News Post

MLB '08: The Show Review

12:41 PM - March 12, 2008 by RaychelSnr

We have just posted our MLB '08: The Show review, written by Matt Gagnon.

Quote:


	I don't think I'm alone when I say that barring a few examples, sports titles for the latest crop of consoles haven't exactly blown our socks off. It always seems as if there's some glaring problem that holds a game back. We've rarely experienced a complete title that makes us appreciate the new technology we've invested so much into. That is, until MLB 08: The Show for the PS3 hit store shelves this month.

Game: MLB '08: The ShowReader Score: 8.5/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS2 / PS3 / PSPVotes for game: 97 - View All

Member Comments

# 41 Eski33 @ 03/17/08 03:15 PM

I will say that this game is better than advertised. I purchased a PS3 (which is my second one since I traded in my original) just to play The Show. Sony never thought that a sweet sports game could be a system seller, especially since most next-gen sports games have suffered visually or have lacked in depth.

I hope Sony gets on the wagon and releases some downloadable content, such as classic stadiums, teams and more classic uniforms.

# 42 WindyCity4Eva @ 03/18/08 06:51 AM

Hey everyone i was wondering does The Show have stadium animations like in Shea when the apple comes up or in Houston when the train comes out? I know stadium animations aren't that big of a deal but i think they are so cool and add a little more realism to the game.

# 43 Pared @ 03/18/08 10:19 AM

Great review.

Despite the 6+ pages of bickering, I'll give my take on it briefly:

A game that is obviously created with online vs. play being an added bonus should not be negated in a review for average online play. It can only bring up the score. The core of this game is baseball, made to be played in the many different modes. It's quite obvious online play is there "just to be there" and can only be an added benefit to a solid title.

However, if this game were an online only game such as Warhawk or online play was such a huge factor similar to CoD4, then it most certainly can hinder how a game is scored.

It's all in the perspective. To limit a baseball game for intermittent online play when not ONE baseball game has ever had solid online play would be irresponsible as a reviewer, IMO. You mention it, like Matt has, and you move on. Online is obviously not the core element in this title and should not be treated as such when there are 4 other modes. Mind you... something everyone is overlooking... there is an online community with message boards, downloadable sliders and weekly roster updates.... It baffles me that this is even an issue.

Again, great review.

# 44 Pared @ 03/18/08 10:47 AM

I'm not going to go back and forth with you for 6 pages so I'll just add this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oldschool17


	The CORE Element of this game is ALL that it has to offer.

That's your take and that's fine. However, you're completely demeaning the definition of the word core here by saying it is the same thing as all. Two different words, two different meanings no matter the context they are used in.

Again, if you look at your comments you're harping on a game for what it could (or should, according to you) focus on in terms of online play instead of what it does. That's not how reviews work.

Happy gaming.

# 45 djep @ 03/18/08 11:43 AM

I don't see online play as an added bonus. It is a feature that any good sports title should have. When was the last time we had a decent sports game come out without online play? It's as much a part of the landscape as franchise mode, whether it is as important to you or not is a different question.

But Oldschool, you have to look at the total package. Maybe online isn't top-notch at the moment (don't all sports games have initial issues with online play?) but in the grand scheme of sports games, given the standards that have been set how can you not rate this one as one of the all-time greats?

# 46 Pared @ 03/18/08 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djep


	I don't see online play as an added bonus. It is a feature that any good sports title should have. When was the last time we had a decent sports game come out without online play? It's as much a part of the landscape as franchise mode, whether it is as important to you or not is a different question.

Again, my comments taken out of context.

When was the last time we saw a sports game without sliders? Yet, how many times do we see a game released with customizable sliders that some don't usually have an effect?

Exactly.

# 47 djep @ 03/18/08 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pared


	A game that is obviously created with online vs. play being an added bonus should not be negated in a review for average online play. It can only bring up the score. The core of this game is baseball, made to be played in the many different modes. It's quite obvious online play is there "just to be there" and can only be an added benefit to a solid title. However, if this game were an online only game such as Warhawk or online play was such a huge factor similar to CoD4, then it most certainly can hinder how a game is scored.

Is that in context enough for you?

"A game that is obviously created with online vs. play being an added bonus should not be negated in a review for average online play." Online vs. play being an added bonus? Modes like RTTS are added bonuses. Online play has been standard in sports games for most of the past decade.

