Community Forum

The universal opinion from the non-gatekeepers is all they really do is change the sliders from time to time. Likely the same core game we've been playing for 10 years. Maybe it's just way too difficult for them to overhaul the code and start from scratch. Well, just not "cost effective".

So Mad Max (the cheater we've discovered) is pitching against me in a Conquest game. One of the booth guys says "Sherzer, one of 3 pitchers to have struck out 20 batters in a game, including Randy Johnson and Roger Clemens". What about Kerry Wood's little gem against the Astros in 1998?

If they can't get historical stats correct how does anyone expect they can get the rest of the game right? I mean, there really is no excuse for throwing out inaccurate commentary. That's just lack of effort.

So much more of the commentary is stale, repetitious, silly (59 rated pitcher comes in and they talk about his filthy slider), and just plain inexcusable for a company making 100's of $millions.

But I do enjoy playing the game sometimes. It doesn't totally suck and it's the only MLB console sim option we really have.

The very method of the '23 version of this game completely and totally sucks the very life out of much of the fun factor.

First 1-2 weeks of play everyone has at least 97 rated players up and down their roster. So, if you play online you're playing against the same level teams. Mostly identical players. Maybe some 99's thrown in but, in the great scheme of things, how much difference "should" there be between a 97 and 99 player? Very little if the game actually coded things with any sort of real-life consistent algorithm.

What's the purpose of just dummying down every event and making these 90+ players so accessible? It used to be fun those many years ago to still be fighting it out with your favorite 85 rated player (because you might only have one or 2 diamonds) 2 months into game play. Forget about that. 85 players haven't seen my roster since I've loaded it up with entirely 97-99 rated 3 weeks after the game dropped.

It's not a great strategy or motivator for many long-time fans. I'm sure some love it to death. But, it's like the "everyone gets a trophy" vibe. To the truly competitive , or even marginally so player, just sucks the life out of the game.

Guys, it's been said many times before and by much smarter guys than myself. The AI is dictating game outcomes. You hope that it's taking into consideration controller input before it starts painting its awesome graphics. Typically it is, But when the 'ol AI counter says player flounders..it's going to throw some animation out there indicating you swung "early", "late", whatever. The worst, imo, is when it doesn't even show my reticle (plate target) move. I'm pretty confident I'm on just about every pitch with the reticle, but the AI is fully aware it can't show my reticle lining up with a high fast ball and inducing a pop-up..instead my reticle stays center and I fly a can 'o corn to the 2B.

Perhaps it's just lag and network effect, but it's been a mainstay in this game since it went online. Comes and goes. Could also be sliders and AI intentionally (yet pretty obviously) dictating an outcome just because it's sticking with some predetermined script. Dunno, but I give up even trying to figure it out years ago.

On my 241st pack I got my first diamond a lame/wtfAmIGoingToDoWithThisCrap universal Icon.

Are they just shortchanging us on pack diamonds because they give diamonds away like free water at a 5k race in every silly event/challenge they have. I've got a starting 9/bench and pitching staff all 97s. Not one are from a pack. It's just silly and whoever @ SDS dropped the ball on this one should be demoted.

I pulled Francisco Lindor out of my lineup because I got so sick of hearing the exact same thing, and only that, when Lindor came to bat. Guess that's the only thing in the world of interest for Lindor.

Would it be so difficult to create, I dunno, maybe a dozen clips for each player? Would that be waaaay to much work? Just asking.

For the first couple days this game played better than any of the 10 or 15 previous versions. Everything just felt "real". The reticle would go where I tried to move it. I made hard contact in those situations. If my 90+ pitcher put a perfect pitch on a corner it was never hit hard..and typically whiffed. Really thought the developers had turned the corner at finally made the perfect game.

Then reality slapped me down again. It's back to the reticle seldom going where my intended swing plane is. Fact is, it seldom moves in response to my controller input. Those pitches I time perfectly nipping the corners are smoked for homeruns just about as often as a meatball right over the plate.

