@D_e_m_I_s_E said in First year playing DD now I'm hooked....:

You didn't luck into pulling those diamonds. It is a way to get first year players hooked. People that get a lot of diamond pulls tend to be:
Streamers - So the players watching can see the packs are "lit" and go out and by themselves. Also gives the streamers the best chance of being successful.

1st time players - To get them hooked. If you have a decent record, let me know how this plays out the next few years.

Bad players - To give them better players to try to help them out.

Now, you could not be in any of these and get diamonds but I think it is really rare. These are all marketing ploys which are intended to increase sales.

Why is everything doom and gloom with you?, the guy is excited about his team and enjoying the game, he asked the best way to make stubs and your response was to try and trample on any sort of joy this guy has.

we get it man, you don't like the game because it doesn't cater to you, or because of some grand deep state conspiracy SDS is plotting against you. Keep your negativity to yourself, or better yet just stay off these forums.

because you deserve better than their BS cash grabs, thank you for your service.

I haven't played this game in well over a week, I jumped on the other day to get some feedback on how the game was playing since the latest patch and it wasn't good feedback lol. Sadly I think this year The Show is going to be put on the shelf and used sparingly. I have no desire to play RS or events and thats really disappointing, was really hoping to enjoy this game all summer long. Anyone else having trouble finding the desire to play this game as much as they have in the past?.

I hope to see people realize there is a global pandemic going on and that SDS is not considered essential, nor should they risk their lives to appease a bunch of adult children.

If you think this game is bad and you think SDS is bad, you clearly haven't played an EA sports title.

the meta is leave the pci in the centre of the plate and wait for the game to force your opponent to throw you a meatball. Game plays great if you don't have to pitch.

well, that was a well written insightful opinion

@ELJOSHAUA said in What happened!?!?!?!?:

Whenever I play rs I’m a 700-800 level player. I’ve been playing the show since 2009 and DD since 2017 but this is by far the worst the game has been. Hitting was great at launch and now it’s horrible. Idk what it is but pci placement is horrible, I move the pci exactly where the pitch is and it is never where I want it, the timing is horrible. I can sit fastball and be too late on 93 mph which is bs and then other times I’ll be ver early on the same pitch. Pitching is horrible, the ball goes nowhere where I set it, everything is either down the pipe or nowhere near the strike zone. Fielding is awful, my outfielders can’t catch a routine fly all or stop a grounder. Fix the game!!

Simple, people asked them to fix pitching, so they did what anyone would do when asked to fix something, fix something completely different.

People can say what they want about 2K but at least when I time my jumpshot perfectly I am rewarded.

@G___Wood said in Happy Patch Day everyone:

Just deal with it. Be happy we have the best baseball game on the market.

a game where fielding, hitting and pitching are all broken is the best baseball game on the market? LMFAO

the only thing saving this dumpster fire is that it's the only baseball game on the market.

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@ChuckCLC said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@Untchable704 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

Casual players make a game grow more than anybody. If you take out that top 10% that’s leave 90%. 60% of the time that 80 more percents.

60% of the time that statement is right every time.

I sure hope for the sake of SDS that 60% is still there in July. I doubt it, but I hope for this franchise's sake they do. Let's all hope that fortnite doesn't release another patch that steal's these loyal 1 time players away from the franchise.

That's not what casual players mean. They aren't one-time players. They still buy the game every year, (and perhaps some microtransactions early on), but they just don't stay or invest as much time each year. The game maker still gets that revenue once a year from the same casual players. It's expected that casuals start to drop off as the game progresses, that wouldn't be a surprise to any company.

If they don't make the game appeal to those people, those people don't buy next year, and they are always the largest majority of buyers

I know they aren't 1 time buyer's, but how many player's joined this franchise after they released it free-to-play through PSN?. Those are the people they are appealing too, the people who couldn't give a sh#$ about their game until its F2P. Do Casual players dictate how terrible the game plays? no, do they dictate your outfielder fielding the ball like an infielder? no, But they also don't help make change's either. Why? because they benefit from this garbage gameplay.

That statement is wrong, there were plenty of casual players before they ever put it as the free game of the month in 19. The bulk of the game has always been casual, way before it was ever free.

You don't have to like it, I certainly don't like it, but those are the facts. Casual players do bring in the most money, they aren't all just waiting for a free game.

Casual's bring as much if not less than the loyal fan base of this game in term's of monetary value, I have dropped quite a few dollars on this game since DD was introduced. RS6 is the best comparison, the game has a learning curve, you either learn and succeed or you don't and you drop off. They do not compromise and that is what keep's their player base and their fan base loyal. I had to learn and adapt to this franchise why shouldn't everyone else?. All I know is this is the last year I buy MLB the show, I am moving on to PC games, I'd rather deal with hacker's than having to fight with this game to field or hit a ball a properly.

