Quote:
Originally Posted by chazzycat
Agreed. That's why I was trying to stay focused on discussing this from a game design point of view, not get drawn into real baseball arguments. But I couldn't resist responding.
|
Well, yeah. That's good.
But do try to remember that the whole point of the game design is that the game should represent "real" baseball well enough that general baseball knowledge is enough to compete well.
One of the issues with these "All-Star/Multiple-Era" kinds of games, however, is that there is no "real." Every era is different, sometimes dramatically so. Would Barry Bonds have been able to hit the spitball? Maybe. Except, of course, socially he wouldn't have been allowed to so we really have no idea what the stats output of a game environment of that era would be if all the best players had been allowed to compete. Would Josh Gibson have bested Babe Ruth? If Ruth played today, would he even be able to compete at that body type? How fast were pitchers of his day? Could he catch up to a steady stream of 99 MPH pitchers who are learning rapidly with advanced science at their backs? Who knows? But the game serves to create this "what if" scenario in which there literally is no "real" to compare with beyond our own imaginations--of which there is no common consensus.