6 hours ago, pollythewog said:

It’s my first one ever and I love it. I got the 2003 pudge card 😳 

Lucky bitch

4 hours ago, SonOfJack said:

Lucky bitch

It was a good card for about 20 minutes. Lol

Is there a middle ground between just playing a season out like in March to October and the highly detailed franchise mode? I want to be able to play multiple seasons and trade/make acquisitions.

March to October I think doesn't let you propose trades, and Franchise doesn't let you do that without doing a million other things. Am I just configuring shit incorrectly?

8 hours ago, Entendu said:

Is there a middle ground between just playing a season out like in March to October and the highly detailed franchise mode? I want to be able to play multiple seasons and trade/make acquisitions.

March to October I think doesn't let you propose trades, and Franchise doesn't let you do that without doing a million other things. Am I just configuring shit incorrectly?

I miss Season mode which was old school simple seasons as opposed to the too deep franchise mode. Can't believe they got rid of that. 

On 4/7/2023 at 8:30 PM, SilverBullet said:

I miss Season mode which was old school simple seasons as opposed to the too deep franchise mode. Can't believe they got rid of that. 

I respectfully disagree that franchise mode is too deep. I like that you can basically simulate or play as far into the future as you would like.  I don’t think there should be like an 80 year limit like there is with NBA 2k Franchise Mode. 
 

Usually, I buy MLB The Show every year (PS4) but last year I did not. With an individual Marlins player being on the cover of a baseball video game for the first time (Jazz), IMO IK I’m gunna sound bias, but this is the best MLB the Show they have made in years. Obviously I have a Marlins franchise mode but I fast forwarded (simulated) to year 4 after the first GM contract is renewed. I traded for Ohtani, still have Jazz and Alcantara, and with extra sponsorship money, acquired Mookie Betts and Manny Machado. 
 

As for the gameplay itself, I don’t notice much of a difference in pitching, but oh boy, do I notice it with hitting. It feels much smoother now when you are batting in MLB 23 The Show. I like hitting with certain players obviously, like Jazz and Ohtani (Ohtani is a cheat code because of his two way status; had to acquire him.)

I used to play RTTS more, but that’s probably my biggest criticism of the game for this edition, as with the more recent ones. The best Road to the Show was MLB 07, when David Wright was on the cover. Yes, you didn’t have the type of interactions like in the dugout and clubhouse, but it was MUCH easier to earn higher attributes for your RTTS player. 
 

Overall, while I may dislike RTTS for MLB 23, the fact that Jazz is on the cover, hitting is easier, and Ohtani is basically a cheat code, this is one of the more memorable games I have owned and I am very happy I have it. 
 

I’m sure Jazz being on the cover is cool for all of the fans as well. 👍 

1 hour ago, Italian Marlins Fan said:

I respectfully disagree that franchise mode is too deep

Because you probably play it and know it well enough so that it's not too deep for you. For a more casual gamer or casual baseball fan or someone who has less time to play, franchise mode can be super intimidating when you first dive in. 

11 hours ago, Italian Marlins Fan said:

I respectfully disagree that franchise mode is too deep. I like that you can basically simulate or play as far into the future as you would like.  I don’t think there should be like an 80 year limit like there is with NBA 2k Franchise Mode. 
 

Usually, I buy MLB The Show every year (PS4) but last year I did not. With an individual Marlins player being on the cover of a baseball video game for the first time (Jazz), IMO IK I’m gunna sound bias, but this is the best MLB the Show they have made in years. Obviously I have a Marlins franchise mode but I fast forwarded (simulated) to year 4 after the first GM contract is renewed. I traded for Ohtani, still have Jazz and Alcantara, and with extra sponsorship money, acquired Mookie Betts and Manny Machado. 
 

As for the gameplay itself, I don’t notice much of a difference in pitching, but oh boy, do I notice it with hitting. It feels much smoother now when you are batting in MLB 23 The Show. I like hitting with certain players obviously, like Jazz and Ohtani (Ohtani is a cheat code because of his two way status; had to acquire him.)

I used to play RTTS more, but that’s probably my biggest criticism of the game for this edition, as with the more recent ones. The best Road to the Show was MLB 07, when David Wright was on the cover. Yes, you didn’t have the type of interactions like in the dugout and clubhouse, but it was MUCH easier to earn higher attributes for your RTTS player. 
 

