T
@TheRupster12_XBL, well, that's certainly one way of looking at it.
For those of us who happen to disagree and think hitters have the advantage in this game, maybe SDS can do us a solid and require a ball batted down the line to be half on the inside part of the grass to be considered a fair ball... now that we're changing the rules of baseball, and all.
My apologies if this has been brought up already and I missed it, but I was noticing in the gameplay updates video, when highlighting the pitch challenge feature, that one of the examples called a strike on a ball that just nicked the corner of the zone; that ball was 100% a ball in '25, and one of my biggest gripes with the game (the game was hitter friendly enough without squeezing pitchers as a matter of course).
It may very well be just be a half measure as these on-the-black pitches could just be called about 50% of the time so the pitch challenge feature can be employed, but, hey, at least it's half of the way toward honoring the actual strike zone.
Baby steps?
@bostondirtdog21_PSN - Man, I don't know if that would ever have come back to mind had you not said it, but I remember really enjoying it, and thinking that VR Baseball was a much better game than its competitors. And then it was gone.
Good memory. Thank you.
@Easy_Duhz_It__PSN, RBI was pretty advanced... I started with this as a kid:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSjwLGdDGLw
I agree that the graphics are fine (individual blades of grass blowing in the wind would be neat, and all, but...). I think the biggest leaps, now, will come by focusing on better physics and dialing in the speed with which players move relative to the batted ball and the size of the field.
Fewer HRs, more balls landing on grass.
I’m really enjoying KCD2 now, but it’s more of a slow savor for me (I’ll check in on Henry throughout the next iteration of the show).
If you want to finish a game, I’d recommend Ghost of Tsushima. Definitely doable in that time frame, and really a beautiful game.
@PriorFir4383355_XBL said in SDS needs real competition, badly:
In short, if someone can devote enough time to fairly get that good with the controller that he consistently puts the bat on the ball, then he earns the right to good outcomes.
No. They earn the right to have the best possible chance at a good outcome that the game offers. Their superior skill puts them in a better position than anyone else, and it comes with great advantage. They've earned that, and that alone.
@PriorFir4383355_XBL said in SDS needs real competition, badly:
If your approach has merit, then why not have teams below .500 in real baseball use wider bats and pitch with balls having larger stitching?
Even by strawman standards, this is silly. Perhaps your obsession with comeback logic is clouding your thinking, as my position is not that there should be different rules for different people based on their success rate (I don't share your belief in this conspiracy theory, and I don't think what you're claiming is real). My position is that the PCI works like it does because it makes for a better article of baseball. Changing this mechanic and making it yield results based solely on the controller input of the person batting only benefits a very small slice of the community; it is certainly your prerogative to wish for a mechanic that allows a small number of people to marvel at their own greatness at the expense of everyone who prefers a game still recognizable as the sport they love, but I would go the other way.
@PriorFir4383355_XBL said in SDS needs real competition, badly:
The reason is because the concept of fair-minded sporting contests between people is that everyone plays by the same rules, and we don't force handicaps based on previous records.
In applying the same odds at good outcomes to everyone, the rules are the same. You just don't like them.
Hey man. I believe one of my cats absconded with my Garamon coaster, recently—and that was a bummer—but life and health-wise, all good things, so I’m doing well. I hope all is good with you and yours.
Just took a break when Ghost of Yotei came out and played only that for a while, and then my wife rediscovered Guitar Hero on the Wii, so we were having fun with that… never leave baseball for long, though.
@PriorFir4383355_XBL said in SDS needs real competition, badly:
However, you miss something elemental in all this. Humans themselves are not gifted with perfect eye-hand coordination, especially with a device as sensitive as a hand control pad.
Respectfully, I think humans are more likely to perform well where eye-hand coordination is concerned with a control pad than they are with a bat against a pitched ball. And that, in my opinion, is why a true input-based system of results is a terrible idea. Luck and chance, both requisite to actual baseball results, need to be introduced through game coding because manipulating a controller is far too easy, comparatively, and good players will tilt the game toward something that does not resemble baseball at all.
I think @Teak2112 nailed it with the post above.
As to the catch-up mechanics, I personally don't think they exist in the head-to-head format (but I do think it rears its head in vs. CPU games, with respect to the opportunities the human player is offered), but that is an argument for another day.
I see people are still complaining about the same things...
@c_lawson3_MLBTS said:
Look at the screenshots:
• A PERFECT PERFECT where my PCI is nowhere near the ball
Why write that your PCI was "nowhere near the ball" when your screen shot clearly shows the ball in the inner PCI? Maybe you're really good and also a perfectionist, but Perfect/Perfect has meant that the ball is in the inner PCI with perfect timing since it was introduced in 2020 (so that's what the feedback means). There is no issue, there.
