harder teams better be hard

[showstopper496]

in live 2003 easy teams like hawks and nuggets were hard to beat and harder teams like kings and nets were waay easy to beat so i hope in live 2004 the harder teams are harder to beat

[madskillionaire]

umm, thats just the ratings they are given...EA always exaggerates ratings so thats what andrew's rosters are for

[ThisizaJackMove]

Yeah and EA's rating are gonna suck this year too. In that video the Bobcats were 19th and the Suns 21...How the hell an expansion team is better than a playoff team?

[Andrew]

umm, thats just the ratings they are given...EA always exaggerates ratings so thats what andrew's rosters are for

Mad as it may seem to downplay a compliment of my rosters (thanks by the way ), it's not necessarily the ratings. I too found that low rated teams seemed to play better than the top teams. Mind you, it could just be overconfidence on my part.

[chipper]

I think CPU teams are generally hard to beat, not because AI is smart but because they cheat. (10 straight treys out of triple teams and array of steals)
They will make shots no matter what their ratings are.

So basically, all teams, including bad teams (hawks, nuggets..) are hard to beat. Good teams on the other hand, are still hard to beat, but not any harder than other teams.

Just my opinion.

[Andrew]

True, but I always found that bad teams seemed to put up a better fight throughout the game. But like I said, that could just be me not taking them seriously enough and playing too carelessly.

[diafenes]

bad teams seemed to put up a better fight

true. gotta give love to the underdog. I've noticed it too, but it always has been there, live2000 and now.
recently I played against Utah (rated 27th) in my franchise, thinking I'll pad my stats on certain players, but Utah put up quite a fight (even if they cheated) right down to the last minutes.

so yeah its the fighting underdogs & the lax superstar team syndrome, but in some ways I like it.

[Metsis]

I really don't mind that the guys that are 30 points down get a little help from the computer... You get that too. At least I've noticed it when being down big time.

But the way the AI cathes up is what is so upsetting. The AI could shoot a two point jumper every now and then. Just make them get a few critical steals in the third and fourth quarter and generally up their shooting a notch or two.

It is true that when you are up by 20+ points you get a little more careless and those bonuses would be well explained. But shooting the three consecutive times from a double or triple team is just dumb.

Thank god the blocking attempt makes the shot less accurate again. It is quite hard to shoot when you got two players hustling for the ball.

[rudogg33]

i rather have close games, but bad teams do compete, in games like bulls beating lakers twice last yr. I remember reading that teams play like teams so if i play the lakers i hope shaq is practically unstoppable. I the ball 2 go through shaq like lakers do, like that i adjust, i enjoy challenges, becuz the game gets boring when u win by a lot. If the ai needs a little boost 2 make a run than so be it, the nba is all about runs remeber maves up by 29 in 4th and lost. Beside 90% of us when we are up by a lot, we concentrate on stats, trying to get players certain ammount of points asts, etc. i do hope the cpu is challenging.

[Andrew]

Sure, bad teams should compete, but they shouldn't always be harder opponents than the top teams. A good team at the top of their game should provide more of a challenge than a struggling team that has a limited arsenal.

I remember reading that teams play like teams so if i play the lakers i hope shaq is practically unstoppable.

I hope that Shaq is more dominant in Live 2004, but not to the extent of Live 2001/2002 - I remember him dropping as many as 70 points on me, and that just shouldn't happen. He doesn't score 40+ every game, so there should be a way of holding him below his average. Better yet, player streaks could ensure he's not always at the top of his game.

[Ruff Ryder]

And doubleteam seems more accurate so i hope that effects how players play. You should be able to double team t-mac and have him like 18-22 points on 8/23 shooting or something like that. not just having him torch you for 50-70 points a game even when he is doubleteamed.

Same with shaq. It shouldnt be you steal the ball everytime he gets the ball in the post. It should be more like his chances of scoing go down or he kicks it out to a 3-pt shooter(like in the real nba.

[Andrew]

I hope double teaming in the post is improved overall. Live 2003 saw too many steals occur this way, and as you mentioned it was often ineffective against the CPU's post players.

[Metsis]

One bad thing about the game is (and this can ruin the whole gaming experiece) if some things are just different for you then the AI.

In Live 2003 when a player caught up with you, well your player slowed down like hell (Or was this in 2001) and then when you tried to do the same to the AI, well the AI cotrolled player didn't slow down.

The game needs to feel the same for the player and the AI...

It just sucks if the AI can do something that you can't.

[Andrew]

I totally agree. I'm a big believer in the idea "if the CPU can do it, then the human player should be able to do it too".

[Ruff Ryder]

and collision detection. if you ran into the cpu and kept trying to run through him or it, they'd steal the ball. Instead the should back up, get knocked off balance or even fall down.