With pitchers and catchers having reported in mid-February, we have baseball video games to help tide us over until the regular MLB season begins. Unfortunately, 2K Sports decided to release a game they should send back down to the minors. UPDATED
What's It About?
MLB 2K11 puts baseball lovers into the shoes of 2011's franchises. 2010 was widely considered to be the "Year of the Pitcher" after the league saw five no-hitters thrown, two of which were perfect games. So it came as no surprise that 2K Sports selected All Star Roy Halladay (who threw one of those perfect games) as this year's cover boy.
Why Should I Care?
If you’re a huge fan of baseball and can't buy MLB The Show 11, then MLB 2K11 is your only choice. This wouldn't be too big of an issue if 2K11 didn't seem like such a downgrade from what was released last year. This just isn't a game too worthy of your attention.
2K stepped it up last year with MLB 2K10. They created a lengthy My Player mode that put you into the shoes of a Hall of Fame rookie hopeful. MLB Today allowed you to dive right into the day’s games with the (generally) correct line up and pitching match up. But the problem is, even for a sports title, MLB 2K11 is far too much like 2K10 with cosmetic changes to cover its bruises. Even the commentary of last year’s Gary Thorpe/John Kruk/Steve Phillips crew is 90% recycled.
My Player still offers a solid experience, but there are only minor customization tweaks and you can’t import a player. Really? If there was only one feature to this mode, it should have been importation. This makes 2K10’s player a waste unless you invested enough time to reach Hall of Fame status.
MLB Today/online has been retooled with Dynamic Player Rating System to reflect hot/cold players. Unfortunately, with the season not yet underway, we cannot offer any real assessment on this feature. We can state, though, that it doesn't affect Franchise mode. Your players will tend to play cold as the fielding AI seems to have taken a hit and makes plenty of mistakes. Originally, I chalked this up to a player’s abilities. For example, Dodgers utility man Juan Uribe has great moves for a larger player, so seeing him dive or jump during a play wasn’t surprising. My rookie in My Player has about a 55 in range and overall fielding, so I did not expect to make every play.
However, I didn’t expect players to move choppy or just straight slow. Sometimes I would make the mistake of jumping too early, there’s no denying that. Though when I did push my fielder in the right direction, he would tend to either circle or stutter-step before making a full motion. Other times, when a grounder was directed within my second baseman’s range, I would be put into control of the outfielder to back up the play. There was no doubt that my second baseman could have made the play, but instead I’m forced to give up a hit.
At the end of too many plays balls were simply thrown into empty space. There also tends to be a lot of melodramatic close-ups of pitchers after nearly every pitch. It’s… odd.
The most egregious error came after a home run. With 2 outs in the top half the first and a runner on, I launched a high, 2-run shot over Coors Field’s left field wall. The left fielder ran back to the wall and watched it fall into the stands. As soon as Matt Kemp crossed the plate, the inning ended with me having a 2 run lead, but made no mention of an out. In Kemp’s second plate appearance, he was listed as 1-2 with a home run and a pop-up. It felt like such a summary of what MLK 2K11 is: a beautiful attempt that falls horrible short.
Is It Worth My Time and Money?
Simply put, no. The game does not separate itself enough from its predecessor to warrant a purchase. Even if you didn't play last year's entry into the series, it’s hardly worth a rental. MLB 2K11 is essentially a few easy achievements/trophies with stale online play. Cosmetic changes don’t help cover the glaring issues underneath. Sure, it’s a lot like MLB 2K10, but that significantly hurts the quality and value. I can’t vouch for a game that is so much like last year but with plenty more scuffs when you take away the pretty lining.
The more I played the worse the game became. Sure, the baseball nerd in me loved the improved name/number design on the backs of jerseys. However, MLB 2K11 just takes too many steps back for a game that was set up so well by its predecessor.
With pitchers and catchers having reported in mid-February, we have baseball video games to help tide us over until the regular MLB season begins. Unfortunately, 2K Sports decided to release a game they should send back down to the minors….
With pitchers and catchers having reported in mid-February, we have baseball video games to help tide us over until the regular MLB season begins. Unfortunately, 2K Sports decided to release a game they should send back down to the minors. UPDATED
What's It About?
MLB 2K11 puts baseball lovers into the shoes of 2011's franchises. 2010 was widely considered to be the "Year of the Pitcher" after the league saw five no-hitters thrown, two of which were perfect games. So it came as no surprise that 2K Sports selected All Star Roy Halladay (who threw one of those perfect games) as this year's cover boy.
Why Should I Care?
If you’re a huge fan of baseball and can't buy MLB The Show 11, then MLB 2K11 is your only choice. This wouldn't be too big of an issue if 2K11 didn't seem like such a downgrade from what was released last year. This just isn't a game too worthy of your attention.
2K stepped it up last year with MLB 2K10. They created a lengthy My Player mode that put you into the shoes of a Hall of Fame rookie hopeful. MLB Today allowed you to dive right into the day’s games with the (generally) correct line up and pitching match up. But the problem is, even for a sports title, MLB 2K11 is far too much like 2K10 with cosmetic changes to cover its bruises. Even the commentary of last year’s Gary Thorpe/John Kruk/Steve Phillips crew is 90% recycled.
My Player still offers a solid experience, but there are only minor customization tweaks and you can’t import a player. Really? If there was only one feature to this mode, it should have been importation. This makes 2K10’s player a waste unless you invested enough time to reach Hall of Fame status.
