Rigged

SDS

I know 100% now that games are rigged, I get perfect perfect 3 times with people that have over 100 power and fly out to the outfielders. And the other guy hits 2 HR when the pitch was 6 inches outside. Another complaint, I was on deployment and didn’t get to do anything before the 7th inning program, and can’t complete the programs without spending hundreds of thousands of Stubbs to buy the inning players to get the vouchers. Put some more moments or something where you can get 300 stars without spending money to buy inning players. Okay I’m off my soapbox.

SDS

The government is spying on you through your microwave.

SDS

@SchnauzerFace said in Rigged:

The government is spying on you through your microwave.

Glad I’m not the only one that thinks that 😂

SDS

Firstly, thank you for your service.

Secondly, you know the game tracks perfects right? We can look at your game history and it says the perfects + the outcome of it.

Your latest game only had one P/P in it, and it was by your opponent for a home run with Castellanos, so what game are you referencing, because your proof will be there.

SDS

You can believe what you want man 😂 am I still gonna play the game? Yeah. Why would I lie about something so simple. I’m telling you what I saw in my game.

SDS

@Chase__6 said in Rigged:

You can believe what you want man 😂 am I still gonna play the game? Yeah. Why would I lie about something so simple. I’m telling you what I saw in my game.

It's called exaggeration, people do it to make their point matter more, it's often used when if it wasn't exaggerated, it wouldn't seem like a big issue.

The proof is in the game logs, there is no game where you hit 3 perfects for outs.

SDS

Like i said, believe what you want. Probably track stats like they give you hits for perfect perfects 😂

SDS

@Chase__6 said in Rigged:

Like i said, believe what you want. Probably track stats like they give you hits for perfect perfects 😂

No, I have tested that theory by looking when I hit P/P outs, it displays in the game log even if it is not a hit.

SDS

Gentlemen — the only way to solve this dispute is to refer to the video that the government recorded through OP’s coffee maker.

SDS

@eatyum said in Rigged:

Firstly, thank you for your service.

Secondly, you know the game tracks perfects right? We can look at your game history and it says the perfects + the outcome of it.

Your latest game only had one P/P in it, and it was by your opponent for a home run with Castellanos, so what game are you referencing, because your proof will be there.

Thank you for informing me we have the option to fact check these whining posts. It makes me wonder how much time I’ve spent this year reading about RNG conspiracy theories born out of events that never actually happened.

SDS

@eatyum said in Rigged:

Firstly, thank you for your service.

Secondly, you know the game tracks perfects right? We can look at your game history and it says the perfects + the outcome of it.

Your latest game only had one P/P in it, and it was by your opponent for a home run with Castellanos, so what game are you referencing, because your proof will be there.

Where do you see game history? I click a profile name and all I see are recent posts.

SDS

@sabometrics said in Rigged:

@eatyum said in Rigged:

Firstly, thank you for your service.

Secondly, you know the game tracks perfects right? We can look at your game history and it says the perfects + the outcome of it.

Your latest game only had one P/P in it, and it was by your opponent for a home run with Castellanos, so what game are you referencing, because your proof will be there.

Where do you see game history? I click a profile name and all I see are recent posts.

Top right where it says my account, click that > then MLB 20 Dashboard > on that dashboard is a search bar where you can type in the persons PSN and it will show game history.

SDS

Don’t doubt Eatyum, he has fact checked exaggerators so many times I just get my popcorn out and wait for him to appear in these posts.

SDS

@eatyum said in Rigged:

Firstly, thank you for your service.

Secondly, you know the game tracks perfects right? We can look at your game history and it says the perfects + the outcome of it.

Your latest game only had one P/P in it, and it was by your opponent for a home run with Castellanos, so what game are you referencing, because your proof will be there.

So provide us the link or website or give us direction where we can track perfect/perfect that go for outs. Game history only provides perfect/perfect for hits (homeruns).

SDS

It provides all perfect perfects, not just hits , buts outs too

SDS

@onnagood1 said in Rigged:

@eatyum said in Rigged:

Firstly, thank you for your service.

Secondly, you know the game tracks perfects right? We can look at your game history and it says the perfects + the outcome of it.

Your latest game only had one P/P in it, and it was by your opponent for a home run with Castellanos, so what game are you referencing, because your proof will be there.

So provide us the link or website or give us direction where we can track perfect/perfect that go for outs. Game history only provides perfect/perfect for hits (homeruns).

No, as I stated before, it tracks all perfect/perfects and shows both outcomes, both hits and outs, as I said I've double-checked that to make sure when my opponent or I hit a perfect out, it does in fact show up.

SDS

@OreoRockstar said in Rigged:

It provides all perfect perfects, not just hits , buts outs too

Ok, you're right. For the first time, I see that they show perfect/perfect go for lined out to CF.

But the OP's point, I think he may be talking about some at-bats where you can hear the distinct "crack" of the bat as you hear in perfect/perfect contacts, but for whatever reason are not considered p/p and just good contact.

I'm guessing, so I could be wrong.

SDS

@onnagood1 said in Rigged:

@OreoRockstar said in Rigged:

It provides all perfect perfects, not just hits , buts outs too

Ok, you're right. For the first time, I see that they show perfect/perfect go for lined out to CF.

But the OP's point, I think he may be talking about some at-bats where you can hear the distinct "crack" of the bat as you hear in perfect/perfect contacts, but for whatever reason are not considered p/p and just good contact.

I'm guessing, so I could be wrong.

Perhaps, but that means the game does not recognize it as P/P, so it cannot be called as such. It's important to make that distinction if that is infact what he was referring to.

SDS

@eatyum said in Rigged:

@onnagood1 said in Rigged:

@OreoRockstar said in Rigged:

It provides all perfect perfects, not just hits , buts outs too

Ok, you're right. For the first time, I see that they show perfect/perfect go for lined out to CF.

But the OP's point, I think he may be talking about some at-bats where you can hear the distinct "crack" of the bat as you hear in perfect/perfect contacts, but for whatever reason are not considered p/p and just good contact.

I'm guessing, so I could be wrong.

Perhaps, but that means the game does not recognize it as P/P, so it cannot be called as such. It's important to make that distinction if that is infact what he was referring to.

No, you're right. I realize that now.

But I believe that he wasn't trying to intentionally mislead or exaggerate his experience. As I recall, I had experienced the same thing he did, and you had accused me of embellishing my story based on this honest mistake of distinction lol.

SDS

@onnagood1 said in Rigged:

@eatyum said in Rigged:

@onnagood1 said in Rigged:

@OreoRockstar said in Rigged:

It provides all perfect perfects, not just hits , buts outs too

Ok, you're right. For the first time, I see that they show perfect/perfect go for lined out to CF.

But the OP's point, I think he may be talking about some at-bats where you can hear the distinct "crack" of the bat as you hear in perfect/perfect contacts, but for whatever reason are not considered p/p and just good contact.

I'm guessing, so I could be wrong.

Perhaps, but that means the game does not recognize it as P/P, so it cannot be called as such. It's important to make that distinction if that is infact what he was referring to.

No, you're right. I realize that now.

But I believe that he wasn't trying to intentionally mislead or exaggerate his experience. As I recall, I had experienced the same thing he did, and you had accused me of embellishing my story based on this honest mistake of distinction lol.

It's not that I think he was nefariously trying to fool us all, sometimes it's a natural human response to exaggerate a story, but it's important to keep things in perspective and have the facts straight.

It's very easy to rage post, I've definitely done it, but misleading about P/P whether consciously or unconsciously undermines the entire message because it's something that is easily verifiable.

Log in to reply