But rainbow six is geared towards those markets. They certainly aren't selling copies on the levels of a franchise like Call of Duty. The baseball market can't sustain selling to only fans of that type of gameplay because it's already a way smaller market then the first-person shooter market, so equating those two games doesn't work.

Baseball has sustained selling to only fans for year's, only recently have they made comprimises to their game in terms of length of play. Other than that they don't give a s$%# whether you like their game or not and I applaud them for that, one of the reason's I still follow baseball and have completely erased the NHL from my sports viewing agenda. When game companies start focusing on the people who got them to where they are, they will succeed, if they continue to focus on the demographics who pay them out for 1-2 months they will fail. Why do you think Battlefield V was such a colossal failure? because they said F@#$ you to the people who got them there and opened their arms to people who never gave a sh#$ about their games for more than 2 months. This game IMO is a colossal failure.

Battlefield V had a lot of issues, but it's not why you say. COD MW appeals to casuals and is very successful.

I think you are letting your emotion blind to the cold-hard facts. Like I said, you don't have to like it, I def don't, but it's still facts.

COD is only succesful due to a the release of the free 2 play warzone, shocking they offered a free to play game and saw their user number's rise. Does that make COD a better game? no, does it fix the problems that are in the original release that people paid 80+ dollars for? no, and thats my point. Appealing to this user base may get your exec's a bonus at the end of the year but after about 2 months the people who got you that exec position in the first place are gone. Is this a good business strategy for the short term, yes, is it going to retain the player base that got you to this point to begin with? no, no it is not.

COD MW was successful way before warzone came out. Again, your ignoring facts and trying to twist it to your beliefs. Way before warzone came out, MW was one of the most successful COD in the last few years.

I bought COD, within 2 months my friends who are hardcore COD players were done with it, most people buy COD for the campaign, Ground War was garbage and looked like the retarded cousin of battlefield, most levels and guns were glitchy. So yea, it was the most successful at launch but until warzone came out most people didn't care and left, nobody wanted to drop close to a bill for battle pass which did nothing for you but get you some cool skins and extra co-op missions. The only thing saving COD (the original release) is hardcore mode, nobody wants to play a bunch of people mashing the A button and Right Trigger, this game is pretty close to that, just mash the X button and you wont strike out and will most likely get a hit, wouldn't want to make it to hard for the noobs.

But that's MY POINT. They still all bought it!!! The company doesn't care that they left two months in. Most of them are still going to buy next time, no matter what they say. Just look at these forums and how many make complaints, but still buy it every year.

The game companies know this and use this to their advantage, and it quite clearly works.

It works until a game like MLB the show dies because they have to wait until they release a F2P version through PSN. Are my friends going to buy the next COD after this year? no, I certainly won't either. Do you think the people who played this game for 2 months dropped enough money into the game to afford that MLB license?

They say they won't, but most people do. Are you even reading what I'm typing? let me say it again "Just look at these forums and how many make complaints, but still buy it every year." Yes, some people quit, but most always come back no matter what they say.

I think you are projecting your feelings on the gaming community as a whole, and I'm sorry to say that most people aren't that sensible. Even if they complain and say they are done, they never are.

I am not denying that people buy this game every year, for people like myself this will be my last year. That may not make a difference in their bottom line but if enough people get fed up it will, and my true motivation for this post is to ensure that doesn't happen. I love this franchise, this year not so much, but if enough people feel the same way and don't buy you wont have this franchise, those people will drop out if they focus solely on the casual's who show up for 2 months and maybe fund half of the game's development.

I get that, and I'm not saying you are wrong to feel that way, I'm pretty close to that myself.

The only thing you are misguided on how games sell, appealing to casuals works, and not just in the short-term. Obviously there is a line somewhere where some games go to far, but it takes a lot for that to happen.
you seem to think call of duty is a failure because you and your hardcore friends are done by this point, let me tell you the executives at Activision don't care, they are swimming in money. Their model works.

The gaming community as a whole is as I said, pretty gullible and most simply are just going to buy the next iteration no matter how they feel. That is reality.

I know appealing to casuals works, my problem is companies who never relied on casuals to keep them afloat appealing to them. We may think that those who aren't considered top online players, but have been with the fanchise for years are casual's, they are not.

I already know that just because me and my hardcore COD friends are done makes no difference to the execs, thats not my point, I am looking at this from the consumer's view. If I was looking at this from the business perspective (which is my full time job) I would say its brilliant and it is, but for us, the gamer's those who supported these companies from single A developers to AAA developers we are in a serious crisis, we are facing a time where quality games and gameplay are put to the side for profits and to me that is not right.