MLB Today/online has been retooled with Dynamic Player Rating System to reflect hot/cold players. Unfortunately, with the season not yet underway, we cannot offer any real assessment on this feature. We can state, though, that it doesn't affect Franchise mode. Your players will tend to play cold as the fielding AI seems to have taken a hit and makes plenty of mistakes. Originally, I chalked this up to a player’s abilities. For example, Dodgers utility man Juan Uribe has great moves for a larger player, so seeing him dive or jump during a play wasn’t surprising. My rookie in My Player has about a 55 in range and overall fielding, so I did not expect to make every play.
However, I didn’t expect players to move choppy or just straight slow. Sometimes I would make the mistake of jumping too early, there’s no denying that. Though when I did push my fielder in the right direction, he would tend to either circle or stutter-step before making a full motion. Other times, when a grounder was directed within my second baseman’s range, I would be put into control of the outfielder to back up the play. There was no doubt that my second baseman could have made the play, but instead I’m forced to give up a hit.
At the end of too many plays balls were simply thrown into empty space. There also tends to be a lot of melodramatic close-ups of pitchers after nearly every pitch. It’s… odd.
The most egregious error came after a home run. With 2 outs in the top half the first and a runner on, I launched a high, 2-run shot over Coors Field’s left field wall. The left fielder ran back to the wall and watched it fall into the stands. As soon as Matt Kemp crossed the plate, the inning ended with me having a 2 run lead, but made no mention of an out. In Kemp’s second plate appearance, he was listed as 1-2 with a home run and a pop-up. It felt like such a summary of what MLK 2K11 is: a beautiful attempt that falls horrible short.
Is It Worth My Time and Money?
Simply put, no. The game does not separate itself enough from its predecessor to warrant a purchase. Even if you didn't play last year's entry into the series, it’s hardly worth a rental. MLB 2K11 is essentially a few easy achievements/trophies with stale online play. Cosmetic changes don’t help cover the glaring issues underneath. Sure, it’s a lot like MLB 2K10, but that significantly hurts the quality and value. I can’t vouch for a game that is so much like last year but with plenty more scuffs when you take away the pretty lining.
The more I played the worse the game became. Sure, the baseball nerd in me loved the improved name/number design on the backs of jerseys. However, MLB 2K11 just takes too many steps back for a game that was set up so well by its predecessor.
While we encourage criticisms, this is just a juvenile insult, and in no way helps anything. If you have a specific issue with the review, please point it out so Alex or another staffer can address it. We are always looking to improve, and voicing your criticisms maturely helps that. Thanks, -Andrew G.
This is a quality game that not only looks great, but also is very fun to play. So the 4.5 rating is aggregious. You even stated “MLB 2k11 basically the same as last year with just a few cosmetic changes.” (Yes I deemed it necessary to keep your grammatical error when quoting your exact words). If the game in your mind is basically the same as last year, how do you rate MLB 2k10 a 6.9, and this years game a 4.5? Unless you think 6.9 and 4.5 (out of 10) are basically the same numbers, which in that case, you have greater problems than just the inability to review and score games.
You went to great lengths to find the review for last year's game but can't figure out that the reviewers are different? Alex isn't bound to rate 2K11 based on how I rated 2K10 last year, which is a problem if you're really expecting that to be the case.
Okay so I overlooked that, but that is besides the point. The review isn't reflecting only what HE gave MLB 2k11, his score represents what this entire site gave this score. The fact that he can't review game really lowers the reputation of this site, if it had any rep to begin with.
CB,
Thanks for voicing your concerns. You may be unaware that we are a small group of dedicated writers/gamers, and have been in various forms since the early 2000s (Inside Gamer Online, Amped Games, Gamer 2.0). That said, we strive to write meaningful and honest reviews that aren't suspicious of bias due to publisher pressure (notice the lack of advertisements?).
I agree the score does represent an extreme outlier thus far (despite the fact that only 4 reviews exist at this time, which is surprising because the game released a week ago). While we don't pander to publishers or try to match our scores to other published reviews, we certainly do want to listen to the community, and the community has been pretty vocal about this particular review.
Myself and the rest of the staff will stand behind Alex's honest opinion. If he should consider your and the rest of the community's criticisms, then go back to play some more just to find that he was actually a little harsher than he intended to be, we'll stand behind that too.
Regardless, thank you for voicing your concern, and we take it seriously.
There are only four scores to begin with, so more reviews can push the Metacrtic score in either direction very easily. Metacritic is built to handle a game getting a wide range of reviews while being able to give you an average that tries to give you an idea of what the general consensus is.
The review itself could stand to improve a bit since Alex is new to the format, but the score definitely isn't an issue.
16 hours invested? So, this writer explored my player and franchise and reached his conclusion on that? You can't even play 20 baseball games in 16 hours, let alone my player mode. I'm pretty sure the game is better than an F. I'll wait for some more informed reviews before I make my decision.
Glad to hear your concern, Gregg. Please do compare with the other reviews, we encourage it! We pride ourselves on being as honest as we can be in the new review format. It seems many people here have an issue with Alex's review, and we can't just ignore that. Suffice to say, we as a staff are discussing it.
Note to self do not go to St. John's if I want a good education. Not only is this poorly written, but Alex really does not go into any detail about the game. If a game gets this low a score I want a detailed write-up that explains why this game is this bad, other than it suxxors or it be same game as year before. Also take a look at operationsports.com they do several very good reviews of the game. Much better than this drivel.
