Christian: I am absolutely in love with MLB 2K10's MLB Today feature. As a big fan of "Play Now" games, there is something undeniably cool about seeing a player's stats from the previous night along with the announcers discussing current real-world performances. The stat overlays and player introductions look great, and the dynamic statistical updates are detailed and varied enough to make even the most compulsive stat junkie happy.

Even better than the on-field MLB Today presentation aspects is the continual player updates that can be found within the mode's main hub. You are able to scroll through each team and see who's hot and who's not, and you can also examine some very interesting team stat lines. Whenever I boot up the game, I almost feel as if I am interacting with a dedicated MLB Web site -- only I have the ability to step in and play any game on the schedule, which is a a baseball fan's dream come true.

I give a lot of credit to MLB 10 and the various presentation options that can be found in the game, but the game just never conveys that sense of "living atmosphere" like in 2K10. For that reason alone, I give the nod to MLB 2K10 when it comes to presentation. I also think more games should take a cue from 2K and begin integrating similar formats into their games. After all, we are in an era of online-capable consoles, so the ability to stream live stats into a game with dynamic presentation and announcing should become the standard for sports gaming.

Caley: I pretty much agree with everything you have said here, Christian. Some of the best aspects of 2K10 are indeed the presentation elements. I also loved the MLB Today integration and the incorporation of real events, even in the quick-play modes.

I think The Show's commentary is still a notch above most sports games, though, it has become repetitive over the past few years. Going forward, I think the developers need to take a look at adding a "more professional" color commentator and switch to a two-man booth (maybe with an "on field" reporter).

However, one element of The Show that completely eclipses 2K10 is the atmosphere, particularly the "little things" that make baseball special. These touches, from mascots to beach ball interruptions, make playing and watching the game feel a little more personal and a little more authentic. I also love the audio highlights and intro videos that occur separate from the gameplay. All of these things make the whole package feel more like baseball.

Caley: As fundamental as hitting is to baseball, it has not gone through that much evolution during the last 20 years. Of the two games out this year, I prefer 2K's analog control to The Show's button presses. Nevertheless, both leave me wanting more.

I like that 2K's system is more timing based because I tend to think the outcomes skew a little more toward what the batters do in real life (but I have no real proof). The Show's system seems to have a lot of elements in place, but I do not feel they quite mesh, or in some cases, are even needed.

While reviewing MLB 2K10, I played with the camera angles a bit, but ultimately left the camera mostly at default or zoomed in slightly. I was pretty comfortable with that setting. With The Show, I cannot quite find an angle that I like, and I tend to swing at pitches that I would not normally swing at if I was comfortable with the camera (specifically low pitches while using Wide angle).

In the future, I guess I would like to see The Show do something different. It does not have to be based on the analog sticks, but I think it needs to be more streamlined and intuitive.

Christian: I am really not a huge fan of using the analog sticks to hit, but I do find myself preferring MLB 2K10's hitting over MLB 10's mostly because of the default camera angle in 2K10. I remember reading a developer blog a few months before 2K10 was released that explained how the default camera angle may seem a bit disorienting at first, but after a while you would understand why 2K had decided to integrate it into the game. Now, I could not agree more with this sentiment.

There is something about the default angle that allows me to get a very realistic read on ball velocity and break. Never before in a baseball game have I ever been able to work the count, foul off so many borderline pitches and take as many walks as I have in 2K10. The default hitting camera makes me feel like I am digging into the box and really going to war against a pitcher. Whoever made the final call to switch up the camera angles deserves a huge pat on the back.

I also agree that MLB 10 just does not have a camera angle that "feels" right. Too many times I am told that I have made solid contact on a meatball, only for it to result in an easy double play. For as much as The Show has going for it in other areas, Sony San Diego's hitting system has always been a glaring weak spot to me. Pitches are extremely difficult to judge in terms of velocity and break (especially low pitches), the check-swing appeals are spotty, and it is almost as if ratings and statistics play too great of a role in dictating how successful you can be at the plate -- do not strike me down sabermetricians.

