what version are you going to nba live 2004 for?

by **Shadyon** on Sun Sep 14, 2003 9:37 pm

i think i'll get the xbox version and burn the pc version of a friend ( :twisted:

)

by **Scary Hedo** on Sun Sep 14, 2003 9:40 pm

i'm gonna buy it for the pc, cuz I dont have a console but my cousin will buy for the ps2 so I will be playin it on the ps2 to.

by **Boyk** on Sun Sep 14, 2003 10:17 pm

I will be getting it for PC
now that i have a better PC

and i will buy espn basketball for ps2.

by **The Big Racist** on Sun Sep 14, 2003 10:23 pm

im Gonna get it for pc cause i dont have consoles

by **Jing** on Sun Sep 14, 2003 11:22 pm

i'm getting it for the ps2. sucks taht u can't get patches for the ps2 in most parts. cuase my computer can't even handle a demo game, so thats why. yah. otherwise i would get it for the computer.

by **rudogg33** on Mon Sep 15, 2003 1:41 am

ps2, i would get it for pc, but my cpu cant handle it. i hope 2 have a new pc for 2005. Pc is best all u need is the ps2 game controller adpter, like that you have the best controller, graphics, patches and more online capabilities. But online mode on ps2 isnt bad at all, works great. either way a great game is on the way hopefully.

by **ailive2005** on Mon Sep 15, 2003 4:15 am

I'm getting NBA Live 2004 for xbox. Hopefully EA gets it right and take a page from Sega and Make the xbox version of the game sharper than the PS2 and GC, making it a little more similar to the Pc version. I got Madden 2004 and the graphics are better for the box but the grass textures aren't as good as the other too (thats my only gripe), plus to fully see the xbox power u need a HDTV and thats Ok but I hope they also make it look sharp for people with anolog televisions. Thats just my take on this situation. but to answer the question, it's Xbox for me. :wink:

by **Jing** on Mon Sep 15, 2003 6:30 am

rudogg33 wrote:ps2, i would get it for pc, but my cpu cant handle it. i hope 2 have a new pc for 2005. Pc is best all u need is the ps2 game controller adpter, like that you have the best controller, graphics, patches and more online capabilities. But online mode on ps2 isnt bad at all, works great. either way a great game is on the way hopefully.

same here.

by **Se7en>>Dimension** on Mon Sep 15, 2003 6:36 am

Andrew wrote:Both PC and PS2.

by **JAY__JAY_** on Mon Sep 15, 2003 9:45 pm

x-box
cause u dont ahve to worry bout crashes or gettin updates for ya computer. i hate conputers. all breakin. no good enough any more. just frustrates me. maybe if i coudl afford to buy all this stuff nad have an awesome computer then yeha prob computer. why not use x-box live and ps2 online and make it like the pc version. so u can patch it straight form the internet. have like a browser site cd thingy. x-box has a harddrive. why not use it. comon microsoft we're waiting

by **fvdmc** on Tue Sep 16, 2003 8:30 am

I would get a Xbox version for one reason only, GRAPHICS!

I called up EA and asked which version would give the best graphics. They told me, since computers have to be rounded up to fit all computer performance range, it is not good as a console (Excluding PS1 and maybe gamecube.). Xbox, since all xbox are the same, they MAX it out to the best it can be.

If we all had the same cutting-edge computers, EA would make a version for the PC that would kick console any day.

by **cocobee** on Tue Sep 16, 2003 9:52 am

The PC graphics are always gonna be better than any console. Higher resolutions for one.It's so obvious, I play both Madden on the X Box and the PC, the PC version kicks the x box's ass. NBA Live 2004 will look the best on a PC-I'll do a screenshot challenge against any console person who says otherwise.

by **fvdmc** on Tue Sep 16, 2003 10:00 am

cocobee wrote:The PC graphics are always gonna be better than any console. Higher resolutions for one.It's so obvious, I play both Madden on the X Box and the PC, the PC version kicks the x box's ass. NBA Live 2004 will look the best on a PC-I'll do a screenshot challenge against any console person who says otherwise.

