Community Forum

It's a false market because it lacks an essential component of a true free market economy. SDS controls the market through access as well as regulation of the supply and imposition of minimum and maximum values.

But, those two concepts are not the prime reasons. That prime reason is the lack of actual work that must be employed to earn revenue or produce the product. Real products derive their value because of the scarcity of resources needed to produce them. This can be in the form of natural resources or simply a finite amount of human labor required to create each unit. On the flip side, the purchase price is still set by a market where competition can enter the market. This market has no competition.

There would be no point, so the answer is no. All the sponsorships do is add revenue to your Franchise team, which is one of the metrics by which as the GM you are judged on your job performance within that game mode.

There is no association between the sponsorships obtained within Franchise and those of any other game mode.

@sullivanspring_MLBTS said in 26 Franchise Mode New Features Discussion:

@howelljake17_MLBTS said in 26 Franchise Mode New Features Discussion:

@sullivanspring_MLBTS I don’t disagree with game play, but that impacts every game mode, I was just thinking of franchise specific things that can bring the mode to the next level!

Perhaps. I don't play other modes and know nothing about them. Do other modes also have manage mode like franchise?

No, Franchise mode is the only one that has a method by which you can be the team manager and make those decisions. However, even in Franchise, if you choose to be a specific player in the game, then you cannot also be the manager.

@xJerm_PSN said in RTTS Socks:

well.. they had an option in 19 i think where you could equip stance socks without buying a pair. I have no idea why they took it out

As recently as MLB The Show 23, the avatar RTTS players by default wore the team STANCE socks. You could still equip your player with a bronze, silver, gold, or diamond STANCE sock and earn the benefits of them, but your player in the games would still wear the team STANCE sock. That system made sense.

Someone at SDS decided to change all that with MLB 24. The complaints were immediate and frequent, but all fell of deaf ears -- shock, shock!

There is a very convoluted method to force the situation and get your avatar player and the rest of the team in the team's actual Stance socks. He made a video of the process and you have to follow that process to the letter -- zero deviations or else it won't work. But, if you carefully follow the process precisely, it will work.

In terms of why SDS did this? My guess is it is just one more example of SDS leadership demanding that you play the game their way vice the way you wish to play it -- control over customer satisfaction!

Here is a link to that video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dlKUpUf8qg

@JoeSelser_PSN said in So nothing new next year?:

@Sarge1387_PSN so with ya dude. Last year when they showed those chain link fences to hype rtts and some people were so excited that these might have been in CAS. It was deflating for some people when they got the game only to see it was a copy and paste of last year.

That exact moment of realization is something I remember to this day. It was exactly as you said -- deflating. It is rare when a company goes out of its way to maliciously abuse paying customers, and so saying that a company does this is reserved only for very badly led operations. Sadly, SDS deserves that sobriquet. Except in this case, there is nothing funny about it. It is profoundly sad.

For SDS to see customers get something they have been wanting to have for years and then spend money and time to try to shut it down showed everyone what kind of company SDS has become. Since this all went down, I have actually had former managers and senior employees at SDS initiate contact with me. The theme of these contacts is the same. Around the time of COVID, SDS hired new managers who lacked affinity for the sport of baseball and degraded the focus of the game. This included a strategic decision to abandon Stadium Creator, as well as Logo Editor and Custom Uniforms.

In general, it is time that sport video game companies start integrating AI concepts into their games, and broadcast commentary would be the best and most natural fit, and would absolutely revolutionize the immersion factor in video games, especially sports themed games.

Eventually, some company is going to implement this integration and when that happens, it's going to put every other company at a huge competitive disadvantage. Imagine the commentator and color analyst actually calling the game based on what's actually going down, using the actual player names and accurate descriptions of what happened?

Extending this concept to pre-game and post-game interviews and again the immersion advance would be monumental. The trick would be to secure the voice rights for the AI integration, but I am sure this could be done.

There are known capabilities in Stadium Creator that SDS has worked hard to lock out and keep customers from using. I suspect SC is what SDS uses to create their own stadiums, but it is a version where none of the development options are locked out, and it integrates an actual 3D modeler that allows their stadium designers to create their own props and use.

Giving the customers a fully enabled SC would be the easiest thing in the world for SDS to accomplish. But, I am convinced they will never do it.

