with MLB box scores.
I still enjoy the game, even though I’m pretty awful at hitting, but that’s mainly because I only paid $10 for it.
-
@halfbutt People were having this debate in 2011 when I played HUT. I personally believe a company would be stupid not to have DDA in their game. Especially one where you want people to spend real money.
-
@SkunkyTrees1977
Indeed. The same debate comes up at some point every year. I almost feel bad stirring the pot, but I think it’s important for people to be aware of this stuff. -
@halfbutt
Agreed. Whether or not ppl realize it on their own or not want to admit it at all, I think the fact that so many of us talk about this often enough citing similar and compelling examples gives a lot of validation here. The game gets taken out of your hands seemingly when this DDA bs comes into play. And that is not fun.
-
A lot of cards have quirks that allows them to perform better when losing, and this is the extent of their "comeback logic". I have played a lot of MLBTS H2H online games over the years and I do not believe there is some secret DDA code written in by the developers.
I got beat a few years ago 7-6 after leading 6-0 going into the bottom of the ninth. My opponent just started hitting everything, regardless of what Pitcher I put on the mound. I messaged him and asked how and he said that I got too predictable and once he started hitting, he just got in a groove. This stuff happens organically, as no DDA is needed. Just yesterday, in an Event game, I finally got focused in the 3rd inning, was able to see the ball, time it very well, and put up five runs or so. Being "in a zone" is a human element. Playing vs another human in H2H is more unpredictable and interesting, than vs CPU.
-
I agree that playing vs a human is more interesting.
I think “comeback logic” is a poor description for what we’re talking about. It’s not that the game is going to always magically favour the team that is behind.
It’s more that the game is a simulation with its own agenda. It’s not purely a transparent competition between two players. Both players are playing against the game AND each other.
-
@halfbutt - Really interesting to see this… because “comeback logic” is exactly what people like me are arguing against. You say that it doesn’t necessarily favor the team that’s losing… so then it isn’t DDA acting as “comeback logic” at all. If things happen that benefit one team or the other, regardless of which is winning, and that it isn’t about predetermined outcomes… then it’s random!
People don’t like RNG or whatever they want to call it, but that’s a huge factor in what happens in this game, just as random events are a huge factor in what happens in the real game. As the other poster said, some cards have quirks that make them better when losing… those and myriad other variables influence the outcome of any given situation by changing the odds in what is ultimately a roll of the dice to yield a result in that particular situation. If a card with high clutch that performs better when you’re down is batting late in the game with a runner on, the odds for success are greater then they would have been earlier in the game, and people—I think incorrectly—attribute that higher likelihood of success to DDA or “comeback logic.”
Humans adapt, the odds change in a game that stressed from the get the importance of “clutch,” and random events occur randomly. That is not “an agenda” held by the software, and it isn’t DDA.
-
Well, I admire your commitment to the integrity of the game. I’m curious, how long have you been playing the show?
-
@halfbutt… I think that was to me? I’ve been playing since it was a thing, back in the 989 Studios days. I’m about a week away from 50, and have been playing any baseball game I could get my hands on since baseball on the Intellivision.
-
Yes, Joneser, that was to you.
I admit, I’m slightly envious of your level of enjoyment of the game.I just quickly looked up a definition of DDA online: “ is the process of automatically changing parameters, scenarios, and behaviors in a video game in real-time, based on the player's ability, in order to avoid making the player bored (if the game is too easy) or frustrated (if it is too hard)...”
If you don’t see plenty of evidence of this in the Show, again, I’m envious.
Regardless, Cheers! Hope to run into you in a match sometime.
-
@halfbutt - Last thing, and I’ll stop. I agree that it’s part of the experience in games played vs the CPU (those are very, very different), but all I see is randomness in head-to-head… so I don’t totally disagree with you.
Cheers.
-
It’s all about the dopamine.
-
@Red_Ted_is_back
You’re not wrong! -
Wow this convo starting to seem so repetitive. It makes me wonder it’s a person that posted this is insane or maybe mentally challenged. Either way the conspiracy theories are all of that just theories
-
@EzMack
The thread is a bit hard to follow now that all of the OP’s posts have been removed.