Starting with an insult is always a great idea. In all honesty, you could've just asked Alex to expand upon something and gotten a response to explain something easily.
Our new format isn't really about going into deep detail about different aspects of a game and if you're expecting Operation Sports-style detail/impressions, then you're definitely in the wrong place. Since we're not a sports site, we can't spend an entire week or two writing up impressions before doing a full review for just one game. I enjoy their site a lot, but you already have that kind of site that can meet your needs.
In essence, you are basically admitting you know nothing about this baseball or this game. That being said, why is this site even giving scores to games it isn't capable of understanding. It's like bringing football refs to referee a hockey game. Sure they are both refs, but they know nothing about the game, so leave it to the actual hockey refs. Sorry about the sports analogy, I hope you understand it.
One can hardly call them paragraphs. A number of these "paragraphs" only have 5 sentences, which is a middle school length paragraph. I am also being lenient by my sentence count, in other words, I counted one word "sentences".
CB,
You must understand that these are reviews for an entertainment medium, not college or high school essays. That said, it's an effort on our part (and the rest of the press, I'm sure) to try to be concise.
Believe it or not, it's actually more difficult to write less! Page length requirements in high school teach us to write a bunch of filler for ideas that could be expressed in a few sentences or less. When you're presented with the task to write a report on your interpretation of Shelley's "Ozymandias" you get the interesting situation where you end up writing a paper that is 10x longer than the reference document!
If you feel Alex failed on his task to express himself in as few words as possible without losing his meaning, please call him (and anyone else) on it! But please be mature and specific if you do.
John, you can criticize my writing all you would like, but I request that you do not insult St. John's. I received a great education there.
As Chris mentioned, our format doesn't go into deep detail. I felt after around 16 hours, the game getting less impressive. The issues with glitches? That came towards the end. They weren't as bad at the start, but things seemed to get worse the further I went along. Thus, I scored it accordingly
But does that mean I have to look at another site's score and judge it according to theirs? Absolutely not. I'm not going to base my opinion on another. Then it wouldn't be my review.
We're sorry if the style isn't exactly what you're looking for. Of course, we appreciate your visits and taking the time to read it, even if you disagree.
Alex… The problem with the review is that you are a poor writer. It's not the format, it's not reader dissent, it's that you are simply in over your head. I'm sure you're a smart guy and blah blah blah, but a writer you are not. The problem we all have is that you seem to have strong opinions but you express them imprecisely.
Thank you for speaking coherently and calmly, Me Too. We are all looking to improve our writing. If you don't mind, can you point out specific sections you didn't like so that Alex can keep those suggestions in mind when writing future reviews, and for me to keep in mind as I copy-edit them? Thanks, -Andrew G.
Well, I just came to this site, mainly because I haven't heard of this site before and it's one of four that has posted a review for 2k11, and I have to agree that the writing has plenty of mistakes. Andrew, you ask for a bit of a breakdown on what may be wrong, so here ya go, a breakdown addressed, with all due respect and with a helpful attitude, to Alex:
It starts out just fine for the first two mini-paragraphs there, Alex. Then we soon hit the "Why Should I Care" subject, and wow do things turn ugly! Your very first sentence, "If you’re a huge fan of baseball and don’t have a PlayStation 3 to buy MLB The Show 11, then MLB 2K11 is your only choice", makes it sound as if my PlayStation 3 will go ahead and purchase The Show for me as long as I own the system. It makes no mention of the fact that MLB 11: The Show is on other systems (PS2 and PSP), and it also assumes I am able to purchase and play 2K11 without owning a system on which to play it.
From there, you break out your next sentence that's really half of a sentence. It begins and ends with a predicate and assumes the subject of the previous sentence. That's a no-no in any English class.
Moving on, you do well until the second sentence of your next paragraph, in which you reference a "Hall of Fame hopeful rookie", which should have read as a rookie hopeful. Believe it or not, rookie is the adjective here, and hopeful is actually the noun. Things get crazy in the world of sports! 🙂 Also, near the end of the paragraph you missed the word "is" in between the words "MLB 2K11" and "basically".
Ok, the next item up for bids comes in the middle of the next paragraph with your sentence, "If anything should be imported, it should be THAT." This argument assumes that importation is a feature, and that you see the lack of created player importation to be an egregious omission. This sentence should read more like, "Even without an import feature, we should be able to import our previous player in the 'My Player' mode." Remember to consider information already presented, and likewise follow the old adage and never assume.
At the start of the next paragraph you bring up hot/cold streaks in franchise, then you write, "It doesn’t affect Franchise, though, but your players will tend to play cold as the fielding seems to have taken a hit and makes plenty of mistakes." Keep in mind that "but" changes the direction of the sentence. If you're telling us that hot/cold streaks don't apply to Franchise mode, then that is a fact that needs no window dressing. If you're attempting a sarcastic remark, you have to continue that flow. The sentence could read something akin to, "This doesn't affect Franchise mode as your players will play cold regardless since the fielding has taken a turn off a cliff, making way too many mistakes." Good job in your use of "affect" here, instead of the very common mistake of "effect"!
Now, besides the next sentence having the words "were" and "balls" in reverse order, the rest of this is actually written fairly well. Just remember to read over everything before you submit it, and never assume readers know any information beforehand, besides basic comprehension, that is!