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@ChuckCLC said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@Untchable704 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

Casual players make a game grow more than anybody. If you take out that top 10% that’s leave 90%. 60% of the time that 80 more percents.

60% of the time that statement is right every time.

I sure hope for the sake of SDS that 60% is still there in July. I doubt it, but I hope for this franchise's sake they do. Let's all hope that fortnite doesn't release another patch that steal's these loyal 1 time players away from the franchise.

That's not what casual players mean. They aren't one-time players. They still buy the game every year, (and perhaps some microtransactions early on), but they just don't stay or invest as much time each year. The game maker still gets that revenue once a year from the same casual players. It's expected that casuals start to drop off as the game progresses, that wouldn't be a surprise to any company.

If they don't make the game appeal to those people, those people don't buy next year, and they are always the largest majority of buyers

I know they aren't 1 time buyer's, but how many player's joined this franchise after they released it free-to-play through PSN?. Those are the people they are appealing too, the people who couldn't give a sh#$ about their game until its F2P. Do Casual players dictate how terrible the game plays? no, do they dictate your outfielder fielding the ball like an infielder? no, But they also don't help make change's either. Why? because they benefit from this garbage gameplay.

That statement is wrong, there were plenty of casual players before they ever put it as the free game of the month in 19. The bulk of the game has always been casual, way before it was ever free.

You don't have to like it, I certainly don't like it, but those are the facts. Casual players do bring in the most money, they aren't all just waiting for a free game.

Casual's bring as much if not less than the loyal fan base of this game in term's of monetary value, I have dropped quite a few dollars on this game since DD was introduced. RS6 is the best comparison, the game has a learning curve, you either learn and succeed or you don't and you drop off. They do not compromise and that is what keep's their player base and their fan base loyal. I had to learn and adapt to this franchise why shouldn't everyone else?. All I know is this is the last year I buy MLB the show, I am moving on to PC games, I'd rather deal with hacker's than having to fight with this game to field or hit a ball a properly.

But rainbow six is geared towards those markets. They certainly aren't selling copies on the levels of a franchise like Call of Duty. The baseball market can't sustain selling to only fans of that type of gameplay because it's already a way smaller market then the first-person shooter market, so equating those two games doesn't work.

Baseball has sustained selling to only fans for year's, only recently have they made comprimises to their game in terms of length of play. Other than that they don't give a s$%# whether you like their game or not and I applaud them for that, one of the reason's I still follow baseball and have completely erased the NHL from my sports viewing agenda. When game companies start focusing on the people who got them to where they are, they will succeed, if they continue to focus on the demographics who pay them out for 1-2 months they will fail. Why do you think Battlefield V was such a colossal failure? because they said F@#$ you to the people who got them there and opened their arms to people who never gave a sh#$ about their games for more than 2 months. This game IMO is a colossal failure.

Battlefield V had a lot of issues, but it's not why you say. COD MW appeals to casuals and is very successful.

I think you are letting your emotion blind to the cold-hard facts. Like I said, you don't have to like it, I def don't, but it's still facts.

COD is only succesful due to a the release of the free 2 play warzone, shocking they offered a free to play game and saw their user number's rise. Does that make COD a better game? no, does it fix the problems that are in the original release that people paid 80+ dollars for? no, and thats my point. Appealing to this user base may get your exec's a bonus at the end of the year but after about 2 months the people who got you that exec position in the first place are gone. Is this a good business strategy for the short term, yes, is it going to retain the player base that got you to this point to begin with? no, no it is not.

COD MW was successful way before warzone came out. Again, your ignoring facts and trying to twist it to your beliefs. Way before warzone came out, MW was one of the most successful COD in the last few years.

I bought COD, within 2 months my friends who are hardcore COD players were done with it, most people buy COD for the campaign, Ground War was garbage and looked like the retarded cousin of battlefield, most levels and guns were glitchy. So yea, it was the most successful at launch but until warzone came out most people didn't care and left, nobody wanted to drop close to a bill for battle pass which did nothing for you but get you some cool skins and extra co-op missions. The only thing saving COD (the original release) is hardcore mode, nobody wants to play a bunch of people mashing the A button and Right Trigger, this game is pretty close to that, just mash the X button and you wont strike out and will most likely get a hit, wouldn't want to make it to hard for the noobs.

But that's MY POINT. They still all bought it!!! The company doesn't care that they left two months in. Most of them are still going to buy next time, no matter what they say. Just look at these forums and how many make complaints, but still buy it every year.

The game companies know this and use this to their advantage, and it quite clearly works.

It works until a game like MLB the show dies because they have to wait until they release a F2P version through PSN. Are my friends going to buy the next COD after this year? no, I certainly won't either. Do you think the people who played this game for 2 months dropped enough money into the game to afford that MLB license?