However, I am not quite sure if moving to an analog-stick system is the way to go for The Show. Instead, I think a simple camera tweak like the one found in 2K10 could go a long way towards making hitting more enjoyable in MLB 11.

Caley: I think 2K's refined analog-stick system is refreshing, and it is a major upgrade when compared to previous versions in the series. I like that I can walk batters without really "trying" and that there seems to be a great level of difference between top-tier talent and rotation fillers.

Christian, I also know that you gave The Show a bit of a hard time in your review, especially when looking at what was not changed. In terms of pitching, I completely agree. Meter pitching was innovative circa 2003, but I think something needs to be added. I am not advocating change for change's sake, but this is an area where The Show now seems to be a bit behind. Even with the meter system, I think many pitchers still feel too similar. Walks are not that easy to come by either. Some people advocate switching to Classic mode for pitching, but I think that mode strips away one of the more fun elements of a baseball game.

I like that both games incorporate confidence into the controls -- any game that tries to tackle the psychological side of sports games is on good terms with me. I do wish the confidence of the pitchers was a little more evident when looking at the on-screen personalities of the pitchers. However, I do not think we need to go back to the '80s where pitchers started to pant and sweat uncontrollably either.

Christian: Analog-stick pitching may be considered "gimmicky" by the hardcore masses, but I do not think that means it can't be fun as well. For the first time I can remember, I actually have to pay attention to what I am doing on the mound -- as opposed to simply pegging a meter in a robotic fashion. Street Fighter controls may not have any correlation whatsoever to throwing a baseball in real life, but at least they keep the user engaged and provide a challenge. And I also agree that analog-stick pitching really shines when it comes to the player differentiation. Aces have far better control than scrubs, and the end result is something very rewarding.

I do not mind meter-based pitching as an option in a 2010 baseball game, but I just can not get excited about it as a main mode of pitching. To be honest, I am not sure what the perfect pitching control scheme would entail, I just know it has nothing to do with meters. With that being said, MLB 10's meter pitching works well, but as you mentioned Caley, it is still hard to walk anyone.

Fielding in the show is superior. At least according to our writers.

Caley: Neither game this year captures the joy of fielding quite like MVP 2005 did back in the day. But, The Show does come close. For the most part, everything seems pretty fluid, and I like having the freedom to position yourself for a crow hop or being able to dive at runners. If the throwing was a little better or at least more clear, I think this system would be on point. I do understand that the system is based on actual ratings, but I feel like I can never quite tell what is going to happen with this system. So, instead I just end up maxing out the meter every time.

Speaking of throwing, I enjoyed the old 2K system that rewarded you for pushing the stick accurately. I am sorry that is not back. Either way, it would not have helped the fielding in 2K because it seems almost automatic. By the way, I still think that the fielding issues are due in large part to the size of the fielders in comparison to the actual field.

Christian: I disagree with you Caley. I am having a blast fielding in MLB 10, mostly because of the amazing animation variety, and the feeling that I can pull off just about any play I see on TV. I am the biggest MVP 2005 fan on the planet, but MLB 10's fielding far surpasses that old gem in my eyes. Everything just feels great, from the speed of the ball off the bat to a player's momentum as he shifts his weight on a play to the enormity of the outfield when trying to track down a ball in the gap. Simply put, MLB 10's fielding screams realism. I only hope the throwing meter that is in MLB 11 more closely mimics the one found in MVP 05.

On the other hand, 2K10 in the field is completely and utterly terrible. Not since World Series Baseball 2K1 on my Dreamcast have I been so disappointed in a baseball game's fielding. What 2K has failed to tell everyone is that fielding in 2K10 is basically automatic. Plus, players are magnetically attracted to the ball, performing manual dives/wall climbs works what seems like 10 percent of the time, players do not make errors even when intentionally pegging the throwing meter, and balls come off the bat far too quickly. (PS, that last element makes the parks feel compact, which is a far cry from The Show's true-to-scale parks.) The developers completely dropped the ball with the fielding engine in MLB 2K10.