I hope some of this actually helps, and good on ya for posting your own score and not relying on the general consensus! We may not all agree with your score at all times, but we have to respect that it's your own. Thanks for your time, and have an awesome day! 🙂
Alex Quevedo
Mar 15, 2011 @ 21:52 pm
Patrick, thank you. That indeed does help. We appreciate the feedback.
Patrick
Mar 16, 2011 @ 2:23 am
I've gotta say, Alex, most sites don't have their reviewers respond quite so much as this one. For that, and your willingness to keep reviews honest, I'll have to make sure to keep an eye here for more future game reviews. Thanks for your commitment and integrity!
Andrew_G
Mar 16, 2011 @ 7:43 am
Thanks, Patrick. I've addressed your comments and made most of the grammar changes you suggested (as well as some of my own). I hope it reads better. -Andrew G.
Nic
Mar 16, 2011 @ 22:41 pm
I will never read this POS site again thanks to Alex. You should upgrade your staff or stop letting Metacritic report you score and waste my time
Andrew_G
Mar 17, 2011 @ 9:43 am
Nic,
Please try to be a little more mature with your comments. Have you played the game yourself? If so, please weigh in with your thoughts. Our staff as well as the rest of the readers here would love to hear what you think of it, and perhaps you could articulate a little better on the "Why" this is a waste of your time.
Otherwise, what exactly are your complaints against the review? It could not possibly be the score or the complaints. The grammar has been addressed, we know. Please contribute to the discussion instead of mudslinging, Nic.
The problem with that assumption is that they're not the only reviews he's ever written. We've got plenty of reviews that we did at gamer20.com that aren't available now due to issues in trying to get all of that stuff transferred to new servers from a poorly coded site created by our old owners. Finding all of those aren't very likely, but I could at least find a March Madness 07 review by him and I'm sure that there are a few more.
You should figure out who wrote the review before you start accusing me of not knowing my stuff. I've reviewed The Show and 2K for the past several years now and have been playing baseball games every year since Triple Play 97. This year is the only year I couldn't review 2K due to not having the funds to get it.
Alex bought it on the basis of having enjoyed last year's game and he was disappointed that it hadn't changed much. Sports games typically have to fix the issues that the last game had while adding new features and 2K11 failed to do either, so it's a step back while being largely the same game. When you don't improve anything, you stagnate and get worse as a result.
I thought I would break this game down a bit more since my last comment was a bit harsh on the reviewer. Of course in the medium that we are using about the only way that most things are seen is with harsh or outrageous comments. Unfortunate but this is no longer the age of print and radio.
Anyways on to my way too brief review of the game.
Visuals: I own the PC version and have played the 360 version, they are very similar but the PC version looks much better. Still the visuals are poor if you are comparing them to The Show. The player faces range from hideous to passable, and do take away from the immersion of the game. The animations are a big upgrade from last year and help with the realism. The stadiums look fantastic, except for Tropicana field, but it looks terrible anyways.
Sound: This is where MLB 2k11 excels. The commentary is amazing and the stadium sounds have been upgraded, but not to where they need to be. If you are looking for realism and extra tidbits from a commentator then this is your game. If you only listened to the game you would swear it was a radio broadcast. Very few have brought up that many of the lines are the same or similar to the previous year, I don't find this to be a factor at all since the commentary is so spot on and good. You will have heard much of the same commentary as last year though, but that can be said with all sports games.
Gameplay: This is what it really comes down to, is the game fun? In one word, yes. Is it the most realistic game of baseball, no, but the fun factor is there. The analog pitching is second to none and the hitting has made great strides. I enjoy the new hitting camera, but if you just can't stand it then you can customize. This game understands the pitcher and hitter battle, it is intense and very fun. I also enjoy the fielding dynamic but at times it can be a bit off. My Player is very fun and will take you a bit longer to reach the majors than last year. It is too easy to score points and move up, but the mode is very fun. Franchise mode while being simmed is fairly accurate, which many die-hard baseball fans will find great. With all the good being said there are still problems. Bugs run rampant in this game, occasionally fielders will run through walls and make a catch, which results in an out and a home run. This will be fixed, but should have been fixed long ago. In franchise mode, if you play your games and not sim your pitchers will not fatigue. The Computer AI makes some incredibly dumb decisions along the way. In franchise mode your biggest free-agents will usually resign with their team, not incredibly realistic and something that does bug me.
Final Words.
The visuals will keep many away but those that like good game play will be pleasantly surprised with this release. Unfortunately we have to wait on VC to patch many bugs but this seems to be standard these days. Overall the game is very fun to play and while it may not be a huge step-up from last year it is at least worth a rental. If you just want a fun game of baseball or a decent sim then 2k11 is worth picking up.
Sorry did not proof this, but if anyone has any questions on the game please comment.
Thanks for your thoughts, John. Here's some questions I've come up with that can help you expand on what you've said.
As far as the glitches, would you say these are deal-breaking glitches? Or are they instead minor hiccups in what, in your opinion, is an overall enjoyable experience? If you had to score the game out of 10, what would your honest opinion be?
You compare the visuals to The Show. How does 2K11 overall stack up against other games (and even previous iterations like 2K10)?
What separates 2K11 from 2K10? I understand that more of an emphasis has been placed on the pitching in 2K11, but are there a few things that make 2K11 better or worse than 2K10?
If you were speaking to someone who only owns a 360, would you tell them this game is worth their $60?
Sorry it took so long for me to reply. Thanks for the questions and I will try to answer them the best I can.