Overall, while I may dislike RTTS for MLB 23, the fact that Jazz is on the cover, hitting is easier, and Ohtani is basically a cheat code, this is one of the more memorable games I have owned and I am very happy I have it. 
 

I’m sure Jazz being on the cover is cool for all of the fans as well. 👍 

It's apples to oranges. Some people just want to play the games and make trades. Things like upgrading the ballpark and hiring staff is too much. Games have become so complicated in the last 10 or so years. 

This is off topic, but I bought Borderlands 3 to play with a friend and lasted about 3 hours before telling him I just couldn't. Whatever happened to just progressing? Everything is about upgrades, customization, and always the rpg elements. Heck, even RTTS.... What the hell are player relationships? Why?

23 minutes ago, Entendu said:

I bought Borderlands 3 to play with a friend and lasted about 3 hours before telling him I just couldn't. Whatever happened to just progressing? Everything is about upgrades, customization, and always the rpg elements. Heck, even RTTS.... What the hell are player relationships? Why?

Games have lost so much of the just dive in and play element. When you first popped in Super Mario Brothers you didn't have to customize your character and their attributes and earn rewards to upgrade and blah blah blah. I can see how that grinding and earning things can be fun but for most people I feel like you need to take a class to really dive into most games these days and that makes a lot of games a turn off. 

25 minutes ago, Entendu said:

It's apples to oranges. Some people just want to play the games and make trades. Things like upgrading the ballpark and hiring staff is too much.

Franchise mode gives you the jobs of team owner, Pres of baseball operations, Pres of business operations, Pres of ballpark operations, Marketing director, farm director, scouting director, etc etc when all I really want is to be the on-field manager and the general manager.

11 minutes ago, SilverBullet said:

Franchise mode gives you the jobs of team owner, Pres of baseball operations, Pres of business operations, Pres of ballpark operations, Marketing director, farm director, scouting director, etc etc when all I really want is to be the on-field manager and the general manager.

A lot of the stuff can be set to automatic, though, and you can handle the parts you want to handle.

40 minutes ago, Entendu said:

Heck, even RTTS.... What the hell are player relationships?

These just update on their own by playing, that's it. Nothing complex about it.

52 minutes ago, Entendu said:

It's apples to oranges. Some people just want to play the games and make trades. Things like upgrading the ballpark and hiring staff is too much. Games have become so complicated in the last 10 or so years. 

This is off topic, but I bought Borderlands 3 to play with a friend and lasted about 3 hours before telling him I just couldn't. Whatever happened to just progressing? Everything is about upgrades, customization, and always the rpg elements. Heck, even RTTS.... What the hell are player relationships? Why?

Assassin's creed has become like that to an extent.  There are so many ways to customize your weapons and attributes to "your style" of play.  And it's like....I'll never use most of these combinations and "engravings" and "runes" and whatever.  Just give me the list of available weapons and leave it at that lol.

They also removed the "% completed" function, which is annoying lol

2 hours ago, Michael said:

These just update on their own by playing, that's it. Nothing complex about it.

It's apparently for stat boosts. I can't even begin to comprehend why this was implemented. Playing with your friends makes you happier and a better player? The complexity comes from it just being there

2 hours ago, rmc523 said:

Assassin's creed has become like that to an extent.  There are so many ways to customize your weapons and attributes to "your style" of play.  And it's like....I'll never use most of these combinations and "engravings" and "runes" and whatever.  Just give me the list of available weapons and leave it at that lol.

They also removed the "% completed" function, which is annoying lol

Ugh don't tell me that. I used to be an AC completionist. You just clean up the map and buy everything. Now we get to customize our weapons?

I bought Hogwarts Legacy and the spells tree is intimidating. The first HP game was so fun because you just had your spells and that's it. The increase in their effectiveness came from you being better at the game, not boosts or level ups

Edited April 10, 20233 yr by Entendu

34 minutes ago, Entendu said:

It's apparently for stat boosts. I can't even begin to comprehend why this was implemented. Playing with your friends makes you happier and a better player? The complexity comes from it just being there

Wanting to drive in your bro while facing your arch nemesis makes you more focused, I guess.

