MLB 2K11 Demo Impressions Roundtable

Feature Article

Submitted on: 03/04/2011 by Chris Sanner, Chase Becotte, Caley Roark, Christian McLeod

What are you impressions of the MLB 2K11 demo?

Chase Becotte: Every time I think I'm out, they pull me back in.

Most of my initial thoughts about MLB 2K11 can be found in the preview I wrote a couple days ago, but this demo basically serves to cement a lot of those impressions.

I gave up on MLB 2K10 shortly after picking it up last year, but right now I don't foresee the same thing happening this year. The big three of fielding, hitting and pitching all feel improved, and the subtraction of rocket-armed outfielders and the addition of more defined skill levels for fielders helps to extinguish a lot of the fielding criticisms I had last year. I'm also liking that the AI pitchers are actually walking batters, and when I'm on the mound, I feel like I can unintentionally walk batters as well.

To keep it simple, while I don't think this game is shaping up to be a masterpiece, it does feel like the folks working on the series are finally going downhill rather than uphill.

Christian McLeod: For once, I'm with Chase. If you can look past some of its rough graphical and animation edges, the MLB 2K11 demo plays a very solid game of hardball.

Based on multiple games with the 2K11 demo, it's great to see that the game's development team took many of 2K10's biggest issues to heart. Fielding is still not as enjoyable as it should be in a baseball game -- still a bit too automatic feeling for my liking -- but I am loving the new throw meter. To be honest, I think it may be the best throw meter I have used in a baseball game to date.

On the hitting side of things, one thing that immediately jumped out to me was the hit variety, displayed beautifully via the new camera angle. In all the time I spent with the demo, I don't think I witnessed the same hit more than a few times. I was most impressed with some of the ball physics I saw, particularly one where a ball flew into center field after it rocketed off the pitcher's mound.

Yes, Miguel Tejada's face looks like a potato, and yes, I was scratching my head when my players refused to deviate from their 90-degree angled route while rounding the bases. Even so, I quite enjoyed my time with the 2K11 demo. Let's just say I would not be completely surprised if this game sells well -- I think it's going to be a lot of fun to play.

Caley Roark: I'm with you guys: I think there is a fun game of baseball buried somewhere in 2K11. However, I'm not sure the demo reflects that. I saw too many flaws in the demo to truly say that 2K11 has improved a great deal over 2K10. (For the record, I thought 2K10 was much better than 2K9.)

First, we have to look past the crazy graphics to enjoy the way it plays. Normally, I'm ok with that, but, for me, the demo just had way too many graphical oddities. The aforementioned 90-degree turns on the basepaths; the alien hybrid that is Josh Hamilton; the slowdown every time I hit a ball deep; the way players sort of "jump" between animations as if they just remembered they had something important to do; and recycled animations, like the seemingly fast-forwarded stare down after an inside pitch.

I would not say these are deal breakers, but they are hard to overlook, at least in a demo. I'm hoping that they are fixed, or at least become less noticeable, in the final build.

Beyond that, I love the presentation graphics and can't wait to hear the dynamic commentary layered on top of them. I'm getting used to the batting camera, which does a good job of letting you track the pitch all the way to the catcher's mitt. Unlike Christian, I'm not digging the in-play "hit" camera. I'd rather use a regular broadcast camera, but that's just me.

I did notice some incorrect base-running AI as well. With no outs and a man on first and third, the computer decided not to score as I turned a double play (in a scoreless game). During the instant replay, it looked like the runner just sort of froze in his secondary lead.

Simply put, I'm not seeing, at least from the demo, the jump in quality that made me appreciate 2K10.

Chris Sanner: If you are not as into realism as a hardcore baseball guy is, and if you are willing to overlook some pretty dumb AI moves, I think MLB 2K11 is going to be your type of baseball game. The Show can be a bit overwhelming to the casual baseball player, and I think 2K has wisely tried not to copy The Show's success verbatim.

However, there are problems with the game that hardcore baseball types will not be able to overlook. For instance, the Giants pulled Lincecum in the second inning when I scored two quick runs -- though this may have had something to do with the shortened game. I also found hitting to be easy, but a bump up in skill levels will fix that. Nevertheless, the meat and potatoes of the game are improved over last year in every way. As my cohorts have pointed out, fielding, hitting and pitching are all different and improved in several little nuanced ways.