The glitches are not game-breaking in my opinion, yes it does suck to occasionally have the hr/out glitch occur, but it does not happen very often. There are still some slowdown moments, yet this occurs very rarely on the PC (Xbox it occurs a bit more, but isn't too bad). In franchise mode players are not fatiguing when you play the game (they do when you sim though). I think the biggest issue with this game or any other baseball game is the occasional poor managerial AI. I would find myself shaking my head at the pitcher's the computer would throw at me from time to time. To be fair though The Show does the same thing.
I find 2k11 to be very fun. I love the pitching mechanic and every game is just fun. It doesn't have all the little features like The Show has but sometimes all I want is just fun. If you are in it for the graphics this is not your game. They have been improved over last year's addition but they still are not fantastic. There are different animations this year but some still look a bit strange.
The biggest upgrades over last year for me are: The variable strike zone (love that a strike is not always called a strike), fielding has been improved, errors now exist, injuries (especially reoccurring injuries) create realism, and players dynamic ratings. Overall 2k11 is better than 2k10. MyPlayer is much better and takes a few more hours of gameplay to reach the big leagues. The franchise mode is better as you can now handle minor league duties, and the sim factor seems pretty good. I would give 2k11 a 7.0. The biggest issues being graphics and glitches.
I bought the pc version which only runs $30. For that price I would say go for it. If you have 2k10 then I would say rent it first to see if it warrants the purchase. If you played 2k10 and loved it you will like 2k11 even more, if you hated it then 2k11 will not change your opinion.
I hope this helps you, if you have anymore questions, feel free to ask me.
In regards to the "Too Brief" comment, it's very valid, but again–SmashPad isn't like everyone else. We won't go to great lengths to provide our readers with something they'll read at every site. We stand by our writers and our notion that we'll be as real as we can 100% of the time.
As John said, this is no longer the age of print and radio, but the internet is continuing to grow as well. One of our lofty goals is to be the go-to site when you need information right off the bat. Our previous brands, Amped News (and Gamer 2.0 after that), did what no other gaming site would dare do–provide news that wasn't our own. If you wanted to read solid editorial pieces on your phone, we want to be that quick read place. That's why our reviews are shorter than most other publications. We won't waste our time writing about the history and giving you every nitty gritty detail–especially if it's a sequel or a rehash such as MLB 2K11.
Of course, the bigger the game, the more we'll have to say about it.
We're a small staff. We're not going to waste time writing news because you can read that at the bigger sites. We want to offer commentary and give you, the reader, a chance to offer your commentary as well. If we were offended by the comments mentioned by you guys in this review, we would've deleted them. But we allow you to voice your opinion because you matter. Even if you come here for the sole purpose of being an asshole (I'm real too), you're still helping us out by taking the time to click on our page.
Honestly, if you think you can do better, join us. We're a small site. We would embrace new and talented writers. We aren't paid, and that's where I think our current strengths lie. We buy our own games and let you know if they're worth the money. We self-motivate ourselves to provide content to help and entertain our readers. Eventually we want to get there, and our site has been a stepping stone. Kevin VanOrd and Carolyn Petit are two such examples of people who have used SmashPad as a stepping stone. They're now with GameSpot pushing editorial content, and I know that SmashPad was a key driver to their current success.
by Alex Quevedo
MLB Today/online has been retooled with Dynamic Player Rating System to reflect hot/cold players. Unfortunately, with the season not yet underway, we cannot offer any real assessment on this feature. We can state, though, that it doesn't affect Franchise mode. Your players will tend to play cold as the fielding AI seems to have taken a hit and makes plenty of mistakes. Originally, I chalked this up to a player’s abilities. For example, Dodgers utility man Juan Uribe has great moves for a larger player, so seeing him dive or jump during a play wasn’t surprising. My rookie in My Player has about a 55 in range and overall fielding, so I did not expect to make every play.
Kind of surprised. If they weren't going to add new features or modes, I'd have expected it to be polished to hell and back.
Yeah. It seems the one thing they mostly worked on was jerseys/faces. I never had as many problems with 2K10 as I have with this.
How is this shitty site listed on Metacrtic? What a fucking joke…
While we encourage criticisms, this is just a juvenile insult, and in no way helps anything. If you have a specific issue with the review, please point it out so Alex or another staffer can address it. We are always looking to improve, and voicing your criticisms maturely helps that. Thanks, -Andrew G.
Lol at Robby…. So true…
Alex Q— Did they teach you guys anything about misplaced modifiers or verb tense in what ever high school you never finished?
This was, admittedly, published too early in the editing process. It has since been revised.
I agree with Robby as well!
This is a quality game that not only looks great, but also is very fun to play. So the 4.5 rating is aggregious. You even stated “MLB 2k11 basically the same as last year with just a few cosmetic changes.” (Yes I deemed it necessary to keep your grammatical error when quoting your exact words). If the game in your mind is basically the same as last year, how do you rate MLB 2k10 a 6.9, and this years game a 4.5? Unless you think 6.9 and 4.5 (out of 10) are basically the same numbers, which in that case, you have greater problems than just the inability to review and score games.
You went to great lengths to find the review for last year's game but can't figure out that the reviewers are different? Alex isn't bound to rate 2K11 based on how I rated 2K10 last year, which is a problem if you're really expecting that to be the case.
Okay so I overlooked that, but that is besides the point. The review isn't reflecting only what HE gave MLB 2k11, his score represents what this entire site gave this score. The fact that he can't review game really lowers the reputation of this site, if it had any rep to begin with.