Also, what's the obsession with always playing online with other people these days? I'm saying in the sense of making that your only way to play. If I get a game I'll about enjoying myself in the single player modes because I'm the one playing it. But it feels like young people today only wanna play online multi-player modes with people they don't even know. I can understand wanting some multiplayer fun with a few of your friends here and there but I just feel like many gamers have gone away from enjoying a game alone. Man does that make me sound like some socially awkward introvert?

2 hours ago, Entendu said:

Ugh don't tell me that. I used to be an AC completionist. You just clean up the map and buy everything. Now we get to customize our weapons?

I bought Hogwarts Legacy and the spells tree is intimidating. The first HP game was so fun because you just had your spells and that's it. The increase in their effectiveness came from you being better at the game, not boosts or level ups

Same - I run around and do everything to 100%.  They removed the % complete thing a few games ago.  Now I just have to go based on markers on the map until I don't see any more and hope I got everything.    I'm playing Odyssey now (I played and finished Valhalla backward/before finishing Odyssey)......they also removed the HUD map a few versions ago too, so the only way to see the map is to open the menu.

I just wind up using the best weapons of what I pick up throughout the game (you pick up a lot of them now , whereas before I feel like you didn't pick that many up, and would buy them in the store like you said).  And yes, you can increase the attributes of weapons by adding "engravings" (Valhalla called them runes)....I honestly don't even bother with half of that.

I feel like they include it all to allow folks to tailor it to how they want to play, but I don't get into all that......best weapon I have and go for me lol.

 

---

I've only just started HP, but the number of spells it seems you wind up using down the road definitely seems intimidating.

7 minutes ago, SilverBullet said:

Also, what's the obsession with always playing online with other people these days? I'm saying in the sense of making that your only way to play. If I get a game I'll about enjoying myself in the single player modes because I'm the one playing it. But it feels like young people today only wanna play online multi-player modes with people they don't even know. I can understand wanting some multiplayer fun with a few of your friends here and there but I just feel like many gamers have gone away from enjoying a game alone. Man does that make me sound like some socially awkward introvert?

I think that stems from the "pay to play" mentality.  In that if you have a solo player game, the company doesn't make money off you past that initial purchase.  Now they want you to buy the game (or free with some) and purchase upgrades constantly.  So there aren't many single player games anymore.  AC is still single player....they tried adding co-op missions in the game a few versions ago, but newer ones don't have that anymore.  Playing with friends is fun, but it's annoying when you wind up having to play with randoms and you can't complete missions without live teammates.  GTA is annoying like that in that for a lot of things, you need 3 other people, so you end up with randoms that often suck or leave partway through.

I do like open world games, but I also like solo ones too.

I also think kids these days don't socially interact as much outside/in the real world, so video games are how many "hang out".

Anyone try the face scan out?

38 minutes ago, SonOfJack said:

Anyone try the face scan out?

It's ass. My guy looks like this weirdo I met at a work conference years ago who tried inviting himself to my room. It's buggy as shit and took forever so I just left it... So now I'm reminded of the time I wish I could forget :'((((

12 minutes ago, Entendu said:

It's ass. My guy looks like this weirdo I met at a work conference years ago who tried inviting himself to my room. It's buggy as shit and took forever so I just left it... So now I'm reminded of the time I wish I could forget :'((((

That's disappointing. I was really looking forward to trying it out.

 

As for the game, I'm more of a RTTS grinder. I don't go online, and I share a lot of the same sentiments as @SilverBullet

52 minutes ago, QbanCastillo said:

That's disappointing. I was really looking forward to trying it out.

 

As for the game, I'm more of a RTTS grinder. I don't go online, and I share a lot of the same sentiments as @SilverBullet

They're more PC than console, but I always loved/love playing the Sim City and Rollercoaster/Railroad Tycoon games.

I don't think I've ever played The Show online. RTTS is my shit.

40 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

Rollercoaster/Railroad Tycoon games.

I remember dabbling in one of those before... it was kind of fun but my attention span didn't give it much of a chance lol.

44 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

I always loved/love playing the Sim City and Rollercoaster/Railroad Tycoon games.

Very time consuming but can be fun. I spent most of my time just playing The Sims when I played those kind of games. The Sim City games always ended with my city completely bankrupt and/or destroyed. Simpsons Tapped Out on iPad is probably the only successful "city" I ever did.