MVP: Is low-and-away pitch this year's lefty bug?

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 1:33 pm

On a more serious note, I still can't believe they improved MVP so much in one year. On the surface, it looks like the same damn game. I have a feeling, some guys like JackB especially, didn't give it enough time so that they can see all of the additions to the series. I understand that if they played the living hell out of it last year, they could tire pretty easy. But people like myself who only played it sparingly last year, it's a MARKED improvement.

Hell, Jackdog sold the thing after a half inning of play (he REALLY Tjunged it)...now he loves it. I guess the Tjung way, isn't always the best way.

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 1:34 pm

webdanzer wrote:He already roots for the Bills, so I'm sure he has no desire to relive that experience.

Touche...but at least the Braves have one championship.

MizzouRah · Post by **MizzouRah** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 1:44 pm

I played about a handful of games with MVP 2004, but when I heard the positives coming out on day 1 - I picked 2005 up and I'm slowly approaching High Heat's man hours.

Todd

Slumberland · Post by **Slumberland** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 3:15 pm

With all the variety on the field in this game, I feel like it's the first baseball game that needs a save replay function like the one in Winning Eleven. I hit a homerun with Eric Valent today that the Brewers CF went up to rob, only to have it deflect off his glove and just trickle over the fence. Amazing.

HouOilers · Post by **HouOilers** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 3:25 pm

dbdynsty25 wrote:Yeah, I agree Slumber. It's funny...MLB 2k5 is so damn good in the presentation department, some people forget how good MVP is. Sure, it's not even close to the 2k5 level, but it still holds it's own. Remember, it was two years ago that people were complaining about how poor the presentation was in MLB 2k3 (World Series then) and how good it was in MVP.

.

MLB may have good presentation but MVP's is better because it flows better with the game. IN mlb 2k5, I had to turn off the presentation and cut-scenes because first it took an hour to play the game with them on, and once you get used to the presentation, it gets to be annoying.

MVP did it right by not going over the top with the presentation. MVP's presentation reminds me more of a baseball telecast which is probably why I dont mind watching the replays or cuts.

MVP's interface though is off the hook compared to the MLB2k5's mucked up interface.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 5:19 pm

JRod wrote:
TRI wrote:The problem with MVP 2005 is that you cannot get both realistic pitch counts and challenging CPU hitting. You have to pick your poison with MVP 2005. MLB 2K5 is bugged and requires too much slider tweaking. I think that High Heat 2004 is still the most realistic baseball game on XBOX and my favorite.
Not true.

I have the CPU control at -50 and CPU throw ball at -3. I had Zambrano (Victor I think), throw 117 against me and was pulled with two outs bases juiced in the 9th.

I think can get pretty realistic sliders, they aren't perfect becuase the CPU isn't trying to make the stats look real. I can usually get to the 100 mark if I'm pitching well by the 7-8-9. I say that's pretty good.

All I did for the CPU hitting was increase contact by a few and CPU power at 8. I wanted them more dangerous. I have their swing rate at default (0) if you can believe that.

As for my results, I have lost my last 5 in SEPTEMBER. The cubbies are 1.5 games behind me (Cards).

John:

Are these your only slider tweaks, or do you do more? Just curious.

Thanks,
PK

Danimal · Post by **Danimal** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 3:05 am

I pitched a no-no on deafult All Star tonight with Zambrano from the Cubs. I needed one out when Nomar through the final groundball out away and the runner reached on an error, fortunately I induced a pop out on the next batter.

No one really needed to know any of this, but I just wanted an excuse to post this...

I removed the pic, as it was breaking the thread..my bad.

http://www.betsysergeant.com/claremont/irony.jpg

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 11:34 am

I tinkered with a bunch of sliders last night with this game -- I know, slideritis is a tough ailment to cure -- and I'm convinced that messing with pitching and hitting settings does as much to screw up the game as cure any potential ills.

When I adjusted hitting and pitching slider settings, almost all of my games were low-scoring affairs. My best game of the night came when the only things I touched were the fielder speed and baserunner speed settings. That was a great 5-3 contest.

I'm done with this slider sh*t, I think. I'm willing to accept slightly lower pitch totals to get more realistic, random results.

That said, does the pitcher fatigue slider really work, causing the pitcher to be wild later in the game, or does it just cause the pitcher to throw more meatballs?

