when you have people pulling excuses out of thier buts consistantly trying to prove the 2005 is just as good or better than the 2004, you know what they are really saying is, i know this new version sucks but dadgum it, i aint gonna admit it!!!!
methinks you 05's protest too much!!!!! hoo haa

Gee the same could be said of those still pushing 2004...

saying 2004 was closer to real live baseball is not trying to justify anything. its just stating facts.

even the most stoic companyman surely cant refute that.

Of course, people you and bret816 seem to be on this neverending quest to prove that 2005 MLB SportsClix isn't good. It's almost an obsession, I think.

Pulling excuses? Let's see. First, bret816 didn't like the new game because it wasn't realistic. Then he complained that this version is only a game. Next he complained that it's a dice fest. Yet, karaokejoe, who played with bret816, feels that the new game is inferior because it ISN'T a dice fest. He said, "More dice rolls more drama." So which is it? How can the new game be both a dice fest and not a dice fest at the same time?

I think we get it now. People lik you, Iron Duck, and bret816, don't like the new game. That's fine. Of course, you can't stop repeating yourselves over and over and over and over and over...to infinity. Talk about trying to justify yourselves. In any case, you just keep finding ways (no matter how illogical your points or the fact that you keep changing your positions) to say that the new game is inferior. It wouldn't matter what anyone said, you'll think the way you do. We get that.

So what's the point? Why still post here? Why still play? I won't even begin to discuss the illogic in buying boosters to a game you don't enjoy "for the figures". That'll show WizKids Games. That'll make them see your point and change the game back to the previous version. Hey, perhaps you should buy ALL of the figures so that nobody gets them! WizKids will really be hurting then.

I haven't tried the previous version, but I've heard that games could go 14 or 15 innings without a run. Is that realistic? I don't think so. Is it realistic to score 8 or more runs in every game, as some have found with the newer version? No, that's not very realistic either.

So it would seem like neither version is completely realistic. To claim that would seem to be absurd. To claim that it's your OPINION would be fine. It could be debated, but to claim that it's a FACT? Well, you certainly won't help out your case with silly claims. Perhaps MLB SportsClix just isn't the game you should be playing if you require realism. Strat-O-Matic Baseball is an excellent choice if you want realism.

I seriously must have been playing a different '04 game than the rest of you guys, because I was just bored stiff by that game. I appreciate (and even like) that it was much more complicated than the 2005 version, and that each player was truly unique...but I can probably count on one hand the number of times I even had two runners on base at the same time to get excited/nervous about that green fly ball.

I miss scorchers.

I miss more clicks up.

I miss the depth and numbers of the intangibles in the '04 version.

I don't miss games going into the 13th inning deadlocked at zero.

I do wish that WK would have stuck with the '04 version and worked on the rules more...it had the potential to be something really great and really fun. I really, really wanted to like it alot...but I just couldn't. It was, at least as I played it, just a bit off.

But, the fact of the matter is, they didn't stick with the '04 version. They'll never go back to the '04 version. They'll never make stickers to convert the '05 figures into '04 versions. I understand why people continue to pine for the '04 version...but for me, personally, I choose to move on. Honestly, I don't know that I would have even been all that excited about using players from '04 along with players from '05...I don't necessarily pine for the '04 Chris Stynes vs. '05 Pedro Martinez matchup. But I CAN see how people who made significant financial investments in the '04 set (myself included) would be upset.

The '05 version is entertaining, still has some strategy and resembles the game that I love (baseball) enough to give me a good fix on those days that my beloved Tribe doesn't play. Oh, and the sculpts look great in the '05 version :)

lol, I'm not sure why I even keep posting about this...I understand why people like '04 and why people like '05...I'm not really adding anything to the argument here. But, posting here IS distracting me from work...so maybe that's why I do it :)

i feel my character has been miliciously attacked by cbourassa. when i questioned the characters of staro and diaperman i was instantly awarded a 4 on the warning level.

oh i was just kiddin, dont give the rookie any warning points. he can't help it. but how a feller can get so worked up and defend a game against another game that he admits he hasnt ever even played sure makes me worry bout the little feller. if you ask me nurse ratchett, yer the one thats crazy round here.

I certainly don't expect any special treatment on this forum, so if what I wrote deserves a warning then I encourage the administrators to do so. I'm not asking for a warning, mind you, but I don't deserve to be treated differently than the other users.

The thing is, Iron Duck, is that I am not "defending a game against another game" as you put it. I am not attacking the older game, either. The older game is what it is. Some really enjoyed the older game. Others didn't. I think you should play the older game if you truly enjoy it more. You'll also have the extra benefit of cheaper Booster Packs. I certainly don't think this makes you crazy (nor do I consider myself to be crazy).

However, I don't understand the neverending quest to attack 2005 MLB SportsClix and anyone who plays it. What purpose does it serve? I appreciate honest reviews. I appreciate helpful criticizm. I think it's good to discuss the potential flaws of the newer game.