They say they won't, but most people do. Are you even reading what I'm typing? let me say it again "Just look at these forums and how many make complaints, but still buy it every year." Yes, some people quit, but most always come back no matter what they say.

I think you are projecting your feelings on the gaming community as a whole, and I'm sorry to say that most people aren't that sensible. Even if they complain and say they are done, they never are.

I am not denying that people buy this game every year, for people like myself this will be my last year. That may not make a difference in their bottom line but if enough people get fed up it will, and my true motivation for this post is to ensure that doesn't happen. I love this franchise, this year not so much, but if enough people feel the same way and don't buy you wont have this franchise, those people will drop out if they focus solely on the casual's who show up for 2 months and maybe fund half of the game's development.

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@ChuckCLC said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@Untchable704 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

Casual players make a game grow more than anybody. If you take out that top 10% that’s leave 90%. 60% of the time that 80 more percents.

60% of the time that statement is right every time.

I sure hope for the sake of SDS that 60% is still there in July. I doubt it, but I hope for this franchise's sake they do. Let's all hope that fortnite doesn't release another patch that steal's these loyal 1 time players away from the franchise.

That's not what casual players mean. They aren't one-time players. They still buy the game every year, (and perhaps some microtransactions early on), but they just don't stay or invest as much time each year. The game maker still gets that revenue once a year from the same casual players. It's expected that casuals start to drop off as the game progresses, that wouldn't be a surprise to any company.

If they don't make the game appeal to those people, those people don't buy next year, and they are always the largest majority of buyers

I know they aren't 1 time buyer's, but how many player's joined this franchise after they released it free-to-play through PSN?. Those are the people they are appealing too, the people who couldn't give a sh#$ about their game until its F2P. Do Casual players dictate how terrible the game plays? no, do they dictate your outfielder fielding the ball like an infielder? no, But they also don't help make change's either. Why? because they benefit from this garbage gameplay.

That statement is wrong, there were plenty of casual players before they ever put it as the free game of the month in 19. The bulk of the game has always been casual, way before it was ever free.

You don't have to like it, I certainly don't like it, but those are the facts. Casual players do bring in the most money, they aren't all just waiting for a free game.

Casual's bring as much if not less than the loyal fan base of this game in term's of monetary value, I have dropped quite a few dollars on this game since DD was introduced. RS6 is the best comparison, the game has a learning curve, you either learn and succeed or you don't and you drop off. They do not compromise and that is what keep's their player base and their fan base loyal. I had to learn and adapt to this franchise why shouldn't everyone else?. All I know is this is the last year I buy MLB the show, I am moving on to PC games, I'd rather deal with hacker's than having to fight with this game to field or hit a ball a properly.

But rainbow six is geared towards those markets. They certainly aren't selling copies on the levels of a franchise like Call of Duty. The baseball market can't sustain selling to only fans of that type of gameplay because it's already a way smaller market then the first-person shooter market, so equating those two games doesn't work.

Baseball has sustained selling to only fans for year's, only recently have they made comprimises to their game in terms of length of play. Other than that they don't give a s$%# whether you like their game or not and I applaud them for that, one of the reason's I still follow baseball and have completely erased the NHL from my sports viewing agenda. When game companies start focusing on the people who got them to where they are, they will succeed, if they continue to focus on the demographics who pay them out for 1-2 months they will fail. Why do you think Battlefield V was such a colossal failure? because they said F@#$ you to the people who got them there and opened their arms to people who never gave a sh#$ about their games for more than 2 months. This game IMO is a colossal failure.

Battlefield V had a lot of issues, but it's not why you say. COD MW appeals to casuals and is very successful.

I think you are letting your emotion blind to the cold-hard facts. Like I said, you don't have to like it, I def don't, but it's still facts.

COD is only succesful due to a the release of the free 2 play warzone, shocking they offered a free to play game and saw their user number's rise. Does that make COD a better game? no, does it fix the problems that are in the original release that people paid 80+ dollars for? no, and thats my point. Appealing to this user base may get your exec's a bonus at the end of the year but after about 2 months the people who got you that exec position in the first place are gone. Is this a good business strategy for the short term, yes, is it going to retain the player base that got you to this point to begin with? no, no it is not.

COD MW was successful way before warzone came out. Again, your ignoring facts and trying to twist it to your beliefs. Way before warzone came out, MW was one of the most successful COD in the last few years.

I bought COD, within 2 months my friends who are hardcore COD players were done with it, most people buy COD for the campaign, Ground War was garbage and looked like the retarded cousin of battlefield, most levels and guns were glitchy. So yea, it was the most successful at launch but until warzone came out most people didn't care and left, nobody wanted to drop close to a bill for battle pass which did nothing for you but get you some cool skins and extra co-op missions. The only thing saving COD (the original release) is hardcore mode, nobody wants to play a bunch of people mashing the A button and Right Trigger, this game is pretty close to that, just mash the X button and you wont strike out and will most likely get a hit, wouldn't want to make it to hard for the noobs.