In short, the casual baseball fan who just wants a fun game of hardball will face an interesting decision for once this spring. MLB 2K11 is quite fun, and a lot of the issues from last year have been ironed out. While others will pop up I'm sure -- it's the series' mantra at this point -- MLB 2K11 should be a solid option for those who just want to play a fun game of baseball.

Major League Baseball 2K11 Videos

Member Comments

# 61 elimack @ 03/04/11 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smearz


	Yeah, you're not biased, are you? That is the most ridiculous comment I've seen here.

This statement is very true. Aside from visual graphics and an additional feature here and there. The game is the same. From the cut scenes to the animations. In fact their still using the same generic baseball stances for players, instead of giving everyone sig styles

# 62 Ltrain44 @ 03/04/11 10:58 PM

All I have to say is "it's a demo from an EARLIER build". I find it funny that some people do not take this into account. It's so entertaining watching folks talk **** about the game when it's a 3 inning skin and bones demo. lol

# 63 ryan36 @ 03/04/11 11:03 PM

It's a no -win for the development team.

Release a 60 day old version of the game and hope people like it, or just hope people like it after full release.

I think with the incredible lack of info 2k has released, that people wanted more from the demo.

I think their marketing approach this year will mean a lot less Day 1 sales.

# 64 CubFan23 @ 03/04/11 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by acarrero


	The Show was a great game...in 2006, it's the same game since, until they decided to copy 2K this year with analog controls. Bottom line is The Show sort of admitted 2K was ahead of them when it comes to gameplay.

But it's ok for 2k to copy RTTS and call it my player?

# 65 BlackBetty15 @ 03/04/11 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryan36


	It's a no -win for the development team. Release a 60 day old version of the game and hope people like it, or just hope people like it after full release. I think with the incredible lack of info 2k has released, that people wanted more from the demo. I think their marketing approach this year will mean a lot less Day 1 sales.

I completley agree with this post. 2K is and has been the worst in marketing, community interactment, and in overall decison making concerning thier baseball franchise. I mean, sean bailey and his staff really needs to read a john maxwell book. Either that or hire Lane Kiffin, at least he brings the bark, unfortunatley he lacks the bite. Anything is better than what is currentley there. ESPECIALLY ronnie...that kid has no idea how to interact with fans or represent a product. Ramone Russell....if your reading this, throw ronnie a life raft QUICK....that dude is drowning for real.

# 66 BearClaw @ 03/05/11 12:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CubFan23


	But it's ok for 2k to copy RTTS and call it my player?

But it's okay for SCEA to copy Madden NFL Superstar and call it Road to the Show?

# 67 jeffy777 @ 03/05/11 01:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryan36


	I'm a franchise guy. That's where I spend most of my time. The game with sliders PLAYED somewhat sim, but to say the entirety of the game was an accurate sim, was a stretch, IMO. I say this about The Show as well.

I'm not saying the entirety of 2K10 was an accurate sim. I'm saying a good portion of the gameplay was, specifically the parts I mentioned (hitting, AI pitching, plate battles, My Player fielding). The things that were lacking were the user pitching (too accurate), regular fielding (too automatic and no errors), and stealing (too random). All of those things have been addressed this year, plus the physics and hit variety has been improved, as well as more sliders have been added to give it even greater flexibility. Based on what I've experienced with the demo, and after setting the demo difficulty to "Hard" (with the 360 profile trick), 2K11 should play a pretty good game of sim baseball. I'm not saying "Hard" is the perfect setting, but it shows that fielding assist can be turned off, pitching can become a lot harder (which means the pitching accuracy slider should be quite effective), as well as hitting, if you need more of a challenge. Personally, I thought hitting and stealing were the two things that were too tricky on the "Hard" setting, so it seems with the right difficulty setting, (with some possible slider tweaks catered to each person's skill level), the game should play a nice game of baseball.

Now other than on-the-field gameplay, the heavier franchise stuff remains to be seen, so I'm keeping my fingers crossed there. So far, the dynamic player ratings, deeper hot/cold system, and reoccuring injury system all sound pretty nice in theory. Now we'll just have to see how well it all works with the supposedly updated progression system and simulation engine.

