this is closed sorry

[showstopper496]

sorry for copying nkredible

[cocobee]

hello Nkredible !

I just read this post over at OS.

All I can say is, let's wait till October.

[showstopper496]

yes thats my post from operation sports

[Jewelz0376]

Thank you for your worthless rambling. If you don't like the new version of live then don't buy it. It amazes me how many people will go nuts over a video like this that probably based on 2 months before the game is realeased so get over it.

[showstopper496]

fuck you if you dont like want i am writing then dont read fucker

[ThisizaJackMove]

Remember the guys playin the game didn't have a f!cking clue. Adressing your issues

1. I Agree completely

2. One thing I liked was that there weren't that man fast breaks like in the last game. Also, I am not sure but EA said it is two different shoot buttons. Maybe the guys playing were trying them out and when you saw the lean ins they were with the dunk/lay-up button, and the only thing reminiscent on a lay-in from long range is a leaner...Remember these guys sucked, maybe they just didn't have a clue at all.

3. The 10 Man Mo-cap does make a difference, but not a really huge one. As on offence guys will move to another spot on the floor if its open. Look at K-Mart and Zo in the vid. They moved to open spots but the suck ass player didn't give them the bal when the obviously raised there hands.

4. I agree ad did you see Ben Wallace's fro?!? Why did they change it? It is ug-a-ly. Looks like Big Ben cornrows patches will be all i'll use for him.

5. Well these guys ovbiously sucked, and they probably didn't us the post up to its full extent as we were seeing LeBron and Vince posting not Shaq & Yao. They may have a different animation even though that seems unlikely. I do agree with you on this for the most part.

6. Hopefully the "auto guard" only happend when on is in a defensive stance. then again that still sucks, to be sucked into the defender and this had the huge clipping problem as when one posted up the ballhandler warped through the defender.

7. I've seen some new dunks, and I like how when you go in you don't dunk on everyone if it isn't clear. That could be a reason we didn't see too many dunks.

[cocobee]

Whoa fellas, take it easy--Show made some valid points.


Sometimes people need to vent--what i like is that he's not totally bashing the game for no reason but backing his thoughts up and I'm sure if the game is solid--Show will be the first person in line to get Live. A healthy debate is always good. Try talking about Live at OS (good luck)--and you''' get shot down with NBA2k this and NBA2k that and Live sucks etc.. If you actually like NBA Live you are shot down. I hope that doesn't happen here. In the long run, he will get what he wants to get and you will get what you want to get and I'll get all 3 games plus the PC version (I'm a sucker for basketball games--shit I might even get NBA Jam 2004 and NBA Ballers)

I'll throw in my opinion later, I'm too tired now. Peace

[Colin]

First of all, this video probably wasn't made very recently. This little round may not have been played just a week before we saw it. This might even be from E3! We don't know. This could explain bad quality graphics and a lack or collision detection.

Secondly, the player models actually look good to me. They look a little stubby because I'm used to Live '03, but still good. The whole "floating" thing I didn't even notice until I heard about it here and looked at the vid real close. It's not that big of a deal IMO. I think the main reason post-up was so much of a non-factor was that those boneheads playing didn't really know how to post a guy up down low. And the graphics will get better. If you look at the new screens (not the ones dahl posted of this vid) you'll see they look good, not fantabulous like some others may look. But still good.

[Metsis]

As colin said, this video could actually be the one that was shown at E3 and if this is true, well it's ancient. I haven't seen it so I'm asking is it a pc vid or is it something else (640x480 resolution)??? Cause the games always look dumb and ugly with those graphics. When you crank up the resolution all looks so much clearer, better and more accurate so don't go dissing if it was 640x480 vid.

And about those jump shots... ThisIzAJackMove already said that the guys playing sucked big time. You might even suck at it big time too when you first play. Remeber that they have the pro-step button now which brings your player to a halt to make the "good" jump shot (or atleast it should). Don't forget about that... I'm sure I will be struggling with this in the first place as I will with the two button shooting too. It will take time to familiarize your self with those.

But the real kicker is not the graphics or the gameplay... The real deal will be in the dynasty section. If the dynasty is good and the AI gives you a good opposition in the gameplay this game will surely still rock. The video had basically nothing about the dynasty mode and I'm sure we will all be surprised about that. Dynasty mode will either make or break this game...

