Re: Player Face comparison
Not bad. I'd give it 8-2 or 7-3 in Show's favor though.
Kind of an "ouch"...LOL
Not bad. I'd give it 8-2 or 7-3 in Show's favor though.
Kind of an "ouch"...LOL
-
#21
Re: Player Face comparison
pastapadre is the most non credible show fanboy there is. Why not write an article comparing the control schemes between the two games? Seriously has that guy had one good thing to say about this game except intentionally picking out things to pan it? And besides the faces in 2k9 look decent in comparison imo. Take your blinders off. We all know the show is slightly better graphically and overall.
This game once they patch it is just as good if not better than the show 08... It also has things going for it that the show doesnt. For one you dont need to own a ps3. Two online play works. 3 the controls are more fun. Drawbacks are it needs to be tweaked out of the box and has some glitches.
I'm sorry for beating a dead horse but listening to two weeks of people bitching, trashing this game and doing the same is even worse. Shut up about the Show. This game is great and is a very legitament option for those of us that dont want to spend that money.Last edited by kGinGreen; 03-12-2009, 01:09 AM.Comment
-
#22
Re: Player Face comparison
I think the faces are both hit and misses, 2k is as usual more mixed when it comes to textures, lack of cohesion. While the show has crazy eyes and some players look like zombies.
I think 2k misses more blatant when they fail compared to the show though.
Btw has pastpadre ever liked a 2k game?Comment
-
#23
Re: Player Face comparison
I think overall, while they were both hit and miss to a degree, The Show's looked more "life-like" and had more accuracy than 2K9.
This shouldn't be particularly surprising to anyone though. The Show has good facial models overall, while 2K has always put more focus on the signature styles.
IMO, The Show closed the gap on that a bit, but 2K still has much better body proportions. Go figure...lol.
It's all give and take. My only real beef with 2K graphics are the textures (for the players particularly). Everything looks kind of washed out and melted together.Comment
-
#24
Re: Player Face comparison
I definitely seem to be in the minority here, but I think the MLB2k9 pictures look better overall; they are more consistent. The Show faces look more like cartoons to me and some of them have oversized features. For me, when I'm playing, it's less about whether the player looks EXACTLY like his real-life counterpart, than whether he looks natural within the context of the game. Having played both, I actually think 2k9 is better in this respect.
Flame away.Last edited by TimLawNYC; 03-13-2009, 04:41 PM.Comment
-
#26
Re: Player Face comparison
Look, man, anyone who says MLB 2K's faces look better are either A. partially blind or B. sticking up for the game because they like the XBOX 360 more than a PS3. Put your emotions aside and look at the images without any prejudice. Seriously look at them and if you can tell me that The Show's faces don't look better, then go jump off a bridge.M!keComment
-
#27
Re: Player Face comparison
Yeah, the shows faces DO look better than 2K9's, but do they really look like the actual player 100%? No way, maybe a little resemblance from both games, but none of them are 100& accurate. What's with all the white guys with those cat eyes in the show?Michigan Wolverines
NY JETS
NY Mets
NY Knicks :(
Comment
-
#28
Re: Player Face comparison
I agree with you that some of the faces in The Show don't look like the actual player. The lighting techniques and skin textures The Show uses makes the faces look better than MLB 2K9 though. Don't read me twisted. I don't own a PS3 or an XBOX 360. I play MLB 2K9 on PC and it looks great, but I'm not gonna deny what is obvious.M!keComment
-
#29
Re: Player Face comparison
Honestly both games have ugly/weird looking faces. It's like picking the lesser of two evils in regards to this particular aspect of the games.Comment
Comment