Poll of the Day > Sports Discussion Topic #161: You Won't BELIEVE What Happened At TRAINING CAMP!!

(+) Yeah! (+)

CaptainHammer posted...

My mom's friend in Seattle asked her to watch the dogs in September so we're all going for a free vacation. I just bought tickets to Angels @ Mariners. Not sure if I'm more excited to aee the stadium or to see Mike Trout in person finally

you're most excited for the legal kush

In places where it's legal can you just buy edibles at a liquor store?

The dream is over. The Cardinals lost.

Fuck Barça
---

Pablo Sandoval is a FATASS

I don't care how fat he is, something always feels right when a player comes "home", even if they're totally washed up. Boston never seemed like the right place for him, so good for him for getting the chance to stink it up back in SF.

The Niners hired Katie Sowers to their coaching staff. Apparently she's not the first female coach because the Falcons had one last year. Is she the first openly gay coach though do you guys know? Just saw her Facebook and she is definitely gay

Pokemon Blue is boring. I wander around and people/wild Pokemon want to fight me when I'm just trying to figure out where I'm supposed to be going. There are all these shitty-ass wild Pokemon that I'm not sure if I'm supposed to be catching and shops that sell a bunch of items which I have no idea if they'll even be useful any time soon. Is this pretty much what all RPGs are?

Okay, I'm just trying to get you guys' goat a bit, but it's reminding me so far why I haven't really gotten into RPGs

I should clarify what I mean about my perceptions of RPGs since that post didn't make much sense. I mean stuff like this:

- Move sets that aren't highly intuitive/sizable learning curve.
- Convoluted/bloated menus and inventory.
- Constant diversions from random/unavoidable battles.

All those are a strong part of my perception of (turn-based) RPGs, and all things I'm seeing in Pokemon. I guess the draw to me for Pokemon games was the power of the branding. There is also the bigger draw of the huge roster of characters, but having played it a bit I realize maybe that just further complicates things for somebody like me. I mean, let me guess, like half the Pokemon in the game are virtually useless? But I don't know enough about which ones to avoid and I don't know how well the game telegraphs that to a first-time player.

Every single Pokemon is usable in the campaign. A lot of them are useless in the competitive scene but it doesn't matter for your purposes because the game is easy enough for kids to beat it.

You think Pokemon has a steep learning curve? It's insanely easy

lol chewy can't beat a kid's game.

Fun story about Pokemon Blue. It was the first non-PC game I ever played. You know how you get the thing for Oak at the beginning and then go back and give it to him? I didn't know I was supposed to do that, and you can't get by the angry guy who wants his coffee until you do, so for the first week I played it I thought that was just the whole game and I just stayed there and leveled up my Charmander. I got it to evolve before my brother showed me what to do.

Lol that's great. I remember getting stuck for weeks at times, like when you need to get the HM for Flash, and just leveling up Blastoise as much as possible. His moveset was something like

Fissure
Blizzard
Skull Bash
Surf

He was also the only Pokemon I used so it was Struggle all day against the Elite Four. Still beat the game though!

my friend had a level 100 charizard and one of those brick game boys that took 6 batteries.
the moveset was
flamethrower
cut
fire blast
fissure


I thought he was a living legend

MNTwins1991 posted...

my friend had a level 100 charizard and one of those brick game boys that took 6 batteries.
the moveset was
flamethrower
cut
fire blast
fissure


I thought he was a living legend

I think they only took four batteries

thank you for correcting me

The game gear took six iirc

thanks once again

CaptainHammer posted...

You think Pokemon has a steep learning curve? It's insanely easy

SkynyrdRocker posted...

lol chewy can't beat a kid's game.

I never said it was hard, and I guess learning curve might not be the right term, but I was also talking about RPGs in general. My point is that there are all these different characters and moves (though I'm sure there will be a large overlap of moves between Pokemon) and to somebody not familiar with the series, they aren't immediately obvious to me. All games require learning to some extent, but I'm used to playing games where your abilities generally make clear sense right off the bat.

I've barely played it yet though so I'll give it a chance to see if I start enjoying it

Maybe it's because I was young and had all the free time in the world, but I enjoyed constantly being bombarded with new information, like new Pokemon and new abilities, because it seemed like the possibilities were endless. Eventually you'll understand the types of moves and Pokemon that are available and it won't seem so daunting. Especially in Blue.

That reminds me... something I've always wondered is how does it work in the later games? I know they add new Pokemon every generation, but can you really find all 700 or however many Pokemon in the newest one? Or do they put in the whole new generation (between the two games obviously) and only the most popular ones from past generations? I imagine the map would just have to get really huge if they kept including everything and it would stop being fun to try to catch so many

DorkLink posted...

