05:49 PM - January 13, 2010 by Jamin23
MLB 2K10 News Post
Major League Baseball 2K10 Videos
Member Comments
# 21
RoyalBoyle78 @ 01/13/10 07:47 PM
well I came away unimpressed, the screens look like the sane old MLB2k, why in the world are all the players legs HUGE?
# 22
SoxFan01605 @ 01/13/10 08:19 PM
Eh...looks about the same mix of good and bad. On a positive note this picture is one thing I do like about 2K's presentational style...
It makes for a pretty realistic shot IMO.
It makes for a pretty realistic shot IMO.
Personally I think the screens look nice, and they're better then 2k9. I'm not surprise to hear certain posters complain like they are. I'm not even going to go there. For someone to say it looks the same as 2k9 just shows their agenda.
# 24
EnigmaNemesis @ 01/13/10 09:49 PM
Or the fact that the preview said the game got worse graphically compared to 2K9 to make up for the frame-rate.
So what does that say about these shots again? Same thing 2K has been doing for years? I think so. Considering the screenshots look better than 2K9, but hands on says otherwise.
So what does that say about these shots again? Same thing 2K has been doing for years? I think so. Considering the screenshots look better than 2K9, but hands on says otherwise.
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
We'll have to see gameplay videos for confirmation, or play the demo if/when it comes out.
# 27
EnigmaNemesis @ 01/13/10 10:00 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
I see, this is all making sense now.
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 29
SoxFan01605 @ 01/13/10 10:28 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
I looked back at some early 2K9 pictures, and they looked fine. That's what's funny to me about your comment. I didn't think (aside from those horrible textures on gloves, etc that I already mentioned) 2K9 looked bad at all. So to act as though saying they look roughly the same is a slight or "agenda" is a pretty unfair generalization. If anything, it would be relatively good news, considering that one hands-on said the graphics took a hit.
If you care to point out what you find particularly better, I'd love to read it. (seriously...not being snarky here) Regardless of what either of us see or don't, it's only a handful of early pictures...I don't see why lines need to be drawn.
EDIT: and here's a picture of 2K9 (actually from a game):
Looking at this I think some of the so-called upgrades that have been listed by posters are mere over-analyzing. The detail of the colors looked a bit sharper in a couple of the 2K10 pics, that much I do see.
|
|||||||||||||
|
EDIT: here's a more accurate screenshot:
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 33
SoxFan01605 @ 01/13/10 10:47 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
Again, that's not trashing the game...as I thought aside from the equipment textures and faces, the graphics were solid in 2K9. My other point was, 5 pictures isn't enough to determine the graphical state of 2K10 either way. I'll leave it alone as some people tend to be far too defensive (not you Jeffy) about this stuff. That is all!
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 35
bigfnjoe96 @ 01/13/10 10:57 PM
For early screens, 2k10 shots seem tighter graphically. I'm liking the way the player models look also
2k9
2k10
2k9
2k10
2k9
2k10
2k9
2k10
2k9
2k10
2k9
2k10
Looks horrible also looks like I wont even give 2K a chance this year. If it stays looking like this, I wont even spend the $7 to rent it.
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 38
ShowTyme15 @ 01/13/10 11:10 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
I can't tell much difference in those comparison picks. The only thing different is there seems to be less blur this year resulting in some sharper images.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Post A Comment