No offense showstopper you shouldn't go f*** you when someone disagrees with you... That's just against the rules of this forum. This forum is basically pretty up beat as it has always been so we really shouldn't go flaming anyone here. Anything Jewelz0376 wrote couldn't be that bad that you would take it that personally. I know how it feels when your posts don't get the feedback you'd like them to get, but I don't go around flaming people about it.

This is a friendly forum... Be nice

[Andrew]

Quite right. showstopper496, remarks such as the one you made:

fuck you if you dont like want i am writing then dont read fucker

are just not on. This isn't the first time you've acted this way, so consider this your first warning. Do not continue this kind of behaviour.

Jewelz0376, you also came off as a little hostile in your post. As Metsis said, we try to promote a friendly atmosphere here. Action will be taken against people who constantly disrupt the forum with flames, so make sure you follow the rules and avoid hostile exchanges.

[Vi1n5ce]

I rarely post anything here, but hey, I have time today... so let me say something.....
It's NBA live 2004...everybody, not NBA Perfect.... Nobody makes a game perfectly.
Which programmer doesn't want to create a perfect game???....
When the Live serie begins, which EA programmer doesn't want to create a true, pure simulation basketball game???...
The main thing here is that they actually showed improvement....
Nba live 2004 is no different than any other previous version of NBA live, It is a stepping stone for EA to reach that perfect basketball simulation...
So, let's calm down and wait for the game, if it's not up to expectation this year, wait for next year's version... There's always hope....

About the graphics, if the programmer (or computer artists....) feels that it is better to override last year version body part, then I think they have reason to... Right decision or wrong decision??? No one can judge that I think, it's a personally opinion...

That's all, I hope everyone will enjoy the NBA live they will own this year.... And have hope for the "NBA live Perfect"...

[Nick]

Well, a reason for a NBA Live programmer not to make the perfect game could be because they have to release an even more perfect game the next year. *shrug*

I agree with most of showstopper's points (if he even wrote them )

[Andrew]

Vi1n5ce brings up a good point: why would anyone want to intentionally create a bad game? It's a common assertion, that the production team must not care about the product or its customers, and just throw a game together. The same assertion is often made about writers for television shows that are seen to be declining in quality.

Why would these people do a poor job intentionally? And indeed, is it a poor job or just not what the public wants?

NBA Live 2003 had good intentions. It was designed to be fun, and if we weren't looking for a realistic sim that produced realistic statistics in 12 minute quarters, we would have enjoyed it. If we didn't know that Chris Whitney and Derek Fisher shouldn't light us up for 40 points whenever we play them, it would be a challenge, not a gripe.

But we want realism, and as such NBA Live 2003 didn't suit our tastes. It could certainly be a fun game to play, though you had to compromise your desire for total realism. The basis of a good game was present in Live 2003, and in all honesty it was a good game. But many of us are fans of realism in sports games and thus weren't satisfied with certain aspects of the game, primarily the speed and a defensive game that wasn't effective enough.

Hopefully NBA Live 2004 will prove to be a step towards the kind of game we truly want. Perhaps it will be a small step, perhaps it will greatly resemble our idea of a "perfect" basketball game. Based upon what we know so far, I think there's reason for optimism. But everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

[elwudl]

But is this step Andrew writes really worth the money I spend them every year on their game, hoping I get a really improved game, with better gameplay, not only new features?
IMO the game would nearly be perfect if they would ask some of us what we want. But the problem is, we are only a little part of the ones that play the game. The majority is satisfied with the type of game we can get now.
I know it from my brother, i am 20, he is 11, he does not want to have a realistic 12 min quarter match. He wants to dunk with Vince all 30 seconds. And that's what you can get from EA.
But why are there always two parts, one simulation play and one arcade?

[Andrew]

True, it can quite expensive to take these steps towards a better game. But my point is that EA is not intentionally making a bad game, nor are they making a bad game. As indicated by the interviews last year, the aim of Live 2003 was to provide a game that was fun to play, which is fine. Even those of us who want the game to be realistic still want to have fun.

But in practice, the idea made the game too arcade-ish. The fun came at the expense of some of the realism, as did the challenge. This is where sliders come in. Sure, the inclusion of sliders doesn't guarantee a perfect game. But they should provide the level of customisation to make the game appealing for those looking for a fun, fast paced game, as well as those of us who want a game that is fun but also realistic.