# 68 Spanky @ 03/05/11 02:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WAT


	I played both demos with my brothers 18 year old friend who is not a big baseball fan or gamer at all. He was kinda like my guinea pig experiment to figure out which game he would consider better and have more fun with at the end of it all. (didnt tell him that though).

Outstanding test!

It's kind of like replacing someone's regular coffee with Folgers crystals.

# 69 SDwinder @ 03/05/11 03:49 AM

I have to shake my head at the hopeful 2k11 comments and the comparisons its fans try to do to The Show. It still is apples and oranges. Just FYI, those who actually play the real game for a living, only play The Show, and have since 2k8 was an abortion. We liked 2K7, but the whole pitch stick was a joke from the beginning starting with the meatball problem. It certainly has gotten better, but when it is tougher to throw a curveball to a spot in the game than in real life, it just loses us. The system is just not consistent enough to get it right.

We all had XBoxes until 2008, then bought PS3s to play The Show starting with 08 and have not looked back. Every year we take a look just to see how much 2K has screwed up their baseball game, but it does appear finally they are putting out a decent option for XBox only players. If I had to grade the demos, The Show being an A and 2K being a B-.

Yes, there are times The Show does feel a little stale or boring, but that IS baseball! It can be very repetitive until those special matchups and moments happen. They may only happen a few times a game. This is represented in The Show. If you want more arcade excitement, get The Bigs. That seems to be more suited to most of the posts I have read here.

The Show does the very best job of any baseball game I have played in the last 25 years of replicating the true chess match of the pitcher/batter duel and being able to work deep counts, and benefit from it. High Heat PC modded was very good as well. MVP PC was a great game after it was modded, but out of the box it was lacking in many areas. People forget these things sometimes. My peers and I were big time MVP PC modded players, but became enamored with the presentation and graphics of 2k7 when it came out. The Show has far and away exceeded our expectations the last 4 years now adding to the gameplay and feel of the game as well as graphically doing the upgrades with animations and AI, and now the analog sticks. I like their analog stick better than 2ks for pitching. Not sure I am on board with the analog hitting though. More time is needed, but we will see.

If you like 2k11, great. Have fun and get your moneys worth. But make no mistake, The Show is head and shoulders above 2K at this point in simulating a real baseball experience. Not only the mental aspects, but how it is replicated on the field. Either way it looks like more people will be having a solid fun baseball experience this season than in quite a few years!

# 70 Dazraz @ 03/05/11 04:14 AM

I think slamming 2K as being just a pick up & play game compared to The Show is a bit harsh. What The Show does so well is animate the many different scenarios baseball throws up in an unbelievably realistic way. The AI that goes behind the scenes to generate such scenarios however often appear to be pre scripted during a game as opposed to random events. In certain situations in a game you will throw a ball no matter how well you've attempted to locate a pitch just so the game can trigger a commentary moment. Another area with The Show that really pains me is when a team is losing by 3 or 4 runs going into the final 3 innings the losing teams batters seem to get an attribute boost & consistently rally to either tie or get within a run of the opposition.
The Show depicts the sport of baseball beautifully but after playing through many many games it becomes apparent the game is far more scripted & alot less realistic then it looks.
I plan on picking up both games this year. Although it's obvious which game is going to be the more visually appealing I feel it's time for a fresh baseball experience this year.

# 71 Yeah...THAT Guy @ 03/05/11 04:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CubFan23


	But it's ok for 2k to copy RTTS and call it my player?

Personally, I've never even played The Show because I have an Xbox, so I have no opinion on which game is better or anything, but honestly dude? Like RTTS was the first career mode in sports... Madden, NCAA Football, and if we're not talking only team sports, games like Tiger Woods and Top Spin all had career modes before RTTS.

# 72 rudyjuly2 @ 03/05/11 05:39 AM

2K11 will be a MUCH better sim of baseball than 2K10. I can't call 2K10 a good sim because the pitch accuracy was way too high. I rarely walked anyone. It was too easy to hit HRs to the opposite field. The infield sucked up almost every ground ball. Hit variety was low (very few popups on the infield or around home plate). There were no injuries or errors. It was very fair to call 2K10 a poor sim for these reasons. All of this was fixed for 2K11 although I'm still not completely sure about the pull vs. push power.