But that's MY POINT. They still all bought it!!! The company doesn't care that they left two months in. Most of them are still going to buy next time, no matter what they say. Just look at these forums and how many make complaints, but still buy it every year.

The game companies know this and use this to their advantage, and it quite clearly works.

It works until a game like MLB the show dies because they have to wait until they release a F2P version through PSN. Are my friends going to buy the next COD after this year? no, I certainly won't either. Do you think the people who played this game for 2 months dropped enough money into the game to afford that MLB license?

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@ChuckCLC said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@Untchable704 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

Casual players make a game grow more than anybody. If you take out that top 10% that’s leave 90%. 60% of the time that 80 more percents.

60% of the time that statement is right every time.

I sure hope for the sake of SDS that 60% is still there in July. I doubt it, but I hope for this franchise's sake they do. Let's all hope that fortnite doesn't release another patch that steal's these loyal 1 time players away from the franchise.

That's not what casual players mean. They aren't one-time players. They still buy the game every year, (and perhaps some microtransactions early on), but they just don't stay or invest as much time each year. The game maker still gets that revenue once a year from the same casual players. It's expected that casuals start to drop off as the game progresses, that wouldn't be a surprise to any company.

If they don't make the game appeal to those people, those people don't buy next year, and they are always the largest majority of buyers

I know they aren't 1 time buyer's, but how many player's joined this franchise after they released it free-to-play through PSN?. Those are the people they are appealing too, the people who couldn't give a sh#$ about their game until its F2P. Do Casual players dictate how terrible the game plays? no, do they dictate your outfielder fielding the ball like an infielder? no, But they also don't help make change's either. Why? because they benefit from this garbage gameplay.

That statement is wrong, there were plenty of casual players before they ever put it as the free game of the month in 19. The bulk of the game has always been casual, way before it was ever free.

You don't have to like it, I certainly don't like it, but those are the facts. Casual players do bring in the most money, they aren't all just waiting for a free game.

Casual's bring as much if not less than the loyal fan base of this game in term's of monetary value, I have dropped quite a few dollars on this game since DD was introduced. RS6 is the best comparison, the game has a learning curve, you either learn and succeed or you don't and you drop off. They do not compromise and that is what keep's their player base and their fan base loyal. I had to learn and adapt to this franchise why shouldn't everyone else?. All I know is this is the last year I buy MLB the show, I am moving on to PC games, I'd rather deal with hacker's than having to fight with this game to field or hit a ball a properly.

But rainbow six is geared towards those markets. They certainly aren't selling copies on the levels of a franchise like Call of Duty. The baseball market can't sustain selling to only fans of that type of gameplay because it's already a way smaller market then the first-person shooter market, so equating those two games doesn't work.

Baseball has sustained selling to only fans for year's, only recently have they made comprimises to their game in terms of length of play. Other than that they don't give a s$%# whether you like their game or not and I applaud them for that, one of the reason's I still follow baseball and have completely erased the NHL from my sports viewing agenda. When game companies start focusing on the people who got them to where they are, they will succeed, if they continue to focus on the demographics who pay them out for 1-2 months they will fail. Why do you think Battlefield V was such a colossal failure? because they said F@#$ you to the people who got them there and opened their arms to people who never gave a sh#$ about their games for more than 2 months. This game IMO is a colossal failure.

Battlefield V had a lot of issues, but it's not why you say. COD MW appeals to casuals and is very successful.

I think you are letting your emotion blind to the cold-hard facts. Like I said, you don't have to like it, I def don't, but it's still facts.

COD is only succesful due to a the release of the free 2 play warzone, shocking they offered a free to play game and saw their user number's rise. Does that make COD a better game? no, does it fix the problems that are in the original release that people paid 80+ dollars for? no, and thats my point. Appealing to this user base may get your exec's a bonus at the end of the year but after about 2 months the people who got you that exec position in the first place are gone. Is this a good business strategy for the short term, yes, is it going to retain the player base that got you to this point to begin with? no, no it is not.

COD MW was successful way before warzone came out. Again, your ignoring facts and trying to twist it to your beliefs. Way before warzone came out, MW was one of the most successful COD in the last few years.