@VF1S_Rick_Hunter_PSN said in First news for MLBTS26:

I think most gamers understand that all the reasonable improvements desired can’t be made in 1 year. I think SDS could better its relationship with gamers by showing a 5 year plan on each item they’re going to tackle and when they expect to accomplish it.

How about SDS simply communicate such plans with the customers? Your five year benchmark is more than reasonable, but we have game modes that have gone five years without upgrades. Worse, despite the lack of TLC, they also receive zero honest communication from SDS when customers express their desires and concerns.

If SDS really wanted to stretch into new territory and set themselves apart, they would code up interviews where the interaction was voice, not words. You could then pick the voice type for your RTTS avatar player, or created player in any game mode. I'm not holding my breath!

@sullivanspring_MLBTS said in My Must-Haves To Purchase MLB The Show 26:

@VF1S_Rick_Hunter_PSN said in My Must-Haves To Purchase MLB The Show 26:

SDS not going to add cap and floor until MLB does. I’d rather SDS spend the time and effort to improve CPU trade logic, CPU free agent signing logic, CPU rebuilding team strategy and CPU scouting/draft logic.

What did you think of the free agent system the put in place for MLBTS 25? Only 3 players and interest improves the longer you keep them on the board.

I think the best comparison point is to compare MLB The Show to other sports video games. And SDS firmly loses this comparison. Madden NFL is the most successful sports video game, and when you enter free agency you have every one of the 32 NFL teams listed with their offers. This includes your former team. You get to select the offer you like most and they do vary significantly. You can even re-sign with your original team.

To limit the free agency in MLB The Show to merely three teams is laughably substandard in that measure.

In the coding world, this stuff is easy. There is no reason for SDS to avoid matching their competition in this area other than it isn't their focus.

Agreed. The entire free agency phase in RTTS has been very lean, lacking realistic depth since its inception. If you compare it to other sports video games it is substandard in this area. Madden NFL actually does line up that offer from every team in the league, including the one you are currently playing for, and then compares each offer to what it calculates is your market value. This is the kind of depth in free agency offers you are asking for, and so your desire is entirely reasonable.

SDS could have created a thread overtly named, "We don't care!" and done far less self-inflicted public relations damage with their customers than this thread has already caused.

This thread was created over six months ago! Over that half year's time, no one at SDS has returned to it to provide any updates. The title of the thread used the words "Temporarily Disabled" and yet again, six months later we are never informed of a fix, much less any update.

The entire life cycle of an MLB The Show release is the span of a single baseball season. From the time conceptualization of the next year's title is started therein is the end of title support for the current year's release. So, we are already at that point now. MLB 25 is no longer receiving software update support.

What does this say about a video game company that they think a bug is so important that it merits a sticky thread to explain the bug and why it caused a game mode to be disabled, and yet six months later there is no update, no additional explanation, and most importantly no correction to the bug? Common sense people conclude that it indicates sloppiness at best, or incompetence, but worst of all it may well represent the truth that SDS harbors outright malice toward their paying customers.

SDS has received numerous requests for update to the status, some right here in this very sticky thread. Not a peep! Customers have started additional threads on the same subject about the status of the use of custom stadiums in online play modes, all ignored. The customers have been forced to guess as to the status, with play options reappearing and then disappearing all without any SDS comment, explanation, or provided timeline.

Even when someone such as myself openly challenges the professionalism of SDS, that comment likewise is ignored. Whistling past the graveyard isn't the formula for corporate success in a free market. SDS has forgotten what customer service looks like.

Another years long issue that has been reported constantly and never fixed. MLB rule says if any portion of the ball pierces any portion of the strike zone, then it's a strike. What I have seen in the game code is that to be called a strike then at least half the ball, and more often two-thirds of the ball, must be in the zone to be called a strike.

Also, the displayed strike zone shown in game play is on the small side if anything.

@Squid_Adams_PSN said in For Those Who Have Taken Some Time Off From This Game:

I regret to inform you, The Show 25 is still broken. Haven't played in a few weeks and just got off a game that was really fun, until the 4th inning when the comeback logic and game scripting came into play. My 4-0 lead becomes 4-5 because of some really questionable "control issues" with a starter that had thrown 21 pitches or so through 3 innings. Oh... and my 99 CF with gold fielding ran past a ground ball in center that turned into an RBI triple. Probably not how a respectable baseball game should play. That is unless you love yourself some RNG.

Pack it up SDS. Don't even bother releasing 26 because you need to discover where it started to go wrong with your series. Seems like 18 was when it began to go downhill. Baseball / Sports video game fans deserve better. Even if the comeback logic benefits you. No more game mechanics deciding outcomes of games, please and thank you.