That reminds me... something I've always wondered is how does it work in the later games? I know they add new Pokemon every generation, but can you really find all 700 or however many Pokemon in the newest one? Or do they put in the whole new generation (between the two games obviously) and only the most popular ones from past generations? I imagine the map would just have to get really huge if they kept including everything and it would stop being fun to try to catch so many

The metagame for pokemon is battling online, which is inhibited with nintendo's shit ass system.
the online communities make tiers, which are community enforced. The community rules are actually pretty good, and the online pokemon battling community has been good for a long time. It's basically like rock paper scissors

MNTwins1991, that didn't answer the question. Please remember to follow the prompt.

No you can not catch every Pokemon in every game. There are boring and time-consuming ways of transferring your mons through generations. There's an app on 3DS called Pokemon Bank where you store them and can pick them up in different games.

They handle the 700 Pokemon thing in various ways:

More variation in any given patch of grass. You could find the new game's Pokemon plus older Pokemon if they want to fill in some of the gaps in Pokemon types that don't show up in that game for a while.

There's usually an extra area after you beat the newer games where you can catch classic Pokemon.

A lot of older Pokemon won't show up no matter what, so the only option is to transfer them from your old save file in previous games. So basically you take your collection with you from game to game.

DorkLink posted...

I imagine the map would just have to get really huge if they kept including everything and it would stop being fun to try to catch so many

I imagine one huge map with all Pokemon is every Pokemon lover's dream

The last Pokémon game should be Pokemon ultimate and it should contain every Pokemon in it in a catchable way. Legendaries and all. And when you actually catch them all they should send you a certificate IRL. And there should be 1001 exactly.

I wonder if they'll ever stop adding Pokemon, even if they continue to make new games. At some point you gotta think enough is enough, but they've successfully gone to ridiculous number already so maybe there really is no limit.

Actually, the "last" of any major game series is an interesting thing to think about. Many TV series and movies have proper, planned finales (though lately it seems nothing is safe from a sequel/reboot/revival), but we haven't really seen anything like that from video games. I wonder what that would look like and how the first one to do it would influence future ones. Maybe it would be a huge celebration of the series that wraps things up nicely, or it could just be like any other entry. But most likely we'll never see something like that

If you think about it, game series keep going until they bomb in sales and the developers abruptly decide to stop making them. I don't think we'll ever see many planned final releases because it'll sell too well and then they'll decide to make more of them because these companies are in it for the money, not to be recognized as making great art pieces like movies do.

Edit: Although there's also many movie franchises keep cashing in well beyond the point where anyone cares, like Saw.

I don't really think that many movies that make it past one entry are really trying to be recognized as great art pieces. I'd say when they end purposely it's probably more for practical reasons, like actors aging, or terms outlined in studio deals. With TV, I imagine most of them that have planned endings do so because the creative energy needed to deliver multiple episodes year after year is unsustainable.

I guess video games have a lot going for them to prevent planned endings from being necessary. There are fewer parties involved, fewer demands for particular deadlines, generational changes that naturally push creativity to keep series from stagnating, etc. So I don't think such a thing would happen anytime soon, but if it did I wonder how the games would turn out

STLCards1991 posted...

Adam Wainwright is so fucking bad it's incredible. Why why why do they still pitch him. he is horrible. I love him but he is extremely done

His peripherals weren't too bad before his last start, but he was sitting at 81 mph all game. He tried to make it seem like it was a normal thing and that he was healthy enough to pitch, even though his arm is fucked and he lucked his way through five innings against a horrible hitting team. It's sad, but at least there's only one more year on his deal.

Sonic Mania is fantastic, guys! It plays like a dream, and the music is amazing. It did kind of get me good, though. The Chemical Plant Act 2 boss is Robotnik challenging you to a quick game of Dr. Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine, or what is generally called...Puyo Pop, I think? It's a match-4 kind of game. Anyway, I'm fucking partially colorblind, so I kept making dumb mistakes, since I couldn't differentiate green and yellow or blue and purple. Luckily, the difficulty wasn't too hard.

Guys, we did it! Sonic has the best games of any company mascot, ever!
---

Sega please outsource all your derelict franchises to fans and modders so we can get new Shining Force and Streets if Rage games. Plus way more

I was looking at reviews for Sonic Mania and the comments are funny because they're full of kids complaining that the score is too high because the graphics suck

I was gonna ask if anybody had gotten Sonic Mania but I figured Colby would be the only one and I didn't know if he would even read the topic. Then of course he just shows up.

On the one hand, it would make a nice addition to my thin Switch library. On the other hand, it's not a first-party Nintendo game so I'm sure it won't be long before it's on sale

I've got a road trip this weekend so I'm gonna buy it and​play it in the backseat.

I just learned that Giancarlo Stanton cleared waivers today and omg he belongs at Coors Field

It's just $20, so get it now, DarkLink! STL, I think you or Squall said you liked Sonic 2, so you will like this one. It plays exactly the same. There's a ton of levels, and each boss battle is unique. About half of the levels are remakes from the Genesis games, but besides the very first level (Green Hill Act 1, of course), they are all totally different from the Genesis levels, which was a nice surprise to me. I thought the remade levels would be similar with just a small change or two, but they are completely new levels.