Absolutely FALSE. The resolution might make a difference. Now, if the console had a resolution option, the Madden for PC would be getting kicked. The picture on PC might be more crisp, but graphic wise, it is absolutely false. The Fps on console is much more. Maybe in a few years when Quantum-computers come out, this concept will seize to exist.

by **fvdmc** on Tue Sep 16, 2003 10:04 am

I heard, in theory, that a Quantum-Computer can boot up windows in less than a second. Some rumors say that the measurement surpasses seconds -- done in ms.

From what I read:

If the latest Pentium 4 processor (Clockspeed of 3.2 GHz) takes on a task that might take 6 years to complete, a quantum-computer will finish it in .5 of a second. (WTF will take 6 years to compute? Hahaha... 2+2?)

by **air gordon** on Tue Sep 16, 2003 10:42 am

ps2 for sure. playing against roommates/friends for money, beer, food, chores is the best.

i guess PC also, hopefully a pirated version.

by **bishibashiboy** on Tue Sep 16, 2003 11:50 am

fvdmc wrote:
cocobee wrote:The PC graphics are always gonna be better than any console. Higher resolutions for one.It's so obvious, I play both Madden on the X Box and the PC, the PC version kicks the x box's ass. NBA Live 2004 will look the best on a PC-I'll do a screenshot challenge against any console person who says otherwise.

Absolutely FALSE. The resolution might make a difference. Now, if the console had a resolution option, the Madden for PC would be getting kicked. The picture on PC might be more crisp, but graphic wise, it is absolutely false. The Fps on console is much more. Maybe in a few years when Quantum-computers come out, this concept will seize to exist.

Absolutely false. Exactly why would Madden for PC be absolutely kicked by a lowly X-box and it's GPU even if it could raise it's resolution?
Don't even bring up the topic of framerates. A Radeon 9800 pro will eat the X-box alive. Case in point, UT2003 for PC vs Xbox.
The PC version SHOULD and i predict WILL have the best graphics. The 3D GPU in PC's is MUCH more sophisticated than anything in the console market right now. Under the assumtion that the X-Box is currently the best looking console out, it uses an nVidia chip that has a reference design similar to something between a Geforce3 and a Geforce4. We're talking about almost a 3 year old design here. We are now headed into DX9 for PC's and IF Nba live is created to take advantage of this, graphically it will win HANDS DOWN. Capability-wise: Pixel shaders 2.0, Vertex Shaders, the new HDL lighting in DX9 are far more advanced than anything on the console market. The X-box cannot render any of these things while keeping a high framerate. Now throw in 6XAA and 16XAF and it's a landslide in terms of image quality for the PC's. This is why new games like half life 2 and Doom3 for the X-box will be scaled down graphically compared to the pc version. All things being equal, the PC 3d graphics have both more capability and have the potential to be better than anything the console market can put out. Whether or not the developers at EA sports can make the game look good on the pc is another story.
The only thing the X-box has going for it is that it's a custom chip which allows programmers to program specifically for it and optimize for it specifically. This will indeed yield higher framerates than a comparable Geforce3 or maybe even a Geforce4 Ti4200 since there are no extraneous variables to account for. In the end though, it will still be slower than any of the new chips and capability-wise it will be inferior.

by **fvdmc** on Tue Sep 16, 2003 12:19 pm

bishibashiboy wrote:
fvdmc wrote:
cocobee wrote:The PC graphics are always gonna be better than any console. Higher resolutions for one.It's so obvious, I play both Madden on the X Box and the PC, the PC version kicks the x box's ass. NBA Live 2004 will look the best on a PC-I'll do a screenshot challenge against any console person who says otherwise.

Absolutely FALSE. The resolution might make a difference. Now, if the console had a resolution option, the Madden for PC would be getting kicked. The picture on PC might be more crisp, but graphic wise, it is absolutely false. The Fps on console is much more. Maybe in a few years when Quantum-computers come out, this concept will seize to exist.