I don't understand how the insistent effort to destroy the game helps anyone, though. When the reasons to dislike the game change faster than the score in the newer game (a reference that you and bret816 should appreciate), you have to wonder what the attackers have against the game. At some point, you realize that some have a grudge (for whatever reason) against the game. You then stat to discredit those opinions because 1) they sound like a broken record) 2) they cease to be helpful opinions since they don't offer any solutions or anything of substance and 3) the people offering the opinions just have it in for the game.

Would I like to try the older game sometime? Sure. Will I now spend money on two games? No.

That's it, put words in my mouth. I'm done with this site.

I wasn't trying to put words in your mouth. I think I quoted you fairly accurately.

On the other hand, I don't think you should leave the site, either.

What is Strategie? Basically it's a number of choices based knowing your opponent and chances margin of success.

Lets look at one at-bat step by step from that perspective and taking the Randy Johnson vs. Manny Ramirez Szenario as an example.

In the 2004 version you had 2 choices per at-bat as the fielding manager to start with:
1. choosing the white die
2. choosing the red die

If we look at our example we can see that we have a .431 chance of getting a strike out by choosing the red die. The worst that could happen is either a FB or a GB scorcher, choosing the red die makes that improbable as well (.166 combined or .195 on the worst combination red/black) or a Paint the Corner (.278 combined or .444 on the worst combination red/black).

In the 2005 version you have 3 choices per at-bat as the batting manager with probabilitys:
1. choosing the red die .324
2. choosing the blue die .370
3. choosing the black die .454

But the worst thing that could happen by choosing the red die is a home run (.065 combined but .194 on the worst combination red/red). Your choices break down in more different results with different probabilitys you have to take that into account and try to predict your opponent. Beeing totally random makes it hard for your opponent to predict you but it will not work for you on the long run if your opponent figures you out.

In the 2004 version you had 4 choices per at-bat as the batting manager with:
1. choosing the blue die
2. choosing the black die
3. Steal a base
4. Bunt

With the blue die we have a .417 chance of getting a K (.611 on the worst combination) but also a .278 chance of getting a GB scorcher (.444 on the best combination).

Stealing and Bunting only came into play when there where runners on base which was 1/2 of the at-bats at max so basically those both count as 1 option.

In the 2005 version you have 4 choices per at-bat as the batting manager with:
1. choosing the red die .370
2. choosing the blue die .407
3. choosing the black die .370
4. Steal a base

By choosing the red die your chances of a multiple base hit will increase but on the worst combination you will reduce your chances to .306 of getting a hit.

It becomes more important to guess right what the pitcher is throwing (or better what he is NOT throwing) or vice versa.

The 2004 version relied more on fielding attempts since it was much more likly to get a FB or GB including scorcher plays. The thing is that those fielding attempts doesn't include any strategie since you don't have anything to choose, it's just rolling dice and so it only adds an element of chance and not one of strategie.

Yes, both versions are different.
Yes, the 2005 version generates more runs.
Yes, I can understand that somebody likes the 2004 version better.
But I strongly disagree when somebody says that 2005 is inferior or offers less strategie, this is simply an biased opinion without any proof. To play one game and and have certain results can have many reasons as seanwalsh postet.

Both games are only represent a small part of real baseball, differnet parts to be sure but not to a different degree. The 2004 isn't closer to the real game then the 2005 version or farther away, it's different.

well, brett left, that means i am the last sane one left here, i fear there is no room left for the 2004 lovin duck in this sea of 2005 sportsclix lite fanatics. i am off to bluer oceans where clearer headed baseball fans sail.

Not sure what sane is anymore or what that meant. Anyways here is an idea for all the 2004 haters/lovers and 2005/haters/lovers.

Why don't we come up with some rules tweaks of our own to make the game seem to have more strategy or seem better??

I haven't played 05 yet but plan too but I do remember way to many times when no one on my team but the pitcher seemed to get a hit (most often a homer, yes green fences). I also remember playing the 0-0 game to 15 innings and wondering if anyone would ever score?

Anyways thats my thoughts. feel free to bash 'em.:D

Kirkoff, you hit the nail on the head. It seems to me that suggestions on how to improve the 2005 game would be more productive.

First off cbourassa, you obviously didn't read my post.

First off I have made one post about the new game, because I preferred to play it first before I made judgements, so you just lumped me in as a 2005 hater when I made bad and good comments about the game in my only post, and I agree with duck, you bash us and get no warning points, but it seems anyone that doesn't enjoy 2005 seems to get nailed with points. Sounds kinda funny to me. I am sure my points will come after this mail.

Second Bret criticized the game because of the high scoring and he didn't say it is a dice fest. There is a difference.

Some people have issues with 2005 because of what has been stated before, and you need to live with that. We have freedom to post, and it isn't fair to tell us we can't. I still am buying 2005 and may play it from time to time, but will also play 2004 which I enjoy.

Lastly (where my points will come) Starocotes you drive me completely insane. You are so far up Wizkids butts that if you don't have a job working for them you should. You defend everything that they do, no matter if it makes since or not. I understand Diaperman, as he is has to have some loyalty there, but not sure about you. I wish you would just shut up and listen sometimes.

This will be my last post, as I too am tired of this site.

This site will become boring soon, as you will get tired of patting wizkids on the back with no one to argue with!