Community Forum

@Cam8w_MLBTS, is there something built into the game that made you strike out 10 times in the 7th - 9th innings of the last two games you lost? Where was all that good contact that didn’t fall in? I noticed you mention “not even perfect,” but looks like the only late perfect you had was a single to left by Castellanos.

By the way, in those two losses, neither you nor your opponent made an out on a perfect/perfect in either game.

And that weak contact your opponent had? Was that in your last loss when your opponent hit a home run and two doubles in a 5-run, 6-hit 8th?

But you were better than him… despite the fact that he had a better record and a higher batting average.

Your game logs don’t support your stories.

As a directional user who has cancer, just thought I'd throw out a special FU to the OP.

And enough with your no-skill nonsense; it's timing and choosing the right swing type, leaving placement to attribute-based chance, while zone is timing and placement, leaving swing type to attribute-based chance. I like it because it feels more like baseball to me, and it produces more realistic results. More opportunity to screw the pooch in zone, but those who know what they're doing are rewarded much more heavily (which leads me to think you got your a** handed to you by a better zone player).

It's interesting to me that people describe the addition of more random chance as the game being "dumbed down," or in any number of ways that suggest that making it a factor in outcomes has somehow "broken" the game. Considering how outcomes in the real game of baseball depend more on random chance than any other sport, this, to me, makes it feel more real.

I don't want to denigrate the OP (your post is well written and well thought out) or anyone else who feels that all video games should strive to have results determined 100% by input-based skill, as that's obviously the reigning sentiment of those who write in these forums, but that certainly isn't how most people feel. I'd venture to guess that most people who buy this game don't think like that; they want to enjoy a simulated baseball experience where, on any given day, a little bit of luck may allow them to beat a far superior opponent.

I've been playing this game ever since it was a thing, religiously, and this year, with the pandemic conditions and a super fun neck dissection that gave me far too much time to play video games, I've logged thousands of hours over the years. I say that only to make the point that I'm not a "casual" player, and, with that, if I were to posit a theory as to what has "broken" this game, it would be the introduction of the reticle and the resulting mindset that "skill" must trump all else. By allowing users to line up the ball in crosshairs, it has introduced the feeling that successfully accomplishing that should result in a hard base hit at the very least, probably a home run, and anything undesirable is interpreted as the user not being "rewarded" appropriately. Granted, lining it up is very difficult to do, but not so difficult that it doesn't produce very unrealistic results with regard to frequency of hits and, in particular, home runs. The only way to tamp that down is to negate it through RNG, which clearly drives people mad.

Personally, with regard to the reticle, I say just get rid of the [censored] thing, already. If showing how "skilled" you are at lining up your crosshairs on a target is that important to you, play Call of Duty or some other FPS, because that's where that skill belongs. It doesn't have any place in a baseball game (ever used a bat with a scope on it, or know anyone who has?), and working around the mistake of its introduction has resulted in all kinds of weirdness to make the rest of the game work around it.

@Nauracy34... No.

First off, the market doesn't exist so people can make "passive income" by flipping cards. I could care less about your profit margins when I'm making decisions with my inventory.

And you're completely wrong about the speed with which something sells if it's considerably less than the "buy now" price; if I'm satisfied selling that card at $42K minus the 10%, and I want those stubs so I can do something else with them, then why would I post it for a stub less than the "buy now" so some fake-market junkie can undercut me by a stub, and then someone else can undercut that person by a stub... why waste the time when I can set a price I'm happy with and move on to doing what I want to do on my time, rather than playing out some ridiculous scenario where I have to engage with the shenanigans of Wall Street cosplayers instead of playing actual games with cards I'd like to use?

No thanks. I'll take a few thousand less than "buy now" (but a few thousand more than "sell now") to avoid that nonsense and be done with it quickly.

@Nauracy34 said in Why?:

Seems as though I’ve struck a nerve

Yeah. It bothers me when the self-absorbed start calling people stupid for acting in a way that doesn't provide them direct benefit.

But, considering your original post, I guess I--and people like me--struck a nerve first...

I'm sorry, but this is not a problem.

So you hate completing Showdowns. Great. Don't. Resign yourself to the fact that you're either going to have to do something you don't like to get a couple of cards, or don't do the thing and don't get the cards.

Personally, I don't like collections. I think it's a monumental waste of time and stubs to collect high Live Series diamonds that I will never use (I don't play DD to use Live Series cards) and lock them in so I can't sell them. I'd love to have that Beltran card... and that Headley card... but I won't. And that's okay. There is nothing wrong with SDS putting cards behind a "wall" because I don't want to walk the path it takes to get them. That's on me.

You can't always have all the things.

Palmer. Nice speed differentials between pitches, good slider, great hair.

Rod Carew... he’s got mad hits, you know.

So, I’m playing a little conquest on a Sunday morning, giving equal attention to my coffee and my happy pen, and my mind wanders to modes I’d like to see…

Suppose offline players—or those who need a break from online shenanigans—could enter into tournaments against CPU-controlled teams? Released with about the frequency of conquest, they could have variable reward structures; win the tournament on Allstar and receive 5000 stubs, 2 Headliner packs, yada yada. Win the tourney on Legend and receive 50k stubs, an ASG pack, a HR Derby pack, 5 headliners, yada yada. You lose, you start over. The actuals would need some work, but you get the idea.