The fun evaporated. It's now just the AI taking over and predetermining outcomes and painting some gorgeous animation to support it. Single player mode is a total roulette wheel.

Prediction...SDS does a deep-dive Lessons Learned about the 2023 version and NEVER..EVER..revisits the early season 97-99 drops. Not just the egregiously high rated drops, but the sheer simplicity and wide-scale prevalence of these cards landing in nearly everyone's lap in the first couple weeks.

Brik said it well, no one cares about any card under 97. And that's a complete F-you to whoever inside the development team that came up with the Captain's and Choice series's.

Either that or the development team(s) weren't all reading from the same script. Failure of epic proportions for a company that did create one of the very best console Sports games of all time. Huge Kudos. But appears to have a very hard time moving the legacy forward with anything resembling engaging gameplay. Void of even the most basic MLB strategies for the most part. Weighed down with too much excess.

@BJDUBBYAH_PSN said in Just for the shell of it:

Everything you said, only proves that you lost an online game.

Oh, should I be embarrassed? Should I have kept this little bit of info to myself to keep from disgracing myself?

I don't really give a diddler's duck if I lose games. That's why I do these things just to TRY to keep a very predictable (in it's zany disbursement of funky gameplay) and stale game halfway bearable. I'm still trying to get my $100 worth of enjoyment out it. I'm up to about $33.50. Just don't know if I'll have the patience or enthusiasm to trudge on.

This forum is an outlet for me to vent and actually accounts for about $25 of the $33.50 enjoyment I've gotten so far.

@Tuke7-1_MLBTS said in Happened again:

The pause timer doesn't expire after 46 seconds. Seems like you may be leaving some information out of your tale.

Nope, I said 45 seconds because that was my only pause of the game.

This is the classic "glitch" where somehow/someway when an opponent pauses..if you also pause, stand on your head, pick your nose and eat it, throw salt behind your back, disconnect your wifi for 2 seconds and plug it back in, whatever, etc. you can effectively make the server think your opponent disconnected. I really don't care to know the exact details (I'll never do it) I just think it's a no-gainer and not worth looking like a frickin cheat over.

It's been a thing for years.

Online play is pretty smooth on the PS5

@raesONE-_PSN said in why you suck:

@OG_1970s_Gamer_PSN said in why you suck:

@raesONE-_PSN said in why you suck:

@Ericulous1_PSN said in why you suck:

@raesONE-_PSN said in why you suck:

@Ericulous1_PSN said in why you suck:

@raesONE-_PSN said in why you suck:

22 is one of the easier games in the series to catch on and compete being a casual, given that the game doesn't punish bad plate discipline or terrible pitch recognition. If you sit fastball on every pitch thrown to you, without any intention to adapt or to take a pitch when it's on the black, you can still be very successful in this game. So yeah I disagree with almost everything you say. It applied to some games in this series, like MLBTS 16 and even 17, but definitely not 22.

I agree the gameplay is nowhere near where it should be and the game does let you off the hook on some bad swings for sure. However. I’ve now been playing this game most days for 2 years. Not nearly as much as many who have played forever, but certainly more than a casual player. In my league I never so much as held a lead in the first 7 games. It’s still not easy for guys who aren’t super skilled. Especially when playing on HoF.

That's fair, I simply tried comparing this year's game to other installments in the context of OP. And in that context I stand by what I said.

Good call, I definitely can’t speak to previous years and truthfully, I played better online this year than in 21. And I am certainly willing to acknowledge when I hit a bomb I didn’t really deserve. That’s why I appreciate you. You can handle a lively debate without it turning sour. You gonna play 23?

Appreciate you as well. No I will not be playing at launch, I might pick the game up later when it's on sale but the Tech Test actually pushed me further away from this game.

What in the tech test turned you off?

