NBA 2k12 Review [IGN]

[Pared]

Re: NBA 2k12 Review [IGN]

first, ign is probably where you go to get your favorable review. i like 2k, but their way of handling the marketing this year irks me.

second, just because it's better than last year doesn't mean it should be scoring the same or higher. if that was the case, wouldn't updated rosters count as an improvement and therefore nba 2k11.5 would be a 9.5?

Not sure what you mean about your first comment. But about the second - no, because IGN and other sites has proven time and time again that reviews are not additive - they unique scores based on the content year to year.

As with all sites like IGN and Gamespot, I would say take with a grain of salt. But when someone opens up with the fact they were playing 2k11 ALL year and then they consider THIS to be the best basketball game ever, then you give it a bit more "value" in what it brings to the table.

But that's just my personal opinion. Feel free to have your own - but this reviewer shows he is aware about sports games in general, something I've not seen common with IGN's reviewers over the years.

Either way - the best reviewer will always be yourself - no one else.

[coolcras7]

Re: NBA 2k12 Review [IGN]

first, ign is probably where you go to get your favorable review. i like 2k, but their way of handling the marketing this year irks me.

second, just because it's better than last year doesn't mean it should be scoring the same or higher. if that was the case, wouldn't updated rosters count as an improvement and therefore nba 2k11.5 would be a 9.5?

So what it the criteria you have decided is appropriate for 2k12 to have the same or better score as 2k11, because I always assumed it was creating a better game than the previous, but that could just be crazy talk on my part, and the updated roster are you actually trying to put that on 2k there are rules in sports games that everyone must follow.

[videobastard]

Re: NBA 2k12 Review [IGN]

No mention of the slow down in offline play which is a good thing. The sound getting a 10 is overated to me. The crowd is inconsistent and still lacks the atmopshere that i would love for it to have.

I think anything from 9 to 9.3 is spot on for offline reviews.

[Mr_Riddick]

Re: NBA 2k12 Review [IGN]

Well I just find it weird that he has been real hard on anything 2K related this year. He even links people to a Hitler video making fun of no rookies in 2K

How is he suppose to be taken serious if he acts like that. He claims he is just doing the right thing by informing us but we know what the game offers.

His poll on twitter about who will buy the DLC was 20% yes and 80% no


He says that 2K told all companies that unless the score is 9.0 or above they cannot post their review until Tuesday. He called it sleazy

If you ask me, he's on there payroll. But then again, I believe in conspiracy theory's. You could clearly see the amount of pride these guy take in the work.
It's like at what point do you give credit where it's due.... I say this because he mentions the lack of rookies and updated rosters as a negative point.... Wait. What? Isnt there a lickout? SMH . These days you really can't believe what most sites scores are. I'mean. The football got a 8.5. If that's the case it should have gotten an 11.5. But that's a whole new story. This game will have replayabily that's for sure. Every aspect has been improved. I can't wait to dig deep into this game that's for sure.. Edit: I shoulda just posted a blog.

[RoyalBoyle78]

Re: NBA 2k12 Review [IGN]

Not sure what you mean about your first comment. But about the second - no, because IGN and other sites has proven time and time again that reviews are not additive - they unique scores based on the content year to year.

As with all sites like IGN and Gamespot, I would say take with a grain of salt. But when someone opens up with the fact they were playing 2k11 ALL year and then they consider THIS to be the best basketball game ever, then you give it a bit more "value" in what it brings to the table.

But that's just my personal opinion. Feel free to have your own - but this reviewer shows he is aware about sports games in general, something I've not seen common with IGN's reviewers over the years.

Either way - the best reviewer will always be yourself - no one else.

I agree with you pared, but this crap I'd bothering me about some guys in this thread. Every year sports games come out and people get mad when a great game gets an 8 or 8.5 from IGN, they say man that game deserved a 10 or 9.8, this year 2K finally gets an almost perfect score because it truly deserves it and guys now complain about the review or question it, I'm mean really....SMH...

Well guess what I have had it for a full day one and it deserves a 11.0, yes it's the most complete sports game I ever played and has the best damn gameplay ever in a sports game to date, if it wasn't for the nets moving to there new building next year, I would keep playing this game for the next 5 years and be happy. 2k deserves so much credit, there NBA team stayed with this series for ever and kept making the best game they could year in and out, kudos for a great team who works on this game.

Again, best sports game ever made, yes bold but honest.

[LingeringRegime]

Re: NBA 2k12 Review [IGN]

Tuesday very well could be the most critically acclaimed release day in recent memory.

NBA 2k12: 9.5
Dark Souls: 9.0
Rage: Probably in the same ballpark as well

[shOwty23]

Re: NBA 2k12 Review [IGN]

9.5, it's gonna be goood

[JustSteve]

Re: NBA 2k12 Review [IGN]

yes Vni, check the site.

Whats up with that grey spot in the back of some players heads though? lol

Rasheed Wallace?

[Sundown]

Re: NBA 2k12 Review [IGN]

I'm not sure what it is. A LOT of the faces look good. They look much better than last year. The love put into a lot of the player detail is on par with what Ryan Santos was doing at EA. That's a huge compliment IMO - Ryan was on point.