I bought COD, within 2 months my friends who are hardcore COD players were done with it, most people buy COD for the campaign, Ground War was garbage and looked like the retarded cousin of battlefield, most levels and guns were glitchy. So yea, it was the most successful at launch but until warzone came out most people didn't care and left, nobody wanted to drop close to a bill for battle pass which did nothing for you but get you some cool skins and extra co-op missions. The only thing saving COD (the original release) is hardcore mode, nobody wants to play a bunch of people mashing the A button and Right Trigger, this game is pretty close to that, just mash the X button and you wont strike out and will most likely get a hit, wouldn't want to make it to hard for the noobs.

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@ChuckCLC said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@Untchable704 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

Casual players make a game grow more than anybody. If you take out that top 10% that’s leave 90%. 60% of the time that 80 more percents.

60% of the time that statement is right every time.

I sure hope for the sake of SDS that 60% is still there in July. I doubt it, but I hope for this franchise's sake they do. Let's all hope that fortnite doesn't release another patch that steal's these loyal 1 time players away from the franchise.

That's not what casual players mean. They aren't one-time players. They still buy the game every year, (and perhaps some microtransactions early on), but they just don't stay or invest as much time each year. The game maker still gets that revenue once a year from the same casual players. It's expected that casuals start to drop off as the game progresses, that wouldn't be a surprise to any company.

If they don't make the game appeal to those people, those people don't buy next year, and they are always the largest majority of buyers

I know they aren't 1 time buyer's, but how many player's joined this franchise after they released it free-to-play through PSN?. Those are the people they are appealing too, the people who couldn't give a sh#$ about their game until its F2P. Do Casual players dictate how terrible the game plays? no, do they dictate your outfielder fielding the ball like an infielder? no, But they also don't help make change's either. Why? because they benefit from this garbage gameplay.

That statement is wrong, there were plenty of casual players before they ever put it as the free game of the month in 19. The bulk of the game has always been casual, way before it was ever free.

You don't have to like it, I certainly don't like it, but those are the facts. Casual players do bring in the most money, they aren't all just waiting for a free game.

Casual's bring as much if not less than the loyal fan base of this game in term's of monetary value, I have dropped quite a few dollars on this game since DD was introduced. RS6 is the best comparison, the game has a learning curve, you either learn and succeed or you don't and you drop off. They do not compromise and that is what keep's their player base and their fan base loyal. I had to learn and adapt to this franchise why shouldn't everyone else?. All I know is this is the last year I buy MLB the show, I am moving on to PC games, I'd rather deal with hacker's than having to fight with this game to field or hit a ball a properly.

But rainbow six is geared towards those markets. They certainly aren't selling copies on the levels of a franchise like Call of Duty. The baseball market can't sustain selling to only fans of that type of gameplay because it's already a way smaller market then the first-person shooter market, so equating those two games doesn't work.

Baseball has sustained selling to only fans for year's, only recently have they made comprimises to their game in terms of length of play. Other than that they don't give a s$%# whether you like their game or not and I applaud them for that, one of the reason's I still follow baseball and have completely erased the NHL from my sports viewing agenda. When game companies start focusing on the people who got them to where they are, they will succeed, if they continue to focus on the demographics who pay them out for 1-2 months they will fail. Why do you think Battlefield V was such a colossal failure? because they said F@#$ you to the people who got them there and opened their arms to people who never gave a sh#$ about their games for more than 2 months. This game IMO is a colossal failure.

Battlefield V had a lot of issues, but it's not why you say. COD MW appeals to casuals and is very successful.

I think you are letting your emotion blind to the cold-hard facts. Like I said, you don't have to like it, I def don't, but it's still facts.

COD is only succesful due to the release of the free 2 play warzone, shocking they offered a free to play game and saw their user number's rise. Does that make COD a better game? no, does it fix the problems that are in the original release that people paid 80+ dollars for? no, and thats my point. Appealing to this user base may get your exec's a bonus at the end of the year but after about 2 months the people who got you that exec position in the first place are gone. Is this a good business strategy for the short term, yes, is it going to retain the player base that got you to this point to begin with? no, no it is not.

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@ChuckCLC said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@Untchable704 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

Casual players make a game grow more than anybody. If you take out that top 10% that’s leave 90%. 60% of the time that 80 more percents.

60% of the time that statement is right every time.

I sure hope for the sake of SDS that 60% is still there in July. I doubt it, but I hope for this franchise's sake they do. Let's all hope that fortnite doesn't release another patch that steal's these loyal 1 time players away from the franchise.

That's not what casual players mean. They aren't one-time players. They still buy the game every year, (and perhaps some microtransactions early on), but they just don't stay or invest as much time each year. The game maker still gets that revenue once a year from the same casual players. It's expected that casuals start to drop off as the game progresses, that wouldn't be a surprise to any company.