I judge how sim a baseball game is based mostly on the results of the batter vs. pitcher duel (on offense and while in the field). For me, 2K11 will most likely be the best sim I have ever played. I love the improvements in hitting. The ability to slow down the pitch speed to my comfort zone allows me to pull the ball well and draw walks at a more normal rate (most teams average 3-4). This is huge for me and the customization that 2K allows here is great. With the new pitch accuracy slider I will walk more batters than the paltry few I did last year. Can't wait for Tuesday!

# 73 AmazingMets @ 03/05/11 08:17 AM

Who cares if it a game is sim or not? It is a video game and the only thing that should matter is if it the game is fun. Once you got good sliders, which i did for 2K10, the game is fun. And I am expecting nothing different from 2K11. If anything because of the new fielding stuff, it's going to be even more fun!

# 74 bigfnjoe96 @ 03/05/11 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDwinder


	I have to shake my head at the hopeful 2k11 comments and the comparisons its fans try to do to The Show. It still is apples and oranges. Just FYI, those who actually play the real game for a living, only play The Show, and have since 2k8 was an abortion. We liked 2K7, but the whole pitch stick was a joke from the beginning starting with the meatball problem. It certainly has gotten better, but when it is tougher to throw a curveball to a spot in the game than in real life, it just loses us. The system is just not consistent enough to get it right. We all had XBoxes until 2008, then bought PS3s to play The Show starting with 08 and have not looked back. Every year we take a look just to see how much 2K has screwed up their baseball game, but it does appear finally they are putting out a decent option for XBox only players. If I had to grade the demos, The Show being an A and 2K being a B-. Yes, there are times The Show does feel a little stale or boring, but that IS baseball! It can be very repetitive until those special matchups and moments happen. They may only happen a few times a game. This is represented in The Show. If you want more arcade excitement, get The Bigs. That seems to be more suited to most of the posts I have read here. The Show does the very best job of any baseball game I have played in the last 25 years of replicating the true chess match of the pitcher/batter duel and being able to work deep counts, and benefit from it. High Heat PC modded was very good as well. MVP PC was a great game after it was modded, but out of the box it was lacking in many areas. People forget these things sometimes. My peers and I were big time MVP PC modded players, but became enamored with the presentation and graphics of 2k7 when it came out. The Show has far and away exceeded our expectations the last 4 years now adding to the gameplay and feel of the game as well as graphically doing the upgrades with animations and AI, and now the analog sticks. I like their analog stick better than 2ks for pitching. Not sure I am on board with the analog hitting though. More time is needed, but we will see. If you like 2k11, great. Have fun and get your moneys worth. But make no mistake, The Show is head and shoulders above 2K at this point in simulating a real baseball experience. Not only the mental aspects, but how it is replicated on the field. Either way it looks like more people will be having a solid fun baseball experience this season than in quite a few years!

ooooooooo righty then....

# 75 sportyguyfl31 @ 03/05/11 10:03 AM

Im considering buying both games this year.

Why?

When I play franchise mode..I want to be in and out, I need the game to move along. I hate simming games, and want the option to play shorter seasons so I can play multiple seasons.

The Show was too slow for me in that regard.

Online league, I'll stick to the Show 100% of the time.