CB,
Thanks for voicing your concerns. You may be unaware that we are a small group of dedicated writers/gamers, and have been in various forms since the early 2000s (Inside Gamer Online, Amped Games, Gamer 2.0). That said, we strive to write meaningful and honest reviews that aren't suspicious of bias due to publisher pressure (notice the lack of advertisements?).
I agree the score does represent an extreme outlier thus far (despite the fact that only 4 reviews exist at this time, which is surprising because the game released a week ago). While we don't pander to publishers or try to match our scores to other published reviews, we certainly do want to listen to the community, and the community has been pretty vocal about this particular review.
Myself and the rest of the staff will stand behind Alex's honest opinion. If he should consider your and the rest of the community's criticisms, then go back to play some more just to find that he was actually a little harsher than he intended to be, we'll stand behind that too.
Regardless, thank you for voicing your concern, and we take it seriously.
-Andrew G.
Also, this score is an extreme out-lier to the other scores that have already been posted. More proof that this guy does not know what he is doing.
There are only four scores to begin with, so more reviews can push the Metacrtic score in either direction very easily. Metacritic is built to handle a game getting a wide range of reviews while being able to give you an average that tries to give you an idea of what the general consensus is.
The review itself could stand to improve a bit since Alex is new to the format, but the score definitely isn't an issue.
16 hours invested? So, this writer explored my player and franchise and reached his conclusion on that? You can't even play 20 baseball games in 16 hours, let alone my player mode. I'm pretty sure the game is better than an F. I'll wait for some more informed reviews before I make my decision.
Glad to hear your concern, Gregg. Please do compare with the other reviews, we encourage it! We pride ourselves on being as honest as we can be in the new review format. It seems many people here have an issue with Alex's review, and we can't just ignore that. Suffice to say, we as a staff are discussing it.
Note to self do not go to St. John's if I want a good education. Not only is this poorly written, but Alex really does not go into any detail about the game. If a game gets this low a score I want a detailed write-up that explains why this game is this bad, other than it suxxors or it be same game as year before. Also take a look at operationsports.com they do several very good reviews of the game. Much better than this drivel.
Starting with an insult is always a great idea. In all honesty, you could've just asked Alex to expand upon something and gotten a response to explain something easily.
Our new format isn't really about going into deep detail about different aspects of a game and if you're expecting Operation Sports-style detail/impressions, then you're definitely in the wrong place. Since we're not a sports site, we can't spend an entire week or two writing up impressions before doing a full review for just one game. I enjoy their site a lot, but you already have that kind of site that can meet your needs.
In essence, you are basically admitting you know nothing about this baseball or this game. That being said, why is this site even giving scores to games it isn't capable of understanding. It's like bringing football refs to referee a hockey game. Sure they are both refs, but they know nothing about the game, so leave it to the actual hockey refs. Sorry about the sports analogy, I hope you understand it.
So because we're not a dedicated sports site like Operation Sports, we shouldn't review sports games?
One can hardly call them paragraphs. A number of these "paragraphs" only have 5 sentences, which is a middle school length paragraph. I am also being lenient by my sentence count, in other words, I counted one word "sentences".
What sites do you read that regularly go over five sentences? Most of the sites I read rarely ever get that wordy.
CB,
You must understand that these are reviews for an entertainment medium, not college or high school essays. That said, it's an effort on our part (and the rest of the press, I'm sure) to try to be concise.
Believe it or not, it's actually more difficult to write less! Page length requirements in high school teach us to write a bunch of filler for ideas that could be expressed in a few sentences or less. When you're presented with the task to write a report on your interpretation of Shelley's "Ozymandias" you get the interesting situation where you end up writing a paper that is 10x longer than the reference document!
If you feel Alex failed on his task to express himself in as few words as possible without losing his meaning, please call him (and anyone else) on it! But please be mature and specific if you do.
-Andrew G.
John, you can criticize my writing all you would like, but I request that you do not insult St. John's. I received a great education there.
As Chris mentioned, our format doesn't go into deep detail. I felt after around 16 hours, the game getting less impressive. The issues with glitches? That came towards the end. They weren't as bad at the start, but things seemed to get worse the further I went along. Thus, I scored it accordingly
But does that mean I have to look at another site's score and judge it according to theirs? Absolutely not. I'm not going to base my opinion on another. Then it wouldn't be my review.
We're sorry if the style isn't exactly what you're looking for. Of course, we appreciate your visits and taking the time to read it, even if you disagree.
Alex… The problem with the review is that you are a poor writer. It's not the format, it's not reader dissent, it's that you are simply in over your head. I'm sure you're a smart guy and blah blah blah, but a writer you are not. The problem we all have is that you seem to have strong opinions but you express them imprecisely.
Well thank you for your feedback. I'll help incorporate that into future reviews in this format.
Thank you for speaking coherently and calmly, Me Too. We are all looking to improve our writing. If you don't mind, can you point out specific sections you didn't like so that Alex can keep those suggestions in mind when writing future reviews, and for me to keep in mind as I copy-edit them? Thanks, -Andrew G.
