From the wikipedia page:
Travis Ruhland of Madison, Wisconsin currently holds the world record on RBI Baseball 3 and RBI Baseball 2 (as certified by Twin Galaxies), with a 60 run win and a 50 run win, respectively.[1]
Looks like Twin Galaxies doesn't have score lists anymore, and are now charging fees to get records verified. I assume this was one player ?
Also seems low for an all-time record, especially since if you turn computer forfeits off, there's no mercy rule, so unlike in RBI 1, you have the full 9 innings. The computer opponent isn't any more skilled, either, on the default easy difficulty. Pick someone like the NL All-Stars (who can have a full lineup of 25+ homer guys with lots of speed, if you don't mind putting Andre Dawson at catcher) against a crappy team (Twins or Yankees, maybe), and 60 doesn't seem at all ridiculous.
I wonder what the record is with the mercy rule option on.......
Quote from: BeefMaster on 06/01/13, 01:03:36 PM
Also seems low for an all-time record, especially since if you turn computer forfeits off, there's no mercy rule, so unlike in RBI 1, you have the full 9 innings. The computer opponent isn't any more skilled, either, on the default easy difficulty. Pick someone like the NL All-Stars (who can have a full lineup of 25+ homer guys with lots of speed, if you don't mind putting Andre Dawson at catcher) against a crappy team (Twins or Yankees, maybe), and 60 doesn't seem at all ridiculous.
It's probably also a factor of having VERY few people willing to try this, video tape and send to Twin Galaxies.
Quote from: Metal King on 06/02/13, 08:45:38 PM
I wonder what the record is with the mercy rule option on.......
In RBI 2&3, it's not a "mercy rule" the way the original is - rather, the computer just forfeits the game when they get down by 12, so you can't possibly win by more than that (unless they wait until the current play is over, in which case I suppose you can win by 15 if you end it with a grand slam).
Well I'm glad they made it 12 and not 10, it would be much easier than it already is.
I can usually score 45-55 runs in a full game using the Tengen Team......
So you can turn off the slaughter rule in RBI 2 & 3?
Yup. Theres a "computer player- hard, or easy" option, and a forfeit "off and on" option. But anytime during a game you can check the scoreboard by pressing B and you can also have an option to forfeit yourself from there.
What Metal King said. There is no built-in "slaughter rule" like in the original - in a 2-player game, you can be up by 30 and keep playing if the other player doesn't quit.
Is it lame to still be talking about ancient video games???? I mean they're old old old.... But I don't think so.
:)
Given this site, i would say the answer is a firm no
I agree.
Baseball stars fun facts: A lot of douches tell me its far superior to RBI, but nobody on the fkn planet seems to care enough to have a "fan site" for it.
Fielding sucks Bob Barkers old cock in that game, and you can use teams that have made up chicks, or even monsters. Scooby Doo however wasn't invited to play though.
Baseball Stars is phenomenal... let's not be ridiculous here.
The fielding takes a bit of getting use to, but it's got a bit of computer assistance built in - you only control a couple players at a time, and your other fielders will occasionally back you up. It's a lot more zoomed-in, though, so knowing where your guys start is even more important than in RBI.
Baseball Stars - better 1 player game
RBI - better 2 player game
Baseball stars is great! Tons of options and all that good stuff.....I forget though, do they also use aluminum bats? I know the original RBI and Bases Loaded use 'em!!! This is MLB?????
MLB Baseball, hah, anyone remember that one? I had it, along with Bases Loaded, Bo Jackson Baseball, and Roger Clemens MVP, plus the RBI series which I still have.
The screen would go blank for about 3 seconds after you hit the ball, probably the worst ever baseball game......It was more fun making your teams than the actual games!
I never played MLB, but I played all those other ones, plus Bases Loaded 3, BaseWars, and Baseball Simulator 1.000. In order, I'd rank the non-RBI ones as follows:
Baseball Stars
Baseball Simulator 1.000
Bases Loaded 3
BaseWars
Bo Jackson Baseball
Roger Clemens MVP Baseball
Bases Loaded
Bases Loaded 3 probably provides the best means of "beating the game" - you get scored based on your performance (starting at 100, losing points for stuff like errors and getting picked off but gaining back points for great fielding plays), and the goal of the game is to play a "perfect game" (100 score) against the computer on the highest difficulty, which is only unlocked by having a high enough score against a lower level opponent.
My son enjoys baseball stars. Sadly, RBI is too difficult for his modern gaming attitude.
He likes baseball stars and RBI 3/2 best
Oh yeah, I still have Baseball Simulator 1.000, takes FOREVER to play a season, even longer if you just "skip" games. I actually completed a 165 game season once, neat ending, but nothing spectacular.