"When was the last time we saw a sports game without sliders? Yet, how many times do we see a game released with customizable sliders that some don't usually have an effect?" FIFA, Winning Eleven, Tiger Woods, NASCAR, F1:CE, Top Spin 2....none of these have sliders. Yet, they still feature online versus play.

# 48 SoxChamp @ 03/18/08 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oldschool17


	here we go again...I'm having problems with the continual oversight/denial that Online and H2h is an afterthought/added Bonus...I don't think so and here's why: Online and H2H play is not an added bonus..Sports games in general since their inception were made to be played against other people and opponents...There were no seasons, franchises, editing players etc in the early versions of sports games...But there was always H2H and even ONLINE. ONline and H2H has been and always will be a Major Component of Sports Games. Before there were season/franchise options there was only one game vs the CPU or H2H and Online (anyone recall X-Band) So to comment that Online is almost an afterthought or an added bonus is IMO erroneous...Its a major feature just as Franchise and it should be treated and scored as such. The CORE Element of this game is ALL that it has to offer. Maybe Chris or one of devs can give their take on how Online is perceived by the people who make the game. We have ONLINE communities that are based on ONLINE play...ONLINE Leagues...A whole forum devoted to Online play...Now just to make a point where is the Franchise Forum or Online based franchise communities?...I know and realize franchise is huge but to recognize that and not understand that online is as, if not more, important would be naive IMO. In fact your last parting comments even bring it all the more clear as to how Online is a Major Component in all games...Companies just aren't getting it right thus far and reviews are being far too forgiving. For one moment I'd like to see Franchise mode broken...I think most of you would be singing a far different tune when the Online Community came on here and said..."Franchise is not a major part of the game so this game is still a 9-10"

The more you drone on about this, the more credibility you lose, IMO. You've stated your thoughts. We've stated ours. Move on. Continuing to whine and complain about this review is not going to change the fact that you think online play sucks. For someone who doesn't care that much about reviews, you sure do care alot about this one. You've contradicted yourself in just about every post. Earlier, you told me to stop focusing on the 6.5 number, yet you can't stop focusing on the 9. The reviewer mentioned THREE TIMES that online play was lacking. Isn't that enough? Stop focusing on the NUMBER. Isn't that what you told me earlier? This entire thread is out of control and on the verge of a lockdown if we can't just agree to disagree and move on. You're turning this debate into a sideshow.

# 49 ChaseB @ 03/18/08 04:22 PM

Not to continue this argument but I still don't get why some think the online play is so bad. There's some lag at points but it's nothing like last year where most games would lag out or just be miserable to play. Plus there's so much else the online offers outside of the H2H play itself.

# 50 Pared @ 03/18/08 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slizeezyc


	Plus there's so much else the online offers outside of the H2H play itself.

I made reference to this in my initial post. People are overlooking the other features available. It doesn't make sense to continue in a circular argument where some just don't get it.

Hell, you can even send in your feedback on what should be in the new roster updates. Unparalleled by any console sports game released to this day...

# 51 SoxChamp @ 03/18/08 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slizeezyc


	Plus there's so much else the online offers outside of the H2H play itself.

He doesn't understand this. There is no use in continuing the discussion.

The one area that he personally enjoys is not up to par with the rest of this terrific game, so he feels the entire review should suffer. 6.5? Utterly asinine.

# 52 SoxChamp @ 03/18/08 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oldschool17


	I never stated the game should be a 6.5...That was just an arbitrary number thrown out there as an example...If your gonna attempt to explain and/or discuss something I've commented p[lease be kind enough to get your facts straight...Thanks

Really? On Page 2, you said that without reliable online play, this game is a 6.5-7.0. Those are YOUR words. That's YOUR "review score". You can't tell me to forget your so-called "arbitrary" number of 6.5 when you can't stop focusing on the 9 it received from the review. We're talking strictly numbers here, right? Afterall, it was mentioned in the review THREE TIMES that online play was unreliable.

If you are going to continue to hammer home redundant point after redundant point, at least avoid being a hypocrite while doing so. Thanks.

This discussion is over with me. Happy gaming.

# 53 huskerfan4life @ 03/19/08 12:49 AM

I have now been playing exhibition games for the last 14 days and i must say that the game is totally awsome and does put you in the game of baseball and it is the most realistic baseball simulation that i have seen in a very long time

# 54 bh446066 @ 03/21/08 11:15 AM

nothing like reading through 10 pages of bickering.......