Lots of variables to play with there, with some tournaments against all-time teams, others against current MLB; the tourneys themselves could be of varying lengths with regard to scheduled games, with games of varying length, designed to commemorate an historical event, etc. I’d love to just use my main squad, but could possibly be event-style entries…

Almost certainly not an original idea, but I just haven’t come across something like it yet.

Okay. Pardon my intrusion. Another sip… another puff… another game.

@rageincage007, I whole-heartedly agree. Much more like real baseball with the chance to play defense without all the nonsensical HRs.

Just curious... from this thread, it seems like any bunt at all is cheese... Is it actually considered by players here bad form to bunt, but the goon-fest, flex-off, home run circle jerks at Shippett are cool?

@MaxHarvest said in Dashboarding - viable solution?:

Horrible idea, just let it be

You know, maybe on those mornings where you wake up and just decide to be a [censored], you should just go back to bed, instead, and let the world be a little better without your participation to weigh it down. You know, try again, tomorrow, where you just might make someone laugh, instead.

Not a horrible idea, and a lot of thought was obviously put into it. I do think it could be hard to pull off from the dev standpoint, with regard to the enforced delay, but I really like the idea of the dashboarding opponent being taken over by the CPU. For all the people who want to stat grind, that would save the lives of the countless, doomed un-homers that would now be allowed to land. Having the choice to forfeit and not play out the whole game against the CPU, but to still collect the fruits of what caused the fit is especially appealing.

I like it.

May your slow day not drag on forever, OP...

Maybe his wife was politely suggesting he get off his [censored] and do something more productive, so haste was necessary?

Obviously, there are improvements to be made and things to refine with The Show, but I remember how excited I was to finally get this game (I think I was 9 by the time I was lucky enough to get my hands on it). There were nine players on defense! And it talked!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6L1sWZCeCgw

@tngu834_psn said in Thank you SDS DEVs:

Thank you for the gameplay updates. You listened to the community and spent the time to update this. I don't play any other video games and I bought a PS5 to maximize this game too. Releasing this game on many consoles and have the additional features was super ambitious and I am sure people were forced to do A LOT more with a lot less during Covid-19 since this seems to be motto for corporations.

Refreshing to see a little positivity and gratitude... thanks for taking the time to post something that acknowledges the human element behind this game and doesn't carry the typical stink of entitled whining. Bottom line is that they didn't have to do a [censored] thing, but they did, and while I'm sure many would have liked to see it sooner, it's nice to see a little reason and understanding from someone who didn't get exactly what they wanted when they wanted it in this "all-things-right-now" world...

Sad that you feel like you need to apologize for it, because you don't. Good on you for showing some decency, which is really all you can do; let the quibblers do their thing and pay no mind.

Enjoy the rest of your weekend, OP.

There’s nothing wrong with the exit velocity. We haven’t had a power creep for a while, and people aren’t used to it… not sure why people are expecting 100mph+ batted balls consistently from guys with power ratings 75 and below. They should be rare, now.

“Fixing” that will result in 150+ once the majority of cards are 90-110.

Remember that the average exit velocity in MLB is 89mph (which means lots of contact at far lesser velocities to make that average). This is the only time of year that the game will likely reflect that… let it be.

I play my Conquest, etc., on HOF, too. Sometimes I score 1, and sometimes I score 4 in an inning. It’s normal.

Why are we asking to honor people without any honor?

Joe Jackson admitted that he not only knew about the plan to throw the series, he admitted to taking $5K from those who made the fix. Pete Rose, in addition to gambling on games in which he was involved, had [censored] with a 15 year old when he was married with two children.

Hard no on both.

@dbub_PSN, you started it off with negativity. And you were wrong, but decided to bag on others anyway.

@skepple15 said in I hate Shippett Stadium:

Play at a “neutral park” to hit that perfect perfect flyball with 110 power that flies out before the warning track

While there doesn't seem to be too many "neutral" parks, playing in a big one is the only way to quell the boring homer-fest. Personally, I like Forbes for that very reason; someone might send one 420 feet, but a fast outfielder can run it down if there's enough loft.

There are still some home runs (very few from me), but Forbes and Griffith are about the only places where pitching and defense seem to matter. I realize I'm in the minority here and in the real world (the best real game I've ever seen ended with my A's winning 1-0 on a Mike Gallego suicide squeeze, sometime in the late 80's), but can't beat a low-scoring game filled with high-leverage situations.

So, there are always home games...

I shouldn't, but can't help myself...

People tend to look at this like you can isolate a healthy segment of society, like athletes, and it's okay because it's likely not going to affect them adversely even if they contract it. That may be true, but what about the poor saps in the hotels where these guys are staying? There are very likely others they come into contact with... What if someone's mom, or girlfriend, or brother contract it and have some comorbidity?

This is not some twisted plan to make sure no one is enjoying their life, nor is it a politically-driven conspiracy; believe it or not, some people think human life is more important than allowing others to have a good time, and instead of just accepting that some people will die because we want to watch baseball, they stop to consider that those statistics have families and loved ones. If even a few deaths can be prevented by being cautious, then we should be cautious.

I'm with ScaryLarito on this.

And ItsaCanesthing, no one's fragile ego is preventing them from accepting your opinion. Patience, a more mature outlook on life, and a better understanding of the situation is all it takes to disregard it.