Christian: I am not particularly impressed by either game's baserunning since each provides separate highs and lows for me. I love MLB 10's left-stick player selection, but I continuously run into areas where a runner will not advance to the base I want or not correctly tag up.

In 2K10, I am a huge fan of holding down a trigger button to lead off. I like this style because then I release the button when the pitcher commits to his delivery. In that way, not only does the control scheme convey the true-to-life nerves of stealing a base at the exact right moment, but it is also one of the more rewarding experiences in a video game. 2K also features a very easy scheme in regards to advancing and retreating individual runners -- a quick trigger tap is all it takes to cue up a runner to head for extra bases. 2K10's number representation on the runner picture-in-picture screen is also great because it allows me me to know where everyone on my team is going at all times.

However, where 2K10 lost me is the wonky left-stick sliding and right-stick runner advancement. For the last five years, sliding has always been integrated on the right stick.

Caley: Baserunning is another case of The Show using a tried and true control method instead of something new and flashy. In this area, I think the developers made the right call. I am comfortable with the baserunning. It makes sense to me, and at this point I do not make many mistakes. It may be vanilla, but in this instance that is OK. I like when baserunning becomes second nature -- the last thing I want is to be fiddling with a million button presses and end up with three runners on second base.

That said, I echo your sentiments about 2K10's trigger system. I liked that "getting a good jump" really seemed to be in your control, and it also makes taking off a tension-filled moment where it is easy to become jumpy.

Similarly, I agree that other parts of the baserunning system were a mess. Sliding especially seemed to require an unneeded button press.

Caley: Having played both franchise modes, it is sort of hard to come up with a winner. My heart says 2K10, if only because of the integrated MLB Today presentation and its overall improvement. My head says The Show because it simply has just about all of the features one could want in a franchise mode. The transaction options alone are a step above what has been offered in previous console games.

That said, I still find the franchise mode in The Show to be a little dry. What I mean is that I am not sure the newspaper articles are cutting it anymore. This mode could use a little more "character" if you will.

Still, what is there is the best in the business, character or not. It is sort of like playing a text sim with playable games, which is not a bad thing. It is just that 2K proves a little more personality can go a long way towards making a franchise mode appealing.

Christian: Caley, you nailed it on the head when you described MLB 10's franchise mode as dry. For as deep and impressive as the mode is, I just cannot help but be completely bored with the entire interface, and I completely agree when you say newspaper articles are not cutting it anymore. It would be nice to see some type of weekly highlight show with top plays and series previews included in future iterations of the series to breath some much-needed life into the franchise mode.

But even with the yawn-inspiring franchise interface, the player movement depth of MLB 10's franchise mode is what puts it on top for me. Being able to duplicate almost every facet of a real-life GM is simply astounding and has kept me interested in aspects like the Rule 5 draft and scouting minor leaguers.

2K10's MLB Today integration provides the visual flair that I yearn for in MLB 10, but the actual content of the mode seems juvenile compared to The Show. That being said, MLB 2K10's franchise mode is no slouch, it just does not contain the depth of player-movement options that can be found in Sony's baseball title. Using your example, if MLB 10's franchise mode is a text sim, then MLB 2K10's franchise mode could be best summed up as a "visual sim"-- lots of great overlays, league stories and player stats, but also minimal player movement, financial and draft options.

While Road to the Show made Career modes famous, My Player might have just perfected it.

Christian: The Show may have introduced the world to the quintessential baseball career mode, but I cannot help but feel like 2K perfected the formula with the My Player mode. Sure, 2K lifted just about every aspect of Road to the Show and integrated it into the My Player mode, but the emphasis on player-specific big plays, lightning quick load times, a goal system that makes sense and quick player progression has me spending every free moment I get trying to earn my created monstrosity a place in Cooperstown. It is nice to play a baseball career mode where it is possible to be called up to the big squad by the middle of your first season. 2K10's My Player mode gives me the feeling that I actually am a top prospect like Jason Heyward or Evan Longoria. I can not only be called up mid-season, but I can also make an immediate impact.