If they don't make the game appeal to those people, those people don't buy next year, and they are always the largest majority of buyers

I know they aren't 1 time buyer's, but how many player's joined this franchise after they released it free-to-play through PSN?. Those are the people they are appealing too, the people who couldn't give a sh#$ about their game until its F2P. Do Casual players dictate how terrible the game plays? no, do they dictate your outfielder fielding the ball like an infielder? no, But they also don't help make change's either. Why? because they benefit from this garbage gameplay.

That statement is wrong, there were plenty of casual players before they ever put it as the free game of the month in 19. The bulk of the game has always been casual, way before it was ever free.

You don't have to like it, I certainly don't like it, but those are the facts. Casual players do bring in the most money, they aren't all just waiting for a free game.

Casual's bring as much if not less than the loyal fan base of this game in term's of monetary value, I have dropped quite a few dollars on this game since DD was introduced. RS6 is the best comparison, the game has a learning curve, you either learn and succeed or you don't and you drop off. They do not compromise and that is what keep's their player base and their fan base loyal. I had to learn and adapt to this franchise why shouldn't everyone else?. All I know is this is the last year I buy MLB the show, I am moving on to PC games, I'd rather deal with hacker's than having to fight with this game to field or hit a ball a properly.

But rainbow six is geared towards those markets. They certainly aren't selling copies on the levels of a franchise like Call of Duty. The baseball market can't sustain selling to only fans of that type of gameplay because it's already a way smaller market then the first-person shooter market, so equating those two games doesn't work.

Baseball has sustained selling to only fans for year's, only recently have they made comprimises to their game in terms of length of play. Other than that they don't give a s$%# whether you like their game or not and I applaud them for that, one of the reason's I still follow baseball and have completely erased the NHL from my sports viewing agenda. When game companies start focusing on the people who got them to where they are, they will succeed, if they continue to focus on the demographics who pay them out for 1-2 months they will fail. Why do you think Battlefield V was such a colossal failure? because they said F@#$ you to the people who got them there and opened their arms to people who never gave a sh#$ about their games for more than 2 months. This game IMO is a colossal failure.

@Harrisville318 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

Ranked season should not be geared towards casual players.

but it is, so here we are.

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@ChuckCLC said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@Untchable704 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

Casual players make a game grow more than anybody. If you take out that top 10% that’s leave 90%. 60% of the time that 80 more percents.

60% of the time that statement is right every time.

I sure hope for the sake of SDS that 60% is still there in July. I doubt it, but I hope for this franchise's sake they do. Let's all hope that fortnite doesn't release another patch that steal's these loyal 1 time players away from the franchise.

That's not what casual players mean. They aren't one-time players. They still buy the game every year, (and perhaps some microtransactions early on), but they just don't stay or invest as much time each year. The game maker still gets that revenue once a year from the same casual players. It's expected that casuals start to drop off as the game progresses, that wouldn't be a surprise to any company.

If they don't make the game appeal to those people, those people don't buy next year, and they are always the largest majority of buyers

I know they aren't 1 time buyer's, but how many player's joined this franchise after they released it free-to-play through PSN?. Those are the people they are appealing too, the people who couldn't give a sh#$ about their game until its F2P. Do Casual players dictate how terrible the game plays? no, do they dictate your outfielder fielding the ball like an infielder? no, But they also don't help make change's either. Why? because they benefit from this garbage gameplay.

That statement is wrong, there were plenty of casual players before they ever put it as the free game of the month in 19. The bulk of the game has always been casual, way before it was ever free.

You don't have to like it, I certainly don't like it, but those are the facts. Casual players do bring in the most money, they aren't all just waiting for a free game.

Casual's bring as much if not less than the loyal fan base of this game in term's of monetary value, I have dropped quite a few dollars on this game since DD was introduced. RS6 is the best comparison, the game has a learning curve, you either learn and succeed or you don't and you drop off. They do not compromise and that is what keep's their player base and their fan base loyal. I had to learn and adapt to this franchise why shouldn't everyone else?. All I know is this is the last year I buy MLB the show, I am moving on to PC games, I'd rather deal with hacker's than having to fight with this game to field or hit a ball a properly.

@eatyum said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@JEEZY-E said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@ChuckCLC said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

@Untchable704 said in Casual player vs consecutive yearly player:

Casual players make a game grow more than anybody. If you take out that top 10% that’s leave 90%. 60% of the time that 80 more percents.

60% of the time that statement is right every time.

I sure hope for the sake of SDS that 60% is still there in July. I doubt it, but I hope for this franchise's sake they do. Let's all hope that fortnite doesn't release another patch that steal's these loyal 1 time players away from the franchise.

That's not what casual players mean. They aren't one-time players. They still buy the game every year, (and perhaps some microtransactions early on), but they just don't stay or invest as much time each year. The game maker still gets that revenue once a year from the same casual players. It's expected that casuals start to drop off as the game progresses, that wouldn't be a surprise to any company.