I need to play it a little more, but I'm pretty sure it's my favorite Sonic game ever. The one complaint is that the emerald levels are based on Sonic CD's special stage, where you were in a 3D zone and you had to chase and destroy UFO's. I never liked those stages, but they are different enough in Mania that it isn't so bad. Still not my fave, but infinitely more playable.

Stanton has felt like a future Cardinal for a few years now. I'd love to dump Piscotty on them and throw in, like, our top three pitching prospects, other than Reyes. The new owners might appreciate a cost-controlled average player like Piscotty.
---

The Giants don't have the prospects to make a trade for him, but he doesn't seem like a Giants guy anyway. He hits too many home runs. Also he has a full no-trade clause which he would probably invoke to avoid hitting at AT&T Park.

Piscotty is not an average player. He's having a horrific season.

Of course, 0.1 WAR in 300 AB's and currently in the minors. I don't think he'll be that bad going forward, though. I guess we could have another Craig situation on our hands, which would be rough.
---

The Cardinals don't have the prospects to trade for Stanton because Reyes is no longer a sure thing and even if they could make that trade they wouldn't because they're too cheap. Piscotty is trash, you might as well make a Grichuk centrepiece offer.

ZiPS has Piscotty as an average player going forward, and that seems about right. I don't even like Piscotty; I recently posted something elsewhere that says Pham's stellar play should force Piscotty out going forward. If Piscotty is a 2 WAR/year player over the course of his remaining 5/$29.4 million deal, and we use the very low end of $/WAR at $8 million, he's worth about $50 million in surplus value. Hell, if he's a 1 WAR player, that's still about $10 million in surplus value.

If a team is assuming the entire Stanton contract, the Marlins aren't gonna get much in terms of prospects. Fangraphs assessed his trade value a couple of months ago, and they said that after this year, Stanton has negative trade value. Now, Stanton has been incredible lately, so maybe it is closer to being neutral. But no one claimed him when it costed nothing but money. If he ever gets dealt, which probably won't happen, he's not bringing in a haul.

I wasn't trying to say Piscotty would be a huge get for the Marlins, just that Stanton's contract kills any hope for a solid return.
---

I still don't quite understand the thing about teams taking on just his contract. So isn't that basically like they'd be signing him as a high-priced free agent? I get that he makes a lot of money, but I'm not sure why it's seen as bad trade value in a sport without a salary cap where teams make worse megadeals all the time. Maybe I'm just too in love with his home runs this year.

Also, I remember reading it takes him through age 37, but doesn't he have some kind of opt-out five years in (or is it with five years left)? Could whatever team he's on opt-out from him, or is it only that he can opt-out from the team?

Yep, if a team claimed him, the Marlins could either let him go and get rid of his contract for no return, or they could try to work out a deal, and if the teams can't work something out, the Marlins would have to pull him back from waivers. The Marlins would then be unable to go through this process again this season.

I'm not shocked that no team wanted to "sign" Stanton to his current deal, but I wouldn't have been shocked if a team did claim him. He's performing at an incredible level at the moment, and he'd be a huge upgrade to a number of teams. Teams sign guys to awful contracts all the time, knowing there's dead money at the end of it. I'm sure the Angels knew that Pujols was gonna hurt them in the last few years of the deal (but it turned out to be much worse than that). Same with Cano and the Mariners. The team is hoping for a few playoff runs and/or big surpluses in value in exchange for shitty performances at the end of the contract.

Stanton can opt out in 2020, I think. He either opts out and becomes a free agent, or he stays and earns $29 million over seven years. For him to opt out, he'd have to be confident that he'd get more than $210 million in a deal. The team has no control over Stanton, but there are sometimes contracts where the team can opt out of a deal. It usually costs them a decent chunk of money to "buy" the player out.
---

Best case scenario for the team is he opts out in a couple of years; worst case scenario is he starts sucking and bogs a team down for nearly a decade.

I bought Sonic Mania and decided not to wait until my road trip because I have poor impulse control. It is good. I hate the special stages though.

I love watching an entire Cardinals game that ends with them giving up 3 runs in the bottom of the 9th to lose.

The Rockies exploded tonight, they're up 17-2.

I might end up getting (implicitly) peer pressured into buying Sonic Mania. I knew it was pretty hyped but I didn't expect to be seeing so many week one impressions and I wanna be one of the cool kids
---

I'm in the same boat on Sonic Mania. I don't want to be left behind.

But then when I get it, everyone will already have beaten it and it'll be last week's news.

Between BotW and Mario Odyssey, that's two big games I'm gonna have at launch this year, which is two more than like the past 20 years. So I don't really feel that bad potentially missing out on the peak Sonic Mania hype - I mean, it's just Sonic. People are gonna play it and be like "Oh, cool" and then go back to not caring about Sonic/Sega in general anymore
---

Just looked at the Rockies box score and saw Rex Brothers had pitched for the Braves. Man, that is a name I totally forgot about. Just one of many once-promising Rockies pitchers whose career flamed out

Juan Nicasio is another one of those names that popped up recently, but apparently he's pretty good this year because Pirates magic
---