Not to sound dramatic or overly bitter, but pretty much everything. I have been hoping for a new completely overhauled MLBTS experience for years and I figured the arrival of next gen consoles would do that. Just like how NBA2K decided to make a dedicated next gen experience, which they totally nailed regardless if you like the game and/or its business model or not. I'm not a big 2K fan either for many reasons, but their next gen games are quality. I give them credit for that.
But as I expected, MLBTS 23 seems like just another lazy copy/paste job with some tweaks and small additions and a lot of messing around with the gameplay parameters/sliders to give us the false pretense of a "new" game, because it feels so different. But it's really not.
I could go into more detail about the specific gameplay what I don't like, but this comment would turn into a case study and nobody wants to read that. My arguments above are what's most important.

Well said. Nice to see some well articulated opinions. And couldn't agree with you more.

Annually rehashed game with a few well marketed "gimmicks" and always chock full of AI contrivances.

Is the best MLB console game on the market. The animation, sound, variety is unmatched. The presentation is top-shelf. My wife walked in a couple days ago while I was playing and thought it was opening day and I was watching a game. That realistic!

However, if you are considering buying it to enjoy some consistently competitive gameplay..you won't get it. The emphasis on consistent, for whatever reason the AI likes to dictates outcomes and the truly competitive gamer despises such things.

@TheHungryHole said in why you suck:

@raesONE-_PSN said in why you suck:

@OG_1970s_Gamer_PSN said in why you suck:

@raesONE-_PSN said in why you suck:

@Ericulous1_PSN said in why you suck:

@raesONE-_PSN said in why you suck:

@Ericulous1_PSN said in why you suck:

@raesONE-_PSN said in why you suck:

22 is one of the easier games in the series to catch on and compete being a casual, given that the game doesn't punish bad plate discipline or terrible pitch recognition. If you sit fastball on every pitch thrown to you, without any intention to adapt or to take a pitch when it's on the black, you can still be very successful in this game. So yeah I disagree with almost everything you say. It applied to some games in this series, like MLBTS 16 and even 17, but definitely not 22.

I agree the gameplay is nowhere near where it should be and the game does let you off the hook on some bad swings for sure. However. I’ve now been playing this game most days for 2 years. Not nearly as much as many who have played forever, but certainly more than a casual player. In my league I never so much as held a lead in the first 7 games. It’s still not easy for guys who aren’t super skilled. Especially when playing on HoF.

That's fair, I simply tried comparing this year's game to other installments in the context of OP. And in that context I stand by what I said.

Good call, I definitely can’t speak to previous years and truthfully, I played better online this year than in 21. And I am certainly willing to acknowledge when I hit a bomb I didn’t really deserve. That’s why I appreciate you. You can handle a lively debate without it turning sour. You gonna play 23?

Appreciate you as well. No I will not be playing at launch, I might pick the game up later when it's on sale but the Tech Test actually pushed me further away from this game.

What in the tech test turned you off?

Not to sound dramatic or overly bitter, but pretty much everything. I have been hoping for a new completely overhauled MLBTS experience for years and I figured the arrival of next gen consoles would do that. Just like how NBA2K decided to make a dedicated next gen experience, which they totally nailed regardless if you like the game and/or its business model or not. I'm not a big 2K fan either for many reasons, but their next gen games are quality. I give them credit for that.
But as I expected, MLBTS 23 seems like just another lazy copy/paste job with some tweaks and small additions and a lot of messing around with the gameplay parameters/sliders to give us the false pretense of a "new" game, because it feels so different. But it's really not.
I could go into more detail about the specific gameplay what I don't like, but this comment would turn into a case study and nobody wants to read that. My arguments above are what's most important.

i agree completely - first time since 2017 since i did not buy the game prelaunch - copy paste job for SDS yet again, and i can enjoy diablo 4 instead in the meantime

I'm playing the RE4 remake. Came out the same time as MLB the Scam. I hadn't purchased the game in 2 years, but decided to give it another go naively thinking they had addressed the dreadful. But no.

So, yeah, about 3 days of playing the Show and having some pretty good early impressions. But, just like always as soon as major traffic hits the servers the game just gets ridiculous.

RE4 is pretty solid. I regret wasting nearly $100 on the Show.

What do you think of Diablo 4? Likely my next buy.

