Community Forum

@IrishFist412_MLBTS, I appreciate that you’re being positive, and that’s fine and good.

My perspective is that there are many days where I can squeeze one game in, maybe two if I’m lucky. I play because I love baseball, and as my ability to actually play it physically has long passed, this game is as visceral an experience as I can have… when a taste of that is what I want in the 50 minutes I might have free to play, a game in Shield Woods is a let down at best, and mostly a miserable experience.

I am fortunate that my wife is a PC gamer and I have many weekend mornings that allow for long stretches of play as we sit together, drink our coffee, and chat. Capitol Lange and Shield Woods are more like background noise on those days, as I disengage and allow them to run their course; my enjoyment comes more from the shared space and visitations from cats than the game I’m putting up with.

Even on those days, in that frame of mind, those parks suck. Happy people at peace should still make that distinction.

@ref479ode_PSN said in Please nerf these disgraceful stadiums:

... why nerf shippett if you're going to put two fields in that play more silly than shippett did?

That's a really good question. People that want a child's stadium to pad stats to complete missions (I don't enjoy that, either, but if people want to do that on their own time, it doesn't affect me) in a single player mode can play at a created stadium, but there's no need for these in competitive modes.

Like they emphasized in the stream, "this is a baseball simulation," and when making adjustments elsewhere in the game to make it play more realistically, why throw all of that out the window and completely ruin the experience for those who don't want to leave the game feeling dumber for having wasted their time playing something that in no way can be called baseball?

@IrishFist412_MLBTS, well, you're probably better than me, and perhaps you use him on HOF or above? I don't know that I've ever faced him when I join the 700s for my brief stints.

I just know that the few times I've tried to use him I've been lit up, and, at least on Allstar, seeing him on the mound for my opponent has always meant a very good day at the plate for me.

@SakAttack87_PSN said in Feature Deep Dive: Gameplay - 2/11/25:

I feel like there has almost been an overcorrection when it comes to fielding over the last few years. For a while, making a diving play was like seeing a unicorn, but now you see multiple highlight reel plays every single game. The issue is, these plays aren't just coming from elite fielders. They need to really dumb down the defense when the shield switches from diamond to gold and even more so when you drop to the silver/bronze territory. Or maybe there just needs to be a more selective process when it comes to dishing out diamond badges. Make it more rare so it means something.

I completely agree about the diving (though I have to admit I somewhat guiltily appreciate the abundance of opportunity and enjoy it very much), and I also think it should be toned down, particularly for average and below average fielders. I do think it's almost an overcorrection out of necessity, though, and that it's at least in part driven by the effects of crazy batted-ball velocities; without the ability to superman dive, very few fielders would ever touch a ball once it hit the ground after good contact. I'd love to see the batted-ball slow down a touch so fielding could become a larger part of the experience.

And I think you're right about the juiced cards... that fuels all of this.

@SakAttack87_PSN said in Feature Deep Dive: Gameplay - 2/11/25:

... but one of the biggest things I would want to see is a bigger emphasis on defense. There should be a HUGE difference between an Ozzie Smith and your more average shortstop. Give players a reason to value defense.

On that same note, the pitching engine needs an overhaul to allow finesse pitchers to be more effective. It's such a shame that usability still comes down to either having outlier or the sinker/cutter meta.

Hear! Hear!

Absolutely this... I don't expect these changes or this year's game to fully embrace this, but would love to see a step in this direction. I love playing defense, but the ease with which just about anyone can drive a ball 450ft makes pitching to contact with success nearly impossible. Crazy that guys like Maddux are unusable...

I've always used meter (and play 300 - 500 Ranked games a year with it)... it doesn't feel random to me when I miss; if I don't go far enough, it seems to float (e.g. right-handed slider doesn't break as much, stays high, and doesn't reach the PAR), and if I go too far, it's overthrown (right-handed slider overshoots the PAR and end up lower in the zone).

There's always the chance that something random happens on rare occasions, but my experience is that my mistakes in the zone reflect my mistakes with the meter.

@SakAttack87_PSN, I like those guys, too... Canseco isn't a Moneyball guy, though

For the Athletics (there is no more Oakland, finally): my heart wants Carney Lansford, but I’d be thrilled with Tim Hudson.

@IrishFist412_MLBTS said in Please nerf these disgraceful stadiums:

… just use real life minor league stadiums…

Well, they’re going to need to make at least one.

Let’s-go-West-Sac!

@YOSHI24_XBL, can't agree more... I played a game yesterday where I won either 10-9 or 9-8 at Shield Woods (trying to wipe it from my memory) where I hit about 6 lazy HRs and my opponent at least that many. It was stupid; I am not a good hitter, and this shouldn't be happening.

@LuvMyXBOX_XBL, wanting to see the envelope pushed on the PS5 and XBox Series X is legitimate enough, though I think people may be overestimating their capabilities and not giving current iterations of the game their due if they think there’s a lot of juice to be squeezed, there.