I have grown increasingly tired of Road to the Show's tedious ranking system filled with unachievable goals. I am tired of being stuck with long-term team goals that are difficult to attain due to the game dictating how to allocate earned player points. To make matters worse, Sony now sells RttS points for real cash in the Playstation Store. Regardless, I simply cannot invest the hours into RttS any longer, especially when the game already features the aforementioned outstanding dynasty mode.

Returning to the other baseball title, if there is one flaw in 2K10's My Player mode it is that it has given gamers too much control over their player's destiny within an organization. Users should be randomly drafted to a team and should not have the ability to determine which team they are traded to. This is an area where RttS still shines.

Still, after investing countless hours into my 2K10 superstar, I cannot see myself spending too much more time with my 2010 RttS player anytime soon.

Caley: I am pretty much in agreement here, although I see 2K's "quick to the majors" feel as a double-edged sword. I guess guys like Longoria are the model here, but I found it a little unrealistic and "cheap" if you will. I suppose I am accustomed to the long, yet realistic path that is in RttS. I think the basis for the My Player mode is a little too close to something like The Bigs -- here your player is a little larger than life. I like the feel that your player is a small cog in a huge organizational machine, and you have to work to achieve your star status.

On the other hand, RttS can get a bit repetitive, especially since it has not changed that much. I do like the drills, and I think they need to be at the heart of any career mode. In other words, enough of allocating points, I just want the game to make me improve not just fiddle with point scales.

I would love to see a career mode integrated into franchise mode, so I would not need to have two separate games going on. It would be pretty sweet to be playing as your franchise team only to get an alert that your player is in a big spot. You could then quick-switch to that game (like with real telecasts), play out the moment and then carry on with the team game.

Christian: I take my hat off to the developers for including a dedicated playoff mode in MLB 2K10, something I have been wanting to see for years now out of The Show. However, what I love about MLB 10 is the ability to adjust hitting and pitching difficulty independent of one another. Finally, I am able to lower my hitting difficulty (as this is an area I struggle this year) without making pitching too easy (as this is an area I have always excelled at in the MLB series). The result is an overall experience that is extremely rewarding and enjoyable.

Caley: I love the way 2K feels, especially as it relates to pitching. And the whole presentation aspect wraps up a pretty deep package -- many modes and extras like 2K Share nicely fill out the title.

As for The Show, I love the passion for the sport that the developers share: the audio highlights, the mascots, beach balls, etc. I feel like I am using a product that was designed by people who love baseball, and it was made for people who love baseball.

Let me come right out and say it, for the first time in years there are two very good baseball games. It is even better because I can actually recommend a baseball game to Xbox 360-only owners without strong reservations. MLB 10: The Show is an excellent game that comes the closest I have ever seen to replicating the sport of baseball, and it is a must-buy for anyone who has a PS3 and an interest in the sport. MLB 2K10's MLB Today feature should be worth the price of admission for many, but its terrible fielding controls hamper the total effort. Depending on your individual focus, (franchise, career mode, exhibition) each game offers something different.

If I have to pick an outright winner of the grudge match, which I will, then I choose MLB 10. The 2K developers are almost there with their baseball title, and if they can improve the fielding and some of the nagging issues that have plagued the series, MLB 2K11 could be an elite title when it is released next year.

You will not get an argument from me, Christian. You have summed up most of my feelings regarding these two games. MLB 2K is much improved. The MLB Today feature is incredible, but the fielding stinks. The Show is a superior product, but it could stand an injection of personality, especially as it relates to the franchise and presentation elements.

I will also expand upon one of your statements. You call The Show the most accurate baseball representation to date. I will go the next step: MLB 10: The Show is the closest virtual representation of any sport currently available on consoles. I like the FIFA and NHL series, but I think in terms of capturing the entire essence of a sport, The Show does it the best.