I completely understand your point of view, and there is great merit to the concept of fixing what is broken (especially things that have been broken for years now) before releasing another game version. But, while SDS will never confirm nor deny this, truth is if they skipped a single year of new title release I think it would bankrupt the company.

After having to pay Sony their profit check, I don't think enough is left over for SDS to absorb a full year of no new release income.

@sullivanspring_MLBTS said in My Must-Haves To Purchase MLB The Show 26:

@SithLordSlyther_XBL said in My Must-Haves To Purchase MLB The Show 26:

My staement about a salary cap/floor is not as a mandatory setting in the game, but as an option as we have now with budget or not budget, and add cap/floor as a third option. Eesentially we would have

1 - play with budget
2 - play without a budget
3 - play with cap/floor

the cap/floor is something that is badly needed in MLB and when the current agreement expired on Dec 1, 2026 we may see some big changes. Yours is a great idea but MLB needs to enact it not just the Show. If it means a lockout then so be it. It could develop into a fight between small and mid market teams vs big market teams.

The current system is so lopsided it isn't sustainable.

SDS will be required to implement any salary cap or floor should those concepts become part of actual MLB player negotiations. I think they will after we lose the entire 2027 season as the players will try to fight a cap/floor to the death. The owners are going to demand it before agreeing to resume MLB play.

Your English is just fine and you properly communicated the bug. This is a bug that has been reported in past years and has gone without correction. The game code does improperly assign the loss to the starting pitcher who completed the previous inning either holding the lead or preserving the tie. Per the official MLB rules, if your team then puts in a reliever to start the next inning, then he would be the pitcher of record if the game is tied, or subject to the loss and/or blown save should he surrender the lead or lose the game.

The game code also gets it wrong by assigning a loss based on the inherited runner who starts the inning at second base in extra innings of a regular season game. If that runner scores the winning run, the previous inning pitcher is assigned the loss, when it must be the pitcher who started the inning as he is the responsible pitcher for the inherited runner. Per official MLB rules, that inherited runner is treated much in the same way as a runner who reached base on an error.

The pitcher who then surrenders that run will be assigned the loss, but it won't be considered an earned run. The game code gets this entirely wrong. SDS has had years to fix this and has ignored the issue.

I'll grant you that RTTS is entirely your expression. But, you are advocating for a change in how RTTS works, a regression in the eyes of most customers, and one that we advocated against years ago. You have the right to express your opinion, but you also cannot ignore the reality that if you got your way on this then the change in RTTS would degrade the desired experience for vastly more customers who firmly believe that your avatar player's attribute levels should be strictly a reflection of the quality of on-the-field play that your skill as a person can determine.

I disagree. You don't buy talent in real life. You have to work for it. The player development in MLB 25's RTTS is actually among the few things that SDS got right. The only tweak should be to the amount of points awarded for good plays on the field.

The concept that you decide the development of the avatar player by your skill as a player is entirely, 100% correct.

@kenkraly2010_PSN said in MLB The Show 26 Wish List:

• For Classic Stadiums and not Stadium Creator can we get fully rendered models of Atlanta Fulton County Stadium (maybe make it Old Atlanta 2) , Cleveland Municipal Stadium , Busch Stadium 2 (1966-2005) ( the 1st Busch Stadium should be called Sportsmans Park by the way) , Veterans Stadium , and Yankee Stadium before it was renovated (1923-1975) and Riverfront Stadium ? The Classic Stadium models in MLB The Show have been the same for like forever time for some new ones.

• Ejections and suspensions

• Pitch clock displayed on the score bug

• For the All-Star Game the player wears the uniform of the MLB team they represent.

• Pre Game Shows for Franchise , Road To October and Road To The Show modes

• Improvements to the graphics for PS5 like improvements to HDR and such.

Does it matter by what source you get realistic classic stadiums? Whether by SDS's direct efforts or the community finally gets a fully fleshed out Stadium Creator, either option would provide you what you say you want, and by what source do you think you'll get the fuller range of classic stadiums? You think seeing hundreds of historic venues is more likely with SDS doing it, or by SDS unleashing SC into what it was meant to become when first released back in MLB The Show 21?

There are hundreds of folks waiting and willing to create historic venues. All these people have ever needed is a version of SC that does not go out of its way to force compromise.