[elwudl]

Of course I do not want to put EA in charge of making a bad game intentionally.
But the thing I complain about is that in my opinion it's bad. And it is only my opinion, which must not be the opinion of someone other.

[Andrew]

Of course you are entitled to your opinion. I maintain that Live 2003 is not a bad game, just not the style of game we were hoping for, but you don't have to agree with that assertion if you do not share that point of view.

[elwudl]

Oh in kind a way I do agree you! I wrote, we are only a little minority that wants another type of game! For my brother that I mentioned it's a good game!
But not for me and my wishes.

[Andrew]

The number of people who want a realistic game is probably higher than you think. What I think EA is aiming for (especially with sliders) is a balance between fun and realism, with the ability to customise the style to your liking.

I'm a fan of realism, but I found I could have fun with Live 2003 if I compromised my desire for realistic stats and played as realistically as the game would allow. But ultimately I would have preferred a more realistic basketball sim.

[Swoosh]

First of all, i agree with andrew on what he said here , second of all, showstopper u made a lot of valid points that are well thought but im still gonna give my own opinion
1.very true, nothing to add accept that it will probably be better in the final version
2. no problems with the momentum, i like a little arcadish style(but again this is personal opinion)
3. i agree, though i still believe 10man freestyle is an improvement and a good one
4. i like the player models actually, and also the big ben of the screen(again personal opinion),cuz in '03 the player models were idd great and all but in the game i kinda thought(especially the white ballers)were a little wide-shouldered, i know they are strong but they were just a little over it imho
5. the persons who played the game probably didnt want to take their time for a good inside game, they wanted to penatrate and dunk obviously, so i dont think they were that great in the game or just going for a quick test, and also its quite normal that players move all around you and quite fast when u are going inside, in real life too(they dont stand around and wait), i gotta admit you shouldnt be triple teamed cuz u go inside or overwhelmed by all the other defenders but they gotta do something right?
6.couldnt agree more, automatic ball protect is not really what i had in mind though if its implemented subtily i can dig it
7. i have no complaints about the dunks, most of the players just do ordinary dunks, so what if they are all the same, there were just too many in '03 and that made them quite boring, though your thingy about the subtle dunk is very correct and i would like to see it in the game too

that's all

[Andrew]

Though I would prefer a wider array of simple dunks, the dunks in NBA Live 2003 were fine save for a few complaints:

1. The dunk packages could stand to be improved. A couple more guard-like dunk packages, a package containing only one handed dunks, some more simple dunk packages, etc.
2. Dunks should not outnumber layups, especially when the lane is clogged. A layup may be a more feasible shot attempt when you're facing traffic.
3. The dunks in Live 2003 were also performed too easily and from too far away from the basket. A gliding dunk should require a player to be running towards the basket. Obviously most players would probably attempt a layup when they are 8 or 9 feet from the basket rather than a jumpshot, though not everyone has the ability to perform a ferocious dunk

If the same array of dunks as Live 2003 (with a few new ones thrown in) is in NBA Live 2004, I won't mind too much, as long as those points have been addressed. After all, numerous dunks that are easy to perform mean higher field goal percentages, and too many unstoppable/uncontested points in the paint.

[Nel]

though not everyone has the ability to perform a ferocious dunk

I agree. Why is everyone complaining about dunks? If you watch nba, only VC, J-rich, Kobe does spectacular dunks. Not everyone can do what they do. IMO i hate seeing VC do a 360 windmill dunk in nba live cause in real life he doesn't do that often. Why ask for more variety of dunks? If you want spectacular dunks buy nba street...

[Andreas Dahl]

yup, totaly agree with you guys... at would be realy nice with some smoother/simpler dunks in 2004, more realistic...


- on a side note -
i posted this somewhere for 2003 as a question...

it would be great to be able to adjust you'r own dunk-package... maybe not ingame, but with some .dbf etiting though... i think it woulkd be nice... most people would probebly just take the most spectacular, but some woudln't (like me for an example)...
and then... ehm... oh screw it... this was a bad idea...

[elwudl]

I do not think it was a bad idea!

[Nkredible]

Um...IM THE REAL NKREDIBLE...this dude straight took my post and pasted it here claiming it was his, LMAO...wow...anyways...i just wanted to point that out...this showstopper cat is not me...im in a rush right now so i dont have time to back up my stuff...i just wanted to come in here and point that out...that is NOT me...i'll be back to reply to some of this stuff though