• A routine pop-out with almost perfect PCI placement
The PCI is not the bat, and as such it is not meant to be an absolute indicator of where your swing will impact the ball (this is on purpose). It's where you want the bat to be, so, essentially, it represents where your batter is looking and functions as an odds generator. And it works like that because swinging a bat isn't like shooting a gun; it doesn't always end up where you're aiming, and that's the only way that a videogame can produce the kind of results that you'd see in a baseball game. While your PCI placement and timing are the biggest factors in determining those odds, other attributes (batter and pitcher) are still considered and play a role, and those other factors produce variance, which, this time, gave you a launch angle about 9 degrees too steep to produce the result you wanted.
Players who can aim as well as you will consistently have better results than those who cannot, and when two of you play each other, well, luck is going to be a factor if all inputs are equal. This is a baseball game made for people who love baseball, and if your goal in playing it is to prove that your input is more precise than that of the other person rather than to compete in something resembling baseball where luck and chance will always play a role, then you're going to continue to be frustrated and would probably be better served playing Call of Duty.
@x-814-x-MAFIA-x_PSN, that's a bit of tongue-in-cheek, friend... I'm making fun of the post. These complaints run the gamut, and I'm pointing that out.
Two singles and a home run... complete BS. Never happens. I defy anyone to show me a documented instance of two bloop singles followed by a home run, anywhere, in all of recorded history, because that kind of thing doesn't exist in real life. Just in this game, and when I see it, I quit. So should you.
Yeah... the game won't let you catch up because it cheats you if you fall behind. And the game cheats you by letting your opponent back into the game with its comeback logic. And it picks winners and losers before the game even starts (because you can tell you're going to lose within the first two batters).
FFS...
With his shades on (defense and post-game celebrations), the 99 Rod Carew looks just like Eazy-E, and that's enough to make him the best card.
Knowin' nothin' in life but to be legit...
@VortexNukezz, my apologies for attributing the 80-99 category to you, then. I'll acknowledge that error. You must have realized, however, how useless a metric that is for supporting your argument; there's a big difference between an 81 mph lollipop and a 99 mph drive that hits the seats. Who wouldn’t take one of the latter over 10 of the former?
In that light, your use of it was a type of manipulation, though I'm not necessarily assigning a value judgement to that. I'm not saying it makes you a lesser person. It just makes your argument spurious.
I guess what I'm saying is that your "objectively better" input is essentially tantamount to counting hits, because in that regard you were better.
I don't know why people are so obsessed with the feedback in this game; who cares if you get a "perfect / perfect" if it's a line drive to the second basemen? I'd personally rather have a good contact at a 32 degree launch angle that results in a 99 mph fly ball to left. Even if I got a little lucky to get it. Might not be perfect, but it is a homerun most of the time.
And maybe you are better than the guy that you played (from my perspective, you're both monsters), but the data you provided in no way supports your assertion.
@Talkingben9558_XBL, Ah... I think that's Jacob Young.
I just saw Jacob Wilson, went to the A's in my brain, and connected to Denzel, who is an amazing defensive CF.
@Talkingben9558_XBL said in Roberto Clemente Program:
Did you forget Jacob Wilson and PCA exist? Hes good, but not the best
Maybe you meant Denzel Clarke, who plays on the same team as Jacob Wilson, but isn’t a poor fielding shortstop?
If you did, he may very well prove to be better than the lot of them (7 DRS in roughly 330 innings is pretty amazing, and watching him is a jaw-dropping experience), but the best may be a bit premature, given he has yet to play a full season.
But, yes, Doyle is not the best defensive fielder in MLB.
And to Clemente, the man made a fair amount of errors in the outfield… maybe 90 isn’t so unfair (I do understand he made 0 errors in 1961). I mean, they gave Gold Gloves to Jeter.
So… you both had very good offensive games but he hit 3 more home runs and won by 5. And this means the hitting engine is “randomized.”
I’m not going to look, but I wonder how many of the other guy’s batted balls “between 80-99” were actually well over 90… my guess would be more than the poster, since the other guy hit 9 HRs in total, but only 5 came off of exit velocities higher than 100. And why choose 80-99, when the types of hits at either end of that spectrum are very, very different?
It’s interesting the things a human mind can convince itself of when the alternative is that someone else did better than you did when it mattered… Statistics can be reported in ways that support a version of the narrative the reporter likes best, and just because you don’t know or understand how other factors aside from placement and timing affected the result doesn’t mean it must therefore be a “random calibration of the hitting engine.”
@PAinPA_PSN, yeah, I believe that they can happen, but I think the amount of disdain from the original post might be a wee bit disproportionate considering how rare and inconsequential this “issue” is.
More complaining for the sake of complaining.
I’ve played nearly 200 RS games and a significant amount against the CPU. I’ve haven’t seen one.
But if we’re each just going to take turns complaining about our own non-essential, non-issues that bother us anyway, then I’d like to stop imbeciles from playing stupid sounds or “you’re killing me, Smalls” over my PA system during home games. That sort of thing ought not be encouraged in any situation, let alone in my house.
Madness, and I say no.
@iBonafideScrub__PSN, I think that was self-deprecating humor rather than a passive aggressive insult… at least it’s written that way.
I would think advice to lighten up is more aptly directed to the guy who suggested punching a pillow, but, hey, what do I know?