# 55 bkrich83 @ 03/21/08 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bh446066


	nothing like reading through 10 pages of bickering.......

Happens after every review. There's always some clown hung up on the score of the game, and thus must tell everyone why the score is "wrong". As if a score based on a personal opinion can be wrong.

Such is life.

# 56 agonytheclown @ 03/27/08 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by huskerfan4life


	I have now been playing exhibition games for the last 14 days and i must say that the game is totally awsome and does put you in the game of baseball and it is the most realistic baseball simulation that i have seen in a very long time

Wow. You think that The Show is a simulation? You must be new to gaming, or computing in general. Try OOTP if you really want to play a "simulation" There aren't any animations in that game, but you will for sure being playing a realistic game of baseball.

# 57 SoxChamp @ 03/30/08 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by agonytheclown


	Wow. You think that The Show is a simulation? You must be new to gaming, or computing in general. Try OOTP if you really want to play a "simulation" There aren't any animations in that game, but you will for sure being playing a realistic game of baseball.

I really hate when people try to compare games like The Show to OOTP. They are two completely different games, and I'm hard-pressed to actually call OOTP a "game". For a console baseball game WITH GRAPHICS, The Show is a terrific simulation that plays an incredible game of baseball. I'd love to know how a text-based generator can be considered a "simulation" of anything, other than reading. No thanks. Nothing makes you feel more on the *outside* of a sport than a game where you have to read everything and see nothing. Heck, even GM's that watch from the press box see more action than people "playing" OOTP. Granted, I admire it's statistical engine, but it's not a simulation. It's a stat generator, and nothing more. Now that's what I call fun! You said he'd be playing a realistic game of baseball. I fail to see where playing is actually involved.

If anything, I'd love to see The Show incorporate the guys from OOTP into the development process and mold the two games.

# 58 Eddie1967 @ 03/30/08 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoxChamp


	I really hate when people try to compare games like The Show to OOTP. They are two completely different games, and I'm hard-pressed to actually call OOTP a "game". For a console baseball game WITH GRAPHICS, The Show is a terrific simulation that plays an incredible game of baseball. I'd love to know how a text-based generator can be considered a "simulation" of anything, other than reading. No thanks. Nothing makes you feel more on the outside of a sport than a game where you have to read everything and see nothing. Heck, even GM's that watch from the press box see more action than people "playing" OOTP. Granted, I admire it's statistical engine, but it's not a simulation. It's a stat generator, and nothing more. Now that's what I call fun! You said he'd be playing a realistic game of baseball. I fail to see where playing is actually involved. If anything, I'd love to see The Show incorporate the guys from OOTP into the development process and mold the two games.

play ********>play_w("P0363500")

(pl

)v. played, play�ing, plays
v.intr.1. To occupy oneself in amusement, sport, or other recreation: children playing with toys.
2. a. To take part in a game: No minors are eligible to play.
b. To participate in betting; gamble.

3. To act in jest or sport: They're not arguing in earnest, they're just playing.
4. To deal or behave carelessly or indifferently; toy. See Synonyms at flirt.
5. To behave or converse sportively or playfully.
6. To act or conduct oneself in a specified way: play fair; an investor who plays cautiously.
7. To act, especially in a dramatic production.
8. Music

Just thought I would help you out there.

# 59 SoxChamp @ 03/30/08 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eddie1967


	play******>play_w("P0363500")(pl)v. played, play�ing, plays** v.intr.1. To occupy oneself in amusement, sport, or other recreation: children playing with toys. 2. a. To take part in a game: No minors are eligible to play. b. To participate in betting; gamble. 3. To act in jest or sport: They're not arguing in earnest, they're just playing. 4. To deal or behave carelessly or indifferently; toy. See Synonyms at flirt. 5. To behave or converse sportively or playfully. 6. To act or conduct oneself in a specified way: play fair; an investor who plays cautiously. 7. To act, especially in a dramatic production. 8. Music Just thought I would help you out there.

Thanks. I can't believe I misplaced my dictionary. Thank God you were there to rescue me. All of a sudden, OOTP makes sense. Whew!

# 60 Eddie1967 @ 03/30/08 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoxChamp


	Thanks. I can't believe I misplaced my dictionary. Thank God you were there to rescue me. All of a sudden, OOTP makes sense. Whew!

LOL, that's what I'm here for, to help you out. No problem.

« Previous 1 234 Next »

More Links

MLB '08: The Show Review