Take care,
PK

Slumberland · Post by **Slumberland** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 11:59 am

I still stand by monkeying with the human pitching sliders. After I switched to MVP difficulty with defaults, I went on a 5-1 streak, which is fine, especially since I played the Brewers in that time, but I never came close to giving up and walk and generally felt pretty invincible on the mound. I went back to the old -50/-50 settings for my pitchers in a game against the cubs, still on MVP, and had a really good game that I lost 4-3, giving up two walks in the process. Obviously one game isn't a great sample, but it seems clear for me that -50/-50 helps my pitchers get semi-realistic ERA's, while defaults turn my Mets into the Koufax era Dodgers or something.

My point being, this seems to be the ultimate "your results may vary" title when it comes to sliders. Everyone's got their own brew.

Speaking of the Brewers, their poor, poor, pitchers. I went up against some guy De La Rosa (?) and won 6-0, with every single run coming as a solo home run... two from Reyes (his first two of the year), and one from Floyd, Mientkiewicz, Wright and TOM GLAVINE. Ha.

The other option as far as pitch counts and difficulty is to try and pitch with the cursor off. I tremble with fear at the prospect, however.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 12:05 pm

Slumber:

When you say -50/-50, you mean meter difficulty and Human pitcher control, right?

What do you set the CPU pitcher control?

Thanks,
PK

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 12:14 pm

Slumberland wrote:two from Reyes (his first two of the year), and one from Floyd, Mientkiewicz, Wright and TOM GLAVINE. Ha.

Chicks dig the long ball, remember.

webdanzer · Post by **webdanzer** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 12:16 pm

Have you tried the 0/-50 combo, slumber?

I swear I give up more runs that way than -50/-50.

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 12:19 pm

My team ERA is in the high 3's (like it was last year for the Braves staff) with -20 (control) -20 (meter difficulty)...that's my sweet spot right now. Some games I can dominate but most of the time I get beat up.

My starters are like 13-25 combined (total record of 19 and 30)...so I'm obviously leaving my starters in a bit too long. Last night though, I pitched a gem against the Red Sox at Fenway with my 5th starter, Horacio Ramirez. A 5 hit shutout. It was one of the most satisfying pitching performances I've ever had in a baseball game. Shutting down the Red Sox offense was a thing of beauty. I seriously have not been this satisfied with a baseball game in a LONG time.

Slumberland · Post by **Slumberland** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 12:22 pm

pk500 wrote:When you say -50/-50, you mean meter difficulty and Human pitcher control, right?

Exactly. Personally, I don't touch the CPU pitcher control. I think they pitch fine.

Web, I was trying the 0/-50 combo for a while, and it didn't make much difference. Most of the pitches I throw for balls are because I miss the green, and it's just too easy to hit the green with the meter difficulty at default. -50/-50 usually makes me throw one or two meatballs in the course of a game, too, which I think is appropriate.

I threw a really wild pitch with Benson last night, and there was no one on base. Piazza just let it go to the backstop... loved that he didn't jump up and chase it in that situation.

spooky157 · Post by **spooky157** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 12:37 pm

I just started playing with the pitching cursor off and no vibration - what a difference. The control is just mushy enough that you really fear missing when pitching inside and hitting the outside corner is not a given. I wish they gave you the option to throw some warmup pitches before every inning though. I walked the first batter in 5 out of the first six innings just trying to get a feel for the strike zone.

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:44 pm

spooky157 wrote:I wish they gave you the option to throw some warmup pitches before every inning though. I walked the first batter in 5 out of the first six innings just trying to get a feel for the strike zone.

Finally, someone else mentions that. Now that we're going to these pitching meters, I agree that we need at least 3 pitches before the inning starts just to get the feel for the meter again. It would be VERY helpful.

Spooky · Post by **Spooky** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:49 pm

dbdynsty25 wrote:
spooky157 wrote:I wish they gave you the option to throw some warmup pitches before every inning though. I walked the first batter in 5 out of the first six innings just trying to get a feel for the strike zone.
Finally, someone else mentions that. Now that we're going to these pitching meters, I agree that we need at least 3 pitches before the inning starts just to get the feel for the meter again. It would be VERY helpful.

Yes, but then you would have to have to have another slider for that becasue people would b*tch that it makes picthing too easy. Or then there would be a whole new thread about the perfect accuracy slider (not pointing fingers here

) now that they let you warm up.

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:50 pm

LOL...true. I can't think of anyone who would create a thread that ridiculous though.

Can you?

<----better?

Spooky · Post by **Spooky** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:58 pm

dbdynsty25 wrote:LOL...true. I can't think of anyone who would create a thread that ridiculous though.

Can you? <----better?

well, ummmm...now it just looks like you are laughing at him.

Nice try though. An 'A' for effort. You'll get the hang of it sooner or later.

See?

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:59 pm

Not laughing at him at all...