But some players just look so strikingly... different. It's just noticeable to me.

I'm a guy about details. You know the thread I put up every year - details are what make a game polished. But I just don't see what happened with a few players. This isn't like how off Melo was last year... they just look strange, moreso at certain angles.

I agree with this. After playing the demo, I played a bit of 2k11 online again-- Mavs vs Heat coincidentally-- and I couldn't help but notice how much Lebron, Wade, and Bosh looked like themselves in 2k11, and how odd they looked in one way or another in 2k12. 2k11 player models also seem to exhibit more detail, with tiny reflective skin bumps and sweat trails-- neither of which I haven't seen yet in 2k12. Perhaps the former is more subdued, but I haven't seen a screenshot featuring the latter. Veins and surface details of the arm muscles are more apparent, and players also have a much more realistic, reflective shine later in the game as they get sweatier-- something I haven't seen in a screenshot yet either. Lebron's shoulders also look bulbous and comically round in 2k12, where as it looked much more realistic last year. Even Lebron's dunking seemed more realistic in 2k for some reason, maybe because of his body and face being better.

The skin tones are definitely improved in 2k12. It has more of a translucent quality-- 2k11 could look a little plasticky-- but it's really jarring playing (against) the Heat in 2k11 and seeing how much more detailed and on point the entire team looked. The Mavs got a mostly lateral upgrade, with a slightly better Dirk and a Terry with exaggerated skin tones.

I was pretty bummed by what little I saw of the Warriors (my team) though. David Lee looks quite off, Monta doesn't look like himself with his dark brows, but Curry seems better. Garnett (who was almost perfect last year) looks blotchy, Allen is no longer 50 years old but now looks like he forgot to take off his face cream, and Rondo's face looks ashen. I do have to say that Kobe got a major upgrade and doesn't look like an alien anymore-- though he's still not perfect.

Overall, I feel that the faces of important players (and players important to me) were handled inconsistently, and many of them took noticeable steps backwards. Seems they should have compared against the old faces and made sure they were actually improving the likenesses rather than have it be different for difference's sake. I know they can do better, especially with how good some of the legends look.

[RoyalBoyle78]

Re: NBA 2k12 Review [IGN]

I agree with this. After playing the demo, I played a bit of 2k11 online again-- Mavs vs Heat coincidentally-- and I couldn't help but notice how much Lebron, Wade, and Bosh looked like themselves in 2k11, and how odd they looked in one way or another in 2k12. 2k11 player models also seem to exhibit more detail, with tiny reflective skin bumps and sweat trails-- neither of which I haven't seen yet in 2k12. Perhaps the former is more subdued, but I haven't seen a screenshot featuring the latter. Veins and surface details of the arm muscles are more apparent, and players also have a much more realistic, reflective shine later in the game as they get sweatier-- something I haven't seen in a screenshot yet either. Lebron's shoulders also look bulbous and comically round in 2k12, where as it looked much more realistic last year. Even Lebron's dunking seemed more realistic in 2k for some reason, maybe because of his body and face being better.

The skin tones are definitely improved in 2k12. It has more of a translucent quality-- 2k11 could look a little plasticky-- but it's really jarring playing (against) the Heat in 2k11 and seeing how much more detailed and on point the entire team looked. The Mavs got a mostly lateral upgrade, with a slightly better Dirk and a Terry with exaggerated skin tones.

I was pretty bummed by what little I saw of the Warriors (my team) though. David Lee looks quite off, Monta doesn't look like himself with his dark brows, but Curry seems better. Garnett (who was almost perfect last year) looks blotchy, Allen is no longer 50 years old but now looks like he forgot to take off his face cream, and Rondo's face looks ashen. I do have to say that Kobe got a major upgrade and doesn't look like an alien anymore-- though he's still not perfect.

Overall, I feel that the faces of important players (and players important to me) were handled inconsistently, and many of them took noticeable steps backwards. Seems they should have compared against the old faces and made sure they were actually improving the likenesses rather than have it be different for difference's sake. I know they can do better, especially with how good some of the legends look.

Wait do you own the game?

[2slik]

Re: NBA 2k12 Review [IGN]

The reviewer gave sound a 10 and called the soundtrack "dope"?

[coolcras7]

Re: NBA 2k12 Review [IGN]

The reviewer gave sound a 10 and called the soundtrack "dope"?

Sorry I missed the punchline.

[Sundown]

Re: NBA 2k12 Review [IGN]

Wait do you own the game?

Not yet, but I've been looking closely at all the videos that have been shared and streamed. Plus the demo.

[Eman5805]

Re: NBA 2k12 Review [IGN]

Not yet, but I've been looking closely at all the videos that have been shared and streamed. Plus the demo.

Able to accurately gauge a game through sight alone. Why don't all reviewers use this amazing tactic? Just watch videos. Why actually PLAY the game to share a credible opinion on said game? It's 90% faster than the old method at least.

You, sir, have just revolutionized the entire game review industry.

[Sinner]

Re: NBA 2k12 Review [IGN]

for those that have seen it, about where does the "intro" star and finish? Don't really want to see any of it till I get the game.