Originally Posted by tsbmolina (Post 2050619711)

Impressive improvements all around. It seems like they have improved the lighting and shaders and the realism of the eyes are second to none. None of that uncanny valley staring eyes.

Originally Posted by KobeDropped81 (Post 2050619803)

Am I tripping or do these screens kinda give off that soft motion picture 2k14 movie lighting?

Example

Originally Posted by ojandpizza (Post 2050619963)

Something feels way off on the neck/shoulder area to me. Maybe it's too thick, not long enough, idk but I keep seeing MJ's face (big improvement) on what looks like it would be Eric Gordon's upper body lol.

Originally Posted by AIRJ23 (Post 2050619976)

Here’s Booker. Keep in mind the improvements to him are because he finally got a new scan so this isn’t a good graphical comparison. It’s clear the body types are identical to 2K22.

One thing that’s kind of worrisome is the colors look sliiiightly more washed out, or am I just seeing things? I wouldn’t think much of it but 2K22 did such a job of adding more saturation and darkening the ultra washed colors of 2K21, I’d hate to see them going backwards there. But the colors at least seem to look good.

Originally Posted by TarHeelPhenom (Post 2050619901)

Was this from the XB1/PS4 version of the game? I never played the console version; but if so that looks real doggone good for a game in 2013.

Originally Posted by Yallasama (Post 2050620033)

Yup, seems we're back to washed out. However, IF this is to make the classic look - with filter - more accurate and looked a bit washed out then I'm all for it. It seems that colour, hue, saturation, etc. is not just a case of picking and applying the right colour but rather they pick a certain look and have to fit everything within a certain range. Kind of like picking a colour scheme in a Photoshop like software, a palette if you will.

Originally Posted by KobeDropped81 (Post 2050620062)

Yup it’s definitely the lighting that has changed. 2k has gone back to that soft movie-esque 2k14 lighting…but in a less dramatic way



And for those of y’all with concerns over washed out colors. This can easily be corrected by just turning up the contrast on TV

Originally Posted by KobeDropped81 (Post 2050620058)

Yup! Extremely impressive. No other 2k from that generation came close to this level of visuals. Id even argue that it looks better than 2k21 (PS5 version)

Originally Posted by AIRJ23 (Post 2050620103)

Yup seems to be the case. Now that I remember it, when 22 came out we had comparisons of darker players (guys with MJ’s skin tone) and they appeared much darker in 22 than 21. And now MJ is a bit lighter than he was in 22 but it coincides with lighter colors in general. Seems clear the lighting engine/filter affects everything at once (skin and overall colors). What’s interesting is when 22 dropped everyone was saying how the darker skin tones were more accurate but now many will probably say the opposite as the darker tones will lighten.



Prob is with 21 no TV adjustment fixed how inherently washed the game was. Also turning up contrast on my TV mostly appears to just add brightness which is weird. It doesn’t saturate the colors like your edit does. But interestingly your edit makes the Suns purple pop identical to the 2K22 pics.

But 21’s colors were clearly broken. They did did a good job enriching colors in 22 and got them spot on. I’d hate for them to go backwards at all there. The washed effect on next gen drives me nuts. Especially with yellows and reds.

Originally Posted by TarHeelPhenom (Post 2050620107)

Yeah, the Wizards, Bulls, and Lakers colors were horrendous in 21'.

Originally Posted by TarHeelPhenom (Post 2050620280)

This can't be true can it lol?????? By the way, the pic looks great!

Originally Posted by TarHeelPhenom (Post 2050620280)

This can't be true can it lol?????? By the way, the pic looks great!

Originally Posted by 49UNCFan (Post 2050620367)

Originally Posted by 49UNCFan (Post 2050620367)

Originally Posted by Lagoa (Post 2050620730)

But are you satisfied with that? For years, 2K has invested ZERO in graphics. See the evolution we had in the body, sweat effects, shadows....it´s ZERO!

Okay, Jordan from 2K23 looks a little better, but it's next to nothing. NBA games need a competition, 2K alone in the market is lazier than ever before.

Since the excellent NBA 2K14 next gen, the franchise's graphics have either gotten worse or stayed the same year on year.

Originally Posted by EccentricMeat (Post 2050621814)

Gotta say I disagree. I can't go back to the PS4 games after playing next-gen, the graphical leap is too obvious. Yes they need to improve/actually use full-body scans, but outside of that the graphics are fantastic and definitely not a weak-point for the series.

Originally Posted by Lagoa (Post 2050621908)

I respect your opinion... and in a way I agree. The graphics are better than the last generation.

I just think it could be so much better. For me, we had a big leap from NBA 2K6 to NBA 2K7, as well as from NBA 2K13 to NBA 2K14. That's what I was talking about.

The Xbox Series/PS5 generation only had texture, color and brightness upgrades, but it's the same game, faces, body, exactly the same game as the last generation, you know?

Originally Posted by TarHeelPhenom (Post 2050621915)

I understand. I know that in that article, Ronnie2k said that now that they've had some time to learn and work with the current gen hardware, that they've been able to fine tune the game. I'm hoping that's the case. I'm interested to know what this "New System" is that he was referring to?

Originally Posted by The 24th Letter (Post 2050621919)

Body models I get, Some of the face models I can understand…I also get we have a Live following here that simply isn’t going to vibe with 2Ks art style regardless…but this about the only place I’ve seen that thinks 2K is a bad looking game..

I feel like 2K22 is one of the better looking current gen games period.



I wouldn’t hold your breath until you hear Mike or Czar talk about it tbh man lol

Originally Posted by TarHeelPhenom (Post 2050621925)

Yeah I know man lol. I'm just hoping. As far as the faces, you can even tell the difference in 23 versus 22 with MJ, Diana, Devin, and Sue Bird. They look better than last year to me. So, at least for me, graphics aren't an issue. They do need to make sure the colors are on point though lol.

Originally Posted by TarHeelPhenom (Post 2050621925)

Yeah I know man lol. I'm just hoping. As far as the faces, you can even tell the difference in 23 versus 22 with MJ, Diana, Devin, and Sue Bird. They look better than last year to me. So, at least for me, graphics aren't an issue. They do need to make sure the colors are on point though lol.