The '87 Tigers lineup on RBI 3 is a bit different:
1.Trammell
2.Sheridan
3.Gibson
4.Evans
5.Whitaker
6.Nokes
7.Lemon
8.Brookens
9.Madlock (.279 Avg, not .307)
Bench:
Heath
Bergman
Herndon (I hit a 424-foot homer with him)
Johnny Grubb (.202 Avg, 2 Hr)
Darnell Coles (.181 Avg, 4 Hr)
As for pitchers, the main 4 are:
Morris
Terrell
Tanana
Robinson
Mike Henneman and Dan Petry are on the list of reserves......
As for the other original RBI teams, the '86 Angels are without Reggie, they have a Miller hitting 4th (.228 avg, 0 Hr), Devon White's on the team, and they have a guy named Ryal (.363 avg, 2 Hr) and lol, Woodroe (.364 avg, 15 Hr).
Tony Armas has 11 homers, not 43, Kevin Mitchell is on the '86 Mets AND the '87 Giants (.306 avg) that must be an error...... Lance Johnson (with speed!) is a reserve on the '87 Cardinals.
Pretty interesting.......
Wait, RBI3 uses the 86 & 87 lineups?
RBI 3 has all the playoff teams from '83-'89, so it includes all the teams in the original. However, they did not preserve the original game's ratings - the ratings (at least for power) appear to follow some sort of algorithm and are almost all directly stat-based, so you don't see as many situations like in the original where a guy has low homers but huge power.
For guys who were retired and thus not part of MLBPA, they usually included a fake version of them, with a name like "RJ Right" - initials followed by position. I'm surprised there wasn't a version of Potatoes like that.
Did some searching and found this post (http://forums.dee-nee.com/index.php?topic=2382.msg29808#msg29808) from nightwulf that has a text file with all the RBI 3 players and ratings.
I compared the '86 Angels in RBI 3 to the Baseball-Reference page for the team (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CAL/1986.shtml), and Miller is not actually a made-up player - it's Darrell Miller (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/milleda01.shtml), a backup OF/C who played 33 games for the '86 Angels but did not make the postseason roster. His .228/0HR numbers are accurate (although they have him as an infielder for some reason), but he's got an 861 power rating, highest on the team, and they start him at cleanup.
Reggie's not the only guy missing from that team - Ruppert and Hendrick are gone, too. RBI 3 has defensive position information, and the team's outfielders are Pettis, Downing, Devon White, Gus Polidor, and Mark Ryal. It's quite a debacle - the last three played a combined 48 games that year, and Polidor only played infield in his whopping six games. There's also an infielder named "Woodroe" whose stats don't match anyone on the team as far as I can tell.
It looks like they got a bunch of hand-editing to their ratings, apart from the "spit out a number based on their average and homers" stuff that makes up most of the teams in the game - White, Polidor, Miller, and Ryal all have much higher power ratings than their stats would justify, and Woodroe has a very low 768 power despite a decent 15 homers.
RBI pitching staff was decimated as well. Witt is intact, but he's the only one - Sutton, Corbett, and Moore are nowhere to be found, even as sets of initials. Starting rotation is Witt, Kirk McCaskill (which is defensible; he was better than Sutton), Urbano Lugo (started three games in '86), and John Candelaria. Bullpen includes a bunch of made-up guys; closest match for Moore's ERA is "Flasher", and the closest to Corbett's 3.66 ERA is "MC Pitch" (terrible rap name) at 4.00. There was one "MC" on that team, Mike Cook, and he had an ERA of 9.00 in 9 innings of work, so maybe that should've been "DC".
Wow lots of great info there, thanks.
And Kevin Mitchell's 1987 stats are correct, I am wrong. I believe he split with the Padres and Giants, he DID hit .306 with 15 HR with SF (have his full stats on original RBI of course).
LOL Woodroe........He and Ryal have great averages!
I still like the Lifeson/Peart/Lee players (Rush). Game was probably made by a few from Canada!
Quote from: BeefMaster on 06/24/13, 03:00:25 PM
However, they did not preserve the original game's ratings - the ratings (at least for power) appear to follow some sort of algorithm and are almost all directly stat-based, so you don't see as many situations like in the original where a guy has low homers but huge power.
I have been looking at RBC 3 stats lately and while I haven't done a full analysis yet, I know that the contact rating (which I like to call the shit factor) was programmed with an inverse linear relationship with the player's real-life batting average (or at least the batting average that was programmed into the game).
I had made this chart with data from three RBI 3 teams (I forget which ones):
(http://i.imgur.com/Y3WMOzk.jpg)
(sorry for resurrecting an old topic)