If they don't make the game appeal to those people, those people don't buy next year, and they are always the largest majority of buyers

I know they aren't 1 time buyer's, but how many player's joined this franchise after they released it free-to-play through PSN?. Those are the people they are appealing too, the people who couldn't give a sh#$ about their game until its F2P. Do Casual players dictate how terrible the game plays? no, do they dictate your outfielder fielding the ball like an infielder? no, But they also don't help make change's either. Why? because they benefit from this garbage gameplay.

@maskedgrappler said in Where are all the Vet's?:

@JEEZY-E said in Where are all the Vet's?:

@maskedgrappler said in Where are all the Vet's?:

@JEEZY-E said in Where are all the Vet's?:

@maskedgrappler said in Where are all the Vet's?:

@JEEZY-E said in Where are all the Vet's?:

@maskedgrappler said in Where are all the Vet's?:

@JEEZY-E said in Where are all the Vet's?:

@eatyum said in Where are all the Vet's?:

@JEEZY-E said in Where are all the Vet's?:

@eatyum said in Where are all the Vet's?:

@JEEZY-E said in Where are all the Vet's?:

@eatyum said in Where are all the Vet's?:

I actually find myself enjoying offline quite a bit, which is a huge reversal for me, I was basically online only unless I needed to grind for something (and even then I hated playing vs the computer). But this real I really enjoy stuff like showdown, so I don't play much ranked

I still have an offline franchise mode that I dip into, but this year in terms of DD I feel slighted. That might just be me, but I feel like the whole game took 2 step's backwards.

Idk, to me there seems to be more offline content.

There are evolution players. (Yes some online missions, but the majority of any evolution is offline stuff).

Team Affinity is way more relevant for offline, with stuff like showdowns and moments tied to it.

I have reasons to occasionally do Play vs CPU to accomplish things like player evolution.

You have player programs, which combines moments, stats, and play vs cpu (Again, some online moments but the majority is offline).

Conquest maps are decent, especially compared to this time last year, we didn't see things like prospect packs early on.

The only thing really missing to make offline the ultimate experience is being able to prestige players.

Content has never been my problem with SDS, its the way the game plays. IMO this year's game play's like sh#$,. I am experiencing the best success I have had online since '17 but its just not enjoyable to me. It's all feel's very predictable, suddenly those centred swings go from good/popped to good/squared...then the next game its back to good/popped.

Gotcha, I just assumed you meant offline content wise because you said "but this year in terms of DD I feel slighted.", and I assumed the word slighted was meant as saying SDS didn't focus as much on offline. That's my bad

Let's be honest, I HATE MOMENT'S, but I have never hid that fact lol. But if that's the only way to truly enjoy the game I am willing to give it a try, Unfortunately IMO moment's have sucked and Conquest has been kind of a filler but it isn't to me in terms of offline content. It honestly just feels like a write off game to me, focusing everything on next gen.

I keep hearing this, that there was no effort and they're focusing on next gen. Do you guys remember what a real mailed in sports game looks like? Exactly the same as the year before with roster updates.

This game has a completely rebuilt fielding system, from the ground up. It may be broken, but its far from no effort. Same with hitting, it's not just brought over from last year, for good or bad.

The rng stuff is what it is, if you're going to gave cards with attributes its going to be there to some degree. I think part of the problem is the feedback doesn't work well. I'd prefer good squared and good good to get better results, but I don't want rng gone completely.

this is the NHL franchise converted into MLB mode, sorry to say it but it is. There are meta's and they change with every patch, just like EA sport's, the game isn't fun to me. To those who enjoy it I praise you, you are stronger than I am. To me, this game is just BP rolled into a collectibles binder.

I'm not telling you how to feel. I don’t love this year's game either, and that includes content. I think last year's game was better in almost every way, I think 17 had the best content delivery.

That said, be honest with your complaints. There was clearly effort put into it. If its a bad game, its a bad game. But its not due to effort. Its more likely due to philosophical differences between us tge players, SDS, and their bosses at Sony.

To me, a veteran of the franchise, it is a bad game. It feel's like they focused on appealing to the casual's, that doesn't develop a game, that put's it into EA Sports realm IMO.

Sure, they have to appeal to casuals though. Most games do. If they didn't there probably wouldn't be a game at all.

you really believe that the fanbase of this game wouldn't pour in enough money on Micro's to fuel this franchise?...come on...Last year I dropped well over a G note.

For SDS? Probably, for Sony? They aren't going to leave money on the table.

We're kind of screwed. As long as we keep buying the game they know they have us, but if sales drop off most publishers assume there's just no interest in the game and stop making it, rather than try to fix it. Its a catch 22.

I know we are all f#$$ed lol, that is what bother's me the most.