Never mind, unless someone has something to the contrary I'm guessing because I completed this map once (fairly easily now that i recall) the AI just amped up the challenge exponentially. Maybe I've read that before, but can someone confirm whether the maps are juiced up after you beat them once?

@Hellsteeth30_XBL said in Can someone explain the great divide in Conquests?:

Same across the board really, the CPU just decides it wants to win and does so.

Yep..pretty much the case at every level and always has been. It's just, sometimes, it feel like there is some consistency in the modes. But that changes like the weather.

Hall of Fame I've beaten every time another team attacks my stronghold. Which it's only happened, ever, when I've played this map I'm talking about. In the same map, though, if I try to "steal" from another team I'll lose about half the time on Veteran. There is no rhyme or reason to difficulties..which is pretty annoying.

The very method of the '23 version of this game completely and totally sucks the very life out of much of the fun factor.

First 1-2 weeks of play everyone has at least 97 rated players up and down their roster. So, if you play online you're playing against the same level teams. Mostly identical players. Maybe some 99's thrown in but, in the great scheme of things, how much difference "should" there be between a 97 and 99 player? Very little if the game actually coded things with any sort of real-life consistent algorithm.

What's the purpose of just dummying down every event and making these 90+ players so accessible? It used to be fun those many years ago to still be fighting it out with your favorite 85 rated player (because you might only have one or 2 diamonds) 2 months into game play. Forget about that. 85 players haven't seen my roster since I've loaded it up with entirely 97-99 rated 3 weeks after the game dropped.

It's not a great strategy or motivator for many long-time fans. I'm sure some love it to death. But, it's like the "everyone gets a trophy" vibe. To the truly competitive , or even marginally so player, just sucks the life out of the game.

@Easy_Duhz_It_ said in Shoulda posted here:

@ShowProdigy_MLBTS said in Shoulda posted here:

First 1-2 weeks of play everyone has at least 97 rated players up and down their roster. So, if you play online you're playing against the same level teams

So your issue is that you're playing on a level playing field and getting smashed online?

Also, every time i see posts like this, i cant help but think the issue some people have with 99s so early is the fact that they cant just grind BR and events all day while manipulating the market and keeping the prices high for people who dont grind online but still want the cards.

I did not say I'm getting smashed or smashing. I've won every online game I've played.

It's just boring I suppose. I'll slightly reiterate my point because it appears some (you perhaps) missed it. Within 2-3 weeks after launch of this year's game, pretty much every roster was composed of 97-99 players. That is a ratings range of 3. Which is pretty negligible. At most, if it was to be kept interesting, that range would be no smaller than 10. 90-99 players.

I understand, and you also said, it really doesn't matter in MLB the Show because ratings are barely factored into outcomes. I get that and agree 100%.

However, the first week of the season, when my roster was a fair mix of 80's/90's there was an element of strategy involved. In key situations I would bring in my higher rated relievers. For example, I might have a mop-up game going where I would be winning by 5 runs late and just bring in a 83-86 reliever. But, if I had a 1 run lead I would bring in my 90+ rated stopper/closer. NOW I pop up my bullpen and every single pitcher is in the high 90's. There is no strategy, just grab whatever arm because they're all about the same.

Strategy exits the game when all players are nearly identically ranked. And, again, your point that it doesn't really matter because this game doesn't put a lot of emphasis on ratings anyway is understood. But, at least, you can pretend it matters.

Someone mentioned a "salary-cap". I don't know if it's ever been implemented for anything other than AI play, but that would be awesome for online play. 25-man roster limited to 2050 total rating. That averages 82 btw. It would be sooooo much better than what landed this year..IMO.

@BrikMahorn_XBL said in Shoulda posted here:

@ShowProdigy_MLBTS said in Shoulda posted here:

The very method of the '23 version of this game completely and totally sucks the very life out of much of the fun factor.

First 1-2 weeks of play everyone has at least 97 rated players up and down their roster. So, if you play online you're playing against the same level teams. Mostly identical players. Maybe some 99's thrown in but, in the great scheme of things, how much difference "should" there be between a 97 and 99 player? Very little if the game actually coded things with any sort of real-life consistent algorithm.