Well, I just came to this site, mainly because I haven't heard of this site before and it's one of four that has posted a review for 2k11, and I have to agree that the writing has plenty of mistakes. Andrew, you ask for a bit of a breakdown on what may be wrong, so here ya go, a breakdown addressed, with all due respect and with a helpful attitude, to Alex:
It starts out just fine for the first two mini-paragraphs there, Alex. Then we soon hit the "Why Should I Care" subject, and wow do things turn ugly! Your very first sentence, "If you’re a huge fan of baseball and don’t have a PlayStation 3 to buy MLB The Show 11, then MLB 2K11 is your only choice", makes it sound as if my PlayStation 3 will go ahead and purchase The Show for me as long as I own the system. It makes no mention of the fact that MLB 11: The Show is on other systems (PS2 and PSP), and it also assumes I am able to purchase and play 2K11 without owning a system on which to play it.
From there, you break out your next sentence that's really half of a sentence. It begins and ends with a predicate and assumes the subject of the previous sentence. That's a no-no in any English class.
Moving on, you do well until the second sentence of your next paragraph, in which you reference a "Hall of Fame hopeful rookie", which should have read as a rookie hopeful. Believe it or not, rookie is the adjective here, and hopeful is actually the noun. Things get crazy in the world of sports! 🙂 Also, near the end of the paragraph you missed the word "is" in between the words "MLB 2K11" and "basically".
Ok, the next item up for bids comes in the middle of the next paragraph with your sentence, "If anything should be imported, it should be THAT." This argument assumes that importation is a feature, and that you see the lack of created player importation to be an egregious omission. This sentence should read more like, "Even without an import feature, we should be able to import our previous player in the 'My Player' mode." Remember to consider information already presented, and likewise follow the old adage and never assume.
At the start of the next paragraph you bring up hot/cold streaks in franchise, then you write, "It doesn’t affect Franchise, though, but your players will tend to play cold as the fielding seems to have taken a hit and makes plenty of mistakes." Keep in mind that "but" changes the direction of the sentence. If you're telling us that hot/cold streaks don't apply to Franchise mode, then that is a fact that needs no window dressing. If you're attempting a sarcastic remark, you have to continue that flow. The sentence could read something akin to, "This doesn't affect Franchise mode as your players will play cold regardless since the fielding has taken a turn off a cliff, making way too many mistakes." Good job in your use of "affect" here, instead of the very common mistake of "effect"!
Now, besides the next sentence having the words "were" and "balls" in reverse order, the rest of this is actually written fairly well. Just remember to read over everything before you submit it, and never assume readers know any information beforehand, besides basic comprehension, that is!
I hope some of this actually helps, and good on ya for posting your own score and not relying on the general consensus! We may not all agree with your score at all times, but we have to respect that it's your own. Thanks for your time, and have an awesome day! 🙂
Patrick, thank you. That indeed does help. We appreciate the feedback.
I've gotta say, Alex, most sites don't have their reviewers respond quite so much as this one. For that, and your willingness to keep reviews honest, I'll have to make sure to keep an eye here for more future game reviews. Thanks for your commitment and integrity!
Thanks, Patrick. I've addressed your comments and made most of the grammar changes you suggested (as well as some of my own). I hope it reads better. -Andrew G.
I will never read this POS site again thanks to Alex. You should upgrade your staff or stop letting Metacritic report you score and waste my time
Nic,
Please try to be a little more mature with your comments. Have you played the game yourself? If so, please weigh in with your thoughts. Our staff as well as the rest of the readers here would love to hear what you think of it, and perhaps you could articulate a little better on the "Why" this is a waste of your time.
Otherwise, what exactly are your complaints against the review? It could not possibly be the score or the complaints. The grammar has been addressed, we know. Please contribute to the discussion instead of mudslinging, Nic.
-Andrew G.
The problem with that assumption is that they're not the only reviews he's ever written. We've got plenty of reviews that we did at gamer20.com that aren't available now due to issues in trying to get all of that stuff transferred to new servers from a poorly coded site created by our old owners. Finding all of those aren't very likely, but I could at least find a March Madness 07 review by him and I'm sure that there are a few more.
You should figure out who wrote the review before you start accusing me of not knowing my stuff. I've reviewed The Show and 2K for the past several years now and have been playing baseball games every year since Triple Play 97. This year is the only year I couldn't review 2K due to not having the funds to get it.
Alex bought it on the basis of having enjoyed last year's game and he was disappointed that it hadn't changed much. Sports games typically have to fix the issues that the last game had while adding new features and 2K11 failed to do either, so it's a step back while being largely the same game. When you don't improve anything, you stagnate and get worse as a result.
I thought I would break this game down a bit more since my last comment was a bit harsh on the reviewer. Of course in the medium that we are using about the only way that most things are seen is with harsh or outrageous comments. Unfortunate but this is no longer the age of print and radio.
Anyways on to my way too brief review of the game.
Visuals: I own the PC version and have played the 360 version, they are very similar but the PC version looks much better. Still the visuals are poor if you are comparing them to The Show. The player faces range from hideous to passable, and do take away from the immersion of the game. The animations are a big upgrade from last year and help with the realism. The stadiums look fantastic, except for Tropicana field, but it looks terrible anyways.
Sound: This is where MLB 2k11 excels. The commentary is amazing and the stadium sounds have been upgraded, but not to where they need to be. If you are looking for realism and extra tidbits from a commentator then this is your game. If you only listened to the game you would swear it was a radio broadcast. Very few have brought up that many of the lines are the same or similar to the previous year, I don't find this to be a factor at all since the commentary is so spot on and good. You will have heard much of the same commentary as last year though, but that can be said with all sports games.
