|
|
Post by Vitamin Z on Oct 17, 2008 18:37:53 GMT -5
Well...London WAS in 2006. But I thought I was going to break the team up...now I'm not sure if I want too. Same here. Im going to keep them together. Well unless they release a The Brian Kendrick DLC update. Also, did they re-animate the SB2? |
|
|
|
Post by Guy Incognito on Oct 17, 2008 19:37:23 GMT -5
OMG LONDON AND KENDRICK! Haha,  in awesome, but they should show people the Tag Team finisher. |
|
|
|
Post by mattoriginal on Oct 17, 2008 20:12:17 GMT -5
Yeah they reanimated it.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 18, 2024 0:37:53 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2008 20:27:59 GMT -5
London and Kendrick rock, I played as London a lot in the last game he was in and I will do the same in this one, as well as Kendrick. Now I just hope there is an update of Kendrick into The Brian Kendrick with his new gear.
|
|
|
|
Post by ● kaneisdaman ● on Oct 17, 2008 22:18:21 GMT -5
London and Kendrick look great even though their announcer introduction would have been better the other way round.
|
|
|
|
Post by pineappleexpress on Oct 18, 2008 2:12:58 GMT -5
Kendrick = sex
|
|
|
|
Post by OverTheEdge on Oct 18, 2008 4:34:48 GMT -5
Well...London WAS in 2006. But I thought I was going to break the team up...now I'm not sure if I want too. Same here. Im going to keep them together. Well unless they release a The Brian Kendrick DLC update. Also, did they re-animate the SB2? What's an SB2? Oh, you mean the Kendrick. Yes, they've reanimated the Kendrick. |
|
|
|
Post by JCF on Oct 18, 2008 9:13:55 GMT -5
London & Kendrick look amazing. Also the Friday Night Fights thing rocked.
|
|
|
|
Post by OverTheEdge on Oct 18, 2008 10:40:40 GMT -5
London & Kendrick look amazing. Also the Friday Night Fights thing rocked. Yeah, the tag match looks like so much fun. Also the gameplay in general looks so much smoother. |
|
|
|
Post by gordon on Oct 19, 2008 8:30:08 GMT -5
How is it that London and Kendrick are equal at 85 but London has either the same or more skill points according to the stats?
|
|
|
|
Post by OverTheEdge on Oct 19, 2008 8:46:51 GMT -5
How is it that London and Kendrick are equal at 85 but London has either the same or more skill points according to the stats? The overalls aren't averages of the actual stats. They never have been. |
|
|
|
Post by lancewiget on Oct 19, 2008 9:32:08 GMT -5
How is it that London and Kendrick are equal at 85 but London has either the same or more skill points according to the stats? The overalls aren't averages of the actual stats. They never have been. If they were... everyone would be inbetween 65 and 80. What's the point in having your top guy an OVR of 82. It just doesn't happen. I personally think that the OVRs are the averages of the stats, with a certain number inbetween 10 and 15 added on. |
|
|
|
Post by OverTheEdge on Oct 19, 2008 10:14:01 GMT -5
The overalls aren't averages of the actual stats. They never have been. If they were... everyone would be inbetween 65 and 80. What's the point in having your top guy an OVR of 82. It just doesn't happen. I personally think that the OVRs are the averages of the stats, with a certain number inbetween 10 and 15 added on. I think they come up with realistic stats for everyone, and then just choose an overall number which would suit them as a mix of their stats and their popularity. |
|
|
|
Post by gordon on Oct 19, 2008 11:44:55 GMT -5
Ive actually thought they were averages, i never tried to work them out :/ lmao
|
|
|
|
Post by lancewiget on Oct 19, 2008 12:29:30 GMT -5
Ive actually thought they were averages, i never tried to work them out :/ lmao It's always been farfetched as in a few of the games, a guy's overall has been 90, yet his highest stat is only an 87. With stats limited to 87... there is no way your OVR is going to be 90. If they were... everyone would be inbetween 65 and 80. What's the point in having your top guy an OVR of 82. It just doesn't happen. I personally think that the OVRs are the averages of the stats, with a certain number inbetween 10 and 15 added on. I think they come up with realistic stats for everyone, and then just choose an overall number which would suit them as a mix of their stats and their popularity. Here is my example of adding numbers on to OVR's. I will be adding 7, as the first example uses the number 7 to get to the actual OVR. Santino's average is 76. Add 7, you get 83. 83 is Santino's actual OVR. Finlay's average is 80. Add 7, you get 87. 87 is Finlay's actual OVR. Shelton Benjamin's average is 79. Add 7, you get 86. 86 is Shelton's actual OVR. Undertaker's average is 88. Add 7, you get 95. 95 is 'Taker's actual OVR. OTE... I rest my case. Admittedly... I did say inbetween 10 and 15... but my theory is proven. |
|
|
|
Post by OverTheEdge on Oct 19, 2008 12:53:32 GMT -5
Ive actually thought they were averages, i never tried to work them out :/ lmao It's always been farfetched as in a few of the games, a guy's overall has been 90, yet his highest stat is only an 87. With stats limited to 87... there is no way your OVR is going to be 90. I think they come up with realistic stats for everyone, and then just choose an overall number which would suit them as a mix of their stats and their popularity. Here is my example of adding numbers on to OVR's. I will be adding 7, as the first example uses the number 7 to get to the actual OVR. Santino's average is 76. Add 7, you get 83. 83 is Santino's actual OVR. Finlay's average is 80. Add 7, you get 87. 87 is Finlay's actual OVR. Shelton Benjamin's average is 79. Add 7, you get 86. 86 is Shelton's actual OVR. Undertaker's average is 88. Add 7, you get 95. 95 is 'Taker's actual OVR. OTE... I rest my case. Admittedly... I did say inbetween 10 and 15... but my theory is proven. It appears that's right. Some come out to have a decimal at the end, but they're more than likely rounded. I randomly tried London and V and both worked out with that. |
|
|
|
Post by lancewiget on Oct 19, 2008 15:25:56 GMT -5
Well Undertaker's is closer to 87. I just rounded up instead. I can't believe I was somewhat correct. I never thought that was the actual case.
|
|
|
|
Post by OverTheEdge on Oct 19, 2008 15:37:13 GMT -5
Well Undertaker's is closer to 87. I just rounded up instead. I can't believe I was somewhat correct. I never thought that was the actual case. Yeah, both V and London were over by .25, but you'd round down if anything. Nice job figuring that out, dude. |
|
|
|
Post by lancewiget on Oct 19, 2008 16:57:13 GMT -5
No probs O?E, I thought "If I've said this... I may aswell check it out."
|
|
|
|
Post by OverTheEdge on Oct 19, 2008 17:10:59 GMT -5
No probs O?E, I thought "If I've said this... I may aswell check it out." I know this is off-topic, but I've seen so many people put O?E. Does it really show up as a question mark? It should be a skull and crossbones. I know the one day I was on a Mac it came up as a '?'. It should look like this:  |
|