# 76 sroz39 @ 03/05/11 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoxFan01605


	Not the deepest roundtable IMO...I didn't feel like anything was added to the discussions that have already taken place in the demo impressions (and honestly, I felt this lacked some of the detail some guys provided there as well). That said, I don't know that there is one specific thing you can point to that makes 2K11 feel better than 2K10, so maybe that's part of it. What I mean is, that the improvements in each area aren't overwhelming on their own, but FINALLY when I play the demo, the sum of it's parts seem to add up to baseball a lot more accurately than previous years (albeit based on a small and incomplete sample). For me at least, that's about as good a sign as any that VC has gotten things turned around (or at the very least, are well on their way) as previous games felt less cohesive. As for the whom 2K caters too thing, I can kind of see how one would think the way it was brought up in the article, though I disagree with the conclusion. The "casual game" comment about 2K is nothing new and the game has more of a "loose" feel to it than it's competition. I don't think "hardcore baseball" vs "casual baseball" is the disconnect though. I thinks it's more in line with the type of experience you're looking for from a video game and how each game approaches drawing people in. I think as a video game, 2K plays at a faster, more action-oriented clip. I hesitate to label it "arcade" because it's not an over-the-top caricature of the sport like an NBA Jam or The Bigs. It has not to this point, however, been presented as a strong sim, but more a "pick up and play" experience. Now, that's not to say it can't be a good simulation experience, and I feel with many of the fixes for 2K11, we might see just that (and even in 2K10, with some tweaking, you could get a solid base going). It has certainly made a steady move back in that direction over the last few years. 2K baseball engages you through it's control scheme in a way that can draw you in on it's own merits. It plays more like a video game first, baseball second. Again, that's not to say it can't or doesn't represent the sport (and it's also not to say that certain baseball aspects like stat tracking or scouting, for example, aren't better represented)...just that it's appeal isn't primarily how the sport is represented, but how you, as a gamer/baseball fan, interact with it. The gripe people usually have with The Show is that it plays at a slower, more deliberate pace. It tries to get your attention as a baseball fan first and not so much by how you interact with it. A lot of it's features are designed to immerse you in the details and nuance of the sport rather than create excitement through a secondary experience or via control scheme. It's kind of like it's operating under the premise of the sport being the draw, when 2K/VC's focus appears to be trying to draw the user to the sport. One could fairly argue a good case for either approach (innovation vs consistency; control vs derivation, etc), but that's kind of the point-it's not really about one being better suited to "hardcore" baseball fans than the other as that's 100% subjective. It's more about the differences in how the games each attempt to draw in their respective fans.

Excellent post and pretty much sums up how I feel to a T.

I like options. I get bored of playing the same game over and over again, no matter how great it is. The Show is outstanding but I labour through things in it at times because of the pace. That's not a knock on the game because that's the pace of the sport it's replicating. I'm just not in the mood all the time to devote an hour and a half to play one game.

Does that make the pace of 2K less sim? I guess in a roundabout way, yes. But it doesn't make the gameplay less sim. I hear complaints from some people about all the meters present in the game and whatnot (though to be honest, aside from the throw meter, I'm not sure what other meter is really present at any time. But I digress). I want the visual representation of what I'm inputting on the controller.

When I'm on the field and actually throwing a ball or swinging a bat and I screw up, I can feel that I did it. In a game, that's not very possible. I want something to show me WHY what happened on screen actually happened. That's why I loved MVP's meters and quick replay when you swung and missed (along with different shades of green on a ball tracker to show "ideal" timing on a swing). It was fantastic and tangible evidence of why something occured.

One of my gripes about The Show is when I bat, I swing and miss and my feedback is "Very Early" "Early" "Just Late" and "Very Late". Great. What does that really mean though? I want to SEE what that means. 2K's game is terrific at this (and the batting feedback is only going to get batter as frames of animation are added to the timing window, like it clearly did from 2K10 to 2K11) and I want this in a game. But just because there's a bunch of visual representation of what you did with the controller, does that mean that 2K is less sim? Of course not, especially when there's still ratings and other things going on "under the hood" that also factor in.

The two games approach the game of baseball differently and I think that's awesome. With the two games, whatever I'm feeling that day, I will get some sort of fix as far as baseball goes.

# 77 ericdrum @ 03/05/11 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDwinder


	Just FYI, those who actually play the real game for a living, only play The Show, and have since 2k8 was an abortion. We liked 2K7, but the whole pitch stick was a joke from the beginning starting with the meatball problem.

roflcopter. Shouldn't you be out on a ledge somewhere? This post is nonsense.

# 78 Kernel Pie @ 03/05/11 11:32 AM

I really feel this game was designed for Hurry-Up Baseball. With the replays and cut scenes looking so poor, there is no point to leaving them on--just turn 'em off and leave 'em off. Once you get over that disappointing fact, you're left with just the real-time gameplay between the lines, plus the sound of the crowd and the commentary--and I think 2k is solid on all of those.