What isn’t legitimate is propping up what appears to be an inferior game in nearly all aspects to create a false argument that something better already exists. It doesn’t.

I have seen videos of the Japanese baseball game and the graphics look awesome.

@Redsfan6272_PSN, I'm not sure why people say this... that game looks pretty good until you watch it for a while. It just has a sharper appearance (like the "soap opera effect" with runaway HDR) when not much is happening, but if you watch a gameplay video (there are many) and actually see it in action for more than a brief second or two, it really starts to disappoint.

The swing animations are jerky and unrealistic, and there's a very noticeable hitch (maybe by design, but it's weird) when it transitions from the pitcher/batter screen to defensive play. The defensive play animations are flat out not good, and the player models that people rave about for some reason are stone-faced and unnatural looking close up. And what's going on with the lighting?

People complain a lot, here, about the graphics of MLBTS, and while I agree that there haven't been too many changes from one year to the next (but the hair thing mattered), it's still a very pretty game. I think people get a little too wrapped up in their Strike Zone camera angle and spend too much time staring at batters' crotches, never getting to see the facial expressions and swing animations... they're better than Professional Baseball Spirits. Zoom out a bit and enjoy it.

@LuvMyXBOX_XBL, yeah I watched a video of someone playing the game this morning. It has a lot of flaws.

I get that you want it to be better, but wishing doesn’t make it so.

@LuvMyXBOX_XBL, I see... so if Marte had freckles and the background was blurred out more? Where's the detail on the bat?

You know there's plenty of video of that game online, and it's player models really aren't any better. It's a bit more sharp, but MLBTS is much better on animating faces, and the player animations aren't as good as MLBTS. It appears, to me, much more jerky and stutter prone, especially on defense.

That picture is also from a trailer cinematic.

Again... what do people expect to see, here?

Let's assume these are actually from the new game (and since they've been posted nowhere except for a coming soon placeholder in the PlayStation app and not in an official marketing release from SDS, that remains unconfirmed)... what about these screenshots is so unacceptable? Is the style line shaved into Marte's eyebrow too thick? Is the shadow line from the bill of his batting helmet somehow unrealistic? Maybe the tan stitching on Stott's glove doesn't quite pop enough off of the black?

What do people expect that a "next gen" game would reveal to them in a static screenshot?

Yeah... these look terrible. I mean, I can barely see the shadowing under Bohm's tricep, and the shoes don't even have laces.

Jesus. What exactly do you want, people? Please quantify your disappointment. How can Ketel Marte look more like Ketel Marte?

Until we see it in motion, we're really not going to know if there are noticeable improvements. I guess people think complaining for the sake of complaining makes them seem edgy... honestly, just makes them sound like whiny, entitled little tw*ts.

"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts and the stupid ones are full of confidence."

--Charles Bukowski

@jake98833_PSN said in Would you guys be ok with this?:

until SDS catered to a more arcade style that favored home runs and severely limited unique gameplay outcomes

Swinging the pendulum back a bit where this is concerned would be the single, greatest improvement to this game. More unique outcomes, fewer HRs. It's as simple as that.

@jaychvz_XBL, I think that would be a great start; particularly the bloopers that die in the grass. I really haven't seen bad hops either... fielders get "eaten up" occasionally on hard hit balls, but I would welcome the rare bad hop vs. a 99 fielder randomly misplaying an easy grounder. I would think that would be a more scripted outcome, though, that would take the ball's path out of the realm of the game's physics models and put it squarely into the pre-determined outcome unless, maybe, it hit the lip of the grass where it meets the dirt... but then we're probably overcomplicating the physics models.

Would love to see gravity and the weight of the baseball made a little more realistic, though... way too many balls that "carry" all the way to the outfielders instead of dropping in, and far too many balls that bounce over the wall for ground-rule doubles.

Honest question, here, because I know squat about coding... while I imagine (that's about as good as I can get on this subject) that there would be some limitations to how far you can take an upgrade if inferior hardware is allowed to tag along, why couldn't they upgrade the physics in their proprietary engine for all platforms?

Not saying that they're actually doing that, but can a Switch seriously not handle those kinds of improvements? Wouldn't the graphical presentation of the players be independent of the core components of crossplay (i.e. the core dynamic data PriorFir mentions), allowing them to make the game a little prettier on next gen consoles, without completely leaving the Switch behind (as the characters can be rendered however the Switch can do it)?

I guess I don't know how limited the switch is, but I can't imagine (again) it having so much trouble with some physics alterations to, say, make gravity a little stronger (balls hitting grass), or more realistic flight paths of batted balls... I think slight tweaks to physics models would drastically change the game. That, coupled with fewer foul balls, actual swings and misses when very early on change-ups in the dirt, and strikes called when any part of the ball hits the zone would be a huge leap forward and make it feel like a vastly improved game.

I don't see why inviting the Switch along hinders that.

What is it that people are expecting from a "next gen" console, aside from improved graphics, that they think they won't get because of the Switch?