 |
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.