The pitching part of the game looks really smooth--you can't deny that. The pitcher's motion is fluid, the flight of the ball to the plate is awesome (with fastballs having a beautifully straight and natural line), and the right stick gestures are challenging and intuitive. Yes, the catcher and ump throwbacks are whack, but that can be overlooked I think. Bottom line on the pitching: it's fun, responsive, difficult (especially with the new variable strike zone), and it looks awesome. So that part of the game is a mega win.

The hitting is good, also, with the new post-contact camera and the ability to better tell balls and strikes. I don't know if this is true or not, but I feel like I can tell pitches way more easily than 2k10--especially high fastballs. You can now take pitches and hope to get a call, which is really nice and adds to the plate battle. Graphically, there's less to critique when batting, because you're mostly looking at a tiny white ball and not your character, so as long as it looks decent it's good enough for me. The real test of the hitting, though, will be the new post-hit camera. This will be the make-or-break aspect of the game. If framerate issues persist, if you cannot tell a hit from an out well enough, or if it just doesn't feel "right," the game will sink. If hitting a screaming double reallly feels rewarding, the game will succeed. Will wait for Tuesday to judge this.

Before I write a book here, I'll just say that fielding shows a lot of promise and could be a really great aspect to the game, and we know the commentary is tight and the crowd noise seems greatly improved--though I'm not 100% on the crowd yet. I'll wait for the full game to judge.

All in all, it looks like a really solid game of baseball as far as controls, gameplay, and difficulty are concerned. I am really psyched to pitch 9 innings with this one. I am still disappointed, though, that I will have to 86 the cut scenes and replays--they would have been nice for more immersion. Can't have everything though.

# 79 nemesis04 @ 03/05/11 11:37 AM

The problem I have with this game is it struggles at times with the core fundamental rules of playing the game of baseball. Put aside the meter graphics, the hitting, fielding and pitching etc. When it stumbles out of the gate with the basics, its sim persona is definitely in question imo. I don't want to hear sliders will fix things because there are AI things going on which tell me there are not baseball savvy people involved with certain key elements of the game.

# 80 thundergatti @ 03/05/11 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sroz39


	Excellent post and pretty much sums up how I feel to a T. I like options. I get bored of playing the same game over and over again, no matter how great it is. The Show is outstanding but I labour through things in it at times because of the pace. That's not a knock on the game because that's the pace of the sport it's replicating. I'm just not in the mood all the time to devote an hour and a half to play one game. Does that make the pace of 2K less sim? I guess in a roundabout way, yes. But it doesn't make the gameplay less sim. I hear complaints from some people about all the meters present in the game and whatnot (though to be honest, aside from the throw meter, I'm not sure what other meter is really present at any time. But I digress). I want the visual representation of what I'm inputting on the controller. When I'm on the field and actually throwing a ball or swinging a bat and I screw up, I can feel that I did it. In a game, that's not very possible. I want something to show me WHY what happened on screen actually happened. That's why I loved MVP's meters and quick replay when you swung and missed (along with different shades of green on a ball tracker to show "ideal" timing on a swing). It was fantastic and tangible evidence of why something occured. One of my gripes about The Show is when I bat, I swing and miss and my feedback is "Very Early" "Early" "Just Late" and "Very Late". Great. What does that really mean though? I want to SEE what that means. 2K's game is terrific at this (and the batting feedback is only going to get batter as frames of animation are added to the timing window, like it clearly did from 2K10 to 2K11) and I want this in a game. But just because there's a bunch of visual representation of what you did with the controller, does that mean that 2K is less sim? Of course not, especially when there's still ratings and other things going on "under the hood" that also factor in. The two games approach the game of baseball differently and I think that's awesome. With the two games, whatever I'm feeling that day, I will get some sort of fix as far as baseball goes.

I second this. A serviceable, play-able baseball game has predictability. You can see and/or feel how things went right or went wrong. I think MVP 05 did a better job of capturing this realisim than 2k's games have, but 2k's gameplay is still above (and actually on a completely different level) its contemporaries.

« Previous 1 2 345 6 7 Next »

More Links