What's the purpose of just dummying down every event and making these 90+ players so accessible? It used to be fun those many years ago to still be fighting it out with your favorite 85 rated player (because you might only have one or 2 diamonds) 2 months into game play. Forget about that. 85 players haven't seen my roster since I've loaded it up with entirely 97-99 rated 3 weeks after the game dropped.

It's not a great strategy or motivator for many long-time fans. I'm sure some love it to death. But, it's like the "everyone gets a trophy" vibe. To the truly competitive , or even marginally so player, just sucks the life out of the game.

@ShowProdigy_MLBTS said in Shoulda posted here:

@Easy_Duhz_It_ said in Shoulda posted here:

@ShowProdigy_MLBTS said in Shoulda posted here:

First 1-2 weeks of play everyone has at least 97 rated players up and down their roster. So, if you play online you're playing against the same level teams

So your issue is that you're playing on a level playing field and getting smashed online?

Also, every time i see posts like this, i cant help but think the issue some people have with 99s so early is the fact that they cant just grind BR and events all day while manipulating the market and keeping the prices high for people who dont grind online but still want the cards.

I did not say I'm getting smashed or smashing. I've won every online game I've played.

It's just boring I suppose. I'll slightly reiterate my point because it appears some (you perhaps) missed it. Within 2-3 weeks after launch of this year's game, pretty much every roster was composed of 97-99 players. That is a ratings range of 3. Which is pretty negligible. At most, if it was to be kept interesting, that range would be no smaller than 10. 90-99 players.

I understand, and you also said, it really doesn't matter in MLB the Show because ratings are barely factored into outcomes. I get that and agree 100%.

However, the first week of the season, when my roster was a fair mix of 80's/90's there was an element of strategy involved. In key situations I would bring in my higher rated relievers. For example, I might have a mop-up game going where I would be winning by 5 runs late and just bring in a 83-86 reliever. But, if I had a 1 run lead I would bring in my 90+ rated stopper/closer. NOW I pop up my bullpen and every single pitcher is in the high 90's. There is no strategy, just grab whatever arm because they're all about the same.

Strategy exits the game when all players are nearly identically ranked. And, again, your point that it doesn't really matter because this game doesn't put a lot of emphasis on ratings anyway is understood. But, at least, you can pretend it matters.

Bravo. Exactly what I've been saying for a couple weeks now. Just more polite.

When every player on everyone's roster is 97/99 (which are basically the same thing)...any sort of strategy is gone.

Sure...there is still some in-game strategy when it comes to hitting and pitching...but not in terms of anything else.

Pinch hitting and bullpen use...who cares. Everyone is awesome, and almost without a flaw.

Same goes for building a roster. No need to sacrifice a bit of power at the plate in exchange for better fielding...everyone is a 5-tool player at every position.

Shoot even Ozzie Smith...with his 28 CAREER HRs...and .328 career SLUG has a 71 and 65 POWER!

LOL!

Those ratings make Jeter's 99/88 Power splits look REALISTIC....I mean the guy hit a whopping 24 HR's one season...what an absolute beast.

They've bent the knee to their "lowest common denominator" gamers. Pokemon players who don't even know the basic rules of baseball...and who just want to play a FPS where they get to hit HR's.

It's a shame. This mode could be sooooooo much more.

They've made it dull and boring.

Believe there is a silent majority that feels the same way. I've played 10+ seasons of this game and it's got to be the worst strategy SDS has ever used. On the service, perhaps, it sounded pretty cool to the decision makers. For sure was "different". But to have even a servicable MLB sim you got to keep strategy factored in.

Put your best defensive SS in (despite him being a bad bat) to protect leads. Get your right-handed batters in against left-handed pitchers (now every batter is over 90 against right or left..so that strategy is irrelevant). All great hitters are also great defenders.

Just so many different factors that strategy brings to the table that have been rendered obsolete by all the grossly overrated cards that are tossed out like candy at a Halloween Parade.