Gameplay: This is what it really comes down to, is the game fun? In one word, yes. Is it the most realistic game of baseball, no, but the fun factor is there. The analog pitching is second to none and the hitting has made great strides. I enjoy the new hitting camera, but if you just can't stand it then you can customize. This game understands the pitcher and hitter battle, it is intense and very fun. I also enjoy the fielding dynamic but at times it can be a bit off. My Player is very fun and will take you a bit longer to reach the majors than last year. It is too easy to score points and move up, but the mode is very fun. Franchise mode while being simmed is fairly accurate, which many die-hard baseball fans will find great. With all the good being said there are still problems. Bugs run rampant in this game, occasionally fielders will run through walls and make a catch, which results in an out and a home run. This will be fixed, but should have been fixed long ago. In franchise mode, if you play your games and not sim your pitchers will not fatigue. The Computer AI makes some incredibly dumb decisions along the way. In franchise mode your biggest free-agents will usually resign with their team, not incredibly realistic and something that does bug me.
Final Words.
The visuals will keep many away but those that like good game play will be pleasantly surprised with this release. Unfortunately we have to wait on VC to patch many bugs but this seems to be standard these days. Overall the game is very fun to play and while it may not be a huge step-up from last year it is at least worth a rental. If you just want a fun game of baseball or a decent sim then 2k11 is worth picking up.
Sorry did not proof this, but if anyone has any questions on the game please comment.
Thanks for your thoughts, John. Here's some questions I've come up with that can help you expand on what you've said.
As far as the glitches, would you say these are deal-breaking glitches? Or are they instead minor hiccups in what, in your opinion, is an overall enjoyable experience? If you had to score the game out of 10, what would your honest opinion be?
You compare the visuals to The Show. How does 2K11 overall stack up against other games (and even previous iterations like 2K10)?
What separates 2K11 from 2K10? I understand that more of an emphasis has been placed on the pitching in 2K11, but are there a few things that make 2K11 better or worse than 2K10?
If you were speaking to someone who only owns a 360, would you tell them this game is worth their $60?
Andrew,
Sorry it took so long for me to reply. Thanks for the questions and I will try to answer them the best I can.
The glitches are not game-breaking in my opinion, yes it does suck to occasionally have the hr/out glitch occur, but it does not happen very often. There are still some slowdown moments, yet this occurs very rarely on the PC (Xbox it occurs a bit more, but isn't too bad). In franchise mode players are not fatiguing when you play the game (they do when you sim though). I think the biggest issue with this game or any other baseball game is the occasional poor managerial AI. I would find myself shaking my head at the pitcher's the computer would throw at me from time to time. To be fair though The Show does the same thing.
I find 2k11 to be very fun. I love the pitching mechanic and every game is just fun. It doesn't have all the little features like The Show has but sometimes all I want is just fun. If you are in it for the graphics this is not your game. They have been improved over last year's addition but they still are not fantastic. There are different animations this year but some still look a bit strange.
The biggest upgrades over last year for me are: The variable strike zone (love that a strike is not always called a strike), fielding has been improved, errors now exist, injuries (especially reoccurring injuries) create realism, and players dynamic ratings. Overall 2k11 is better than 2k10. MyPlayer is much better and takes a few more hours of gameplay to reach the big leagues. The franchise mode is better as you can now handle minor league duties, and the sim factor seems pretty good. I would give 2k11 a 7.0. The biggest issues being graphics and glitches.
I bought the pc version which only runs $30. For that price I would say go for it. If you have 2k10 then I would say rent it first to see if it warrants the purchase. If you played 2k10 and loved it you will like 2k11 even more, if you hated it then 2k11 will not change your opinion.
I hope this helps you, if you have anymore questions, feel free to ask me.
In regards to the "Too Brief" comment, it's very valid, but again–SmashPad isn't like everyone else. We won't go to great lengths to provide our readers with something they'll read at every site. We stand by our writers and our notion that we'll be as real as we can 100% of the time.
As John said, this is no longer the age of print and radio, but the internet is continuing to grow as well. One of our lofty goals is to be the go-to site when you need information right off the bat. Our previous brands, Amped News (and Gamer 2.0 after that), did what no other gaming site would dare do–provide news that wasn't our own. If you wanted to read solid editorial pieces on your phone, we want to be that quick read place. That's why our reviews are shorter than most other publications. We won't waste our time writing about the history and giving you every nitty gritty detail–especially if it's a sequel or a rehash such as MLB 2K11.
Of course, the bigger the game, the more we'll have to say about it.
We're a small staff. We're not going to waste time writing news because you can read that at the bigger sites. We want to offer commentary and give you, the reader, a chance to offer your commentary as well. If we were offended by the comments mentioned by you guys in this review, we would've deleted them. But we allow you to voice your opinion because you matter. Even if you come here for the sole purpose of being an asshole (I'm real too), you're still helping us out by taking the time to click on our page.
Honestly, if you think you can do better, join us. We're a small site. We would embrace new and talented writers. We aren't paid, and that's where I think our current strengths lie. We buy our own games and let you know if they're worth the money. We self-motivate ourselves to provide content to help and entertain our readers. Eventually we want to get there, and our site has been a stepping stone. Kevin VanOrd and Carolyn Petit are two such examples of people who have used SmashPad as a stepping stone. They're now with GameSpot pushing editorial content, and I know that SmashPad was a key driver to their current success.
John and Danreb, nice follow up to the both of you. Thanks for the review.