Absolutely false. Exactly why would Madden for PC be absolutely kicked by a lowly X-box and it's GPU even if it could raise it's resolution?
Don't even bring up the topic of framerates. A Radeon 9800 pro will eat the X-box alive. Case in point, UT2003 for PC vs Xbox.
The PC version SHOULD and i predict WILL have the best graphics. The 3D GPU in PC's is MUCH more sophisticated than anything in the console market right now. Under the assumtion that the X-Box is currently the best looking console out, it uses an nVidia chip that has a reference design similar to something between a Geforce3 and a Geforce4. We're talking about almost a 3 year old design here. We are now headed into DX9 for PC's and IF Nba live is created to take advantage of this, graphically it will win HANDS DOWN. Capability-wise: Pixel shaders 2.0, Vertex Shaders, the new HDL lighting in DX9 are far more advanced than anything on the console market. The X-box cannot render any of these things while keeping a high framerate. Now throw in 6XAA and 16XAF and it's a landslide in terms of image quality for the PC's. This is why new games like half life 2 and Doom3 for the X-box will be scaled down graphically compared to the pc version. All things being equal, the PC 3d graphics have both more capability and have the potential to be better than anything the console market can put out. Whether or not the developers at EA sports can make the game look good on the pc is another story.
The only thing the X-box has going for it is that it's a custom chip which allows programmers to program specifically for it and optimize for it specifically. This will indeed yield higher framerates than a comparable Geforce3 or maybe even a Geforce4 Ti4200 since there are no extraneous variables to account for. In the end though, it will still be slower than any of the new chips and capability-wise it will be inferior.

You are completely forgetting that FPS is all under the game and NOT COMPLETELY the graphic card. For example: The game Sim ANT. Just because you have a Radeon 9800 pro doesn't make any difference against a GeForce FX 5600. It seems like I'm repeating myself over and over again. For the last time, the game is developed under a rounded up PERFORMANCE RANGE!!! Thus, no matter what TOP-NOCH graphic card you have, it will not be smooth and silkly as XBOX. I can catalogically back this up ith 100% truth. I have called EA MYSELF!!! AND PLEASE... EA WON'T LIE. Lastly, why in the world would you think PC-CD comes out last. Hmmm, maybe because EA is cutting out things and rounding things up so it fits all computer PERFORMANCE RANGES. People here are so presumptuous. Especially you, bishibashiboy. Not only your backed up info sucked, it was incoherent. DON'T WITH!!!

Sports games on PC platform will only excede CONSOLE when QUANTUM COMPUTERS COME OUT!!! If you are not familar with Quantum technology, please refer back to my other posts. It should be located a bit above from this one.

Here is an additional back up that might shut your mouth, BISHI:
When computer games are made, they have to be made at a range where numerous people can purchase and play. If a game required a P4 and a Radeon 9800 Pro --HELL YEAH IT WOULD KICK ASS -- but think about how it would do out in the market? FREAKIN HORRIBLE. In other words, NO ONE WILL BE ABLE TO PLAY IT; THUS, NO ONE WILL PURCHASE IT. Do you think a software compant would be willing to throw tons of money down the drain for no reason? HELL NO. Therefore, before the game is released, it is tested and rounded up. Testers and the developers MAKE SURE that it fits a range so majority of computer game consumers can purcahse it and play. I hope I made myself clear! If this does not sound persuasive, I advise you to contact EA yourself and ask.

by **bishibashiboy** on Tue Sep 16, 2003 12:33 pm

fvdmc wrote:You are completely forgetting that FPS is all under the game and NOT COMPLETELY the graphic card. For example: The game Sim ANT. Just because you have a Radeon 9800 pro doesn't mean anything toward graphics.

Huh?..what the hell are you talking about? FPS all under the game and NOT COMPLETELY the graphics card? The graphics card renders everything displayed IN the game. Explain cuz i dunno what you're trying to say.

fvdmc wrote:It seems like I'm repeating myself over and over again. For the last time, the game is developed uder a rounded up PERFORMANCE RANGE!!! Thus, no matter what TOP-NOCH graphic car you have, it will not be smooth and silkly as XBOX.

This makes no sense at all. Are you trying to say that because they have to optimize the game for the lowest denominator (the slowest pc required by the game) then the game will be slower overall? You're crazy. That is the whole logic behind turning down graphics options in the game. Not everyone can display everything at max details in NBa Live so the user will have to turn down graphical detail. Max details on x-box is the same as max details on the pc. In order to play at it max you need a fast graphics card and fast pc. They don't intentionally cripple the graphics for the pc version. It's called scalability. If you have a fast pc coupled with a fast graphics card you should be able to play at max details at high framerates. If not then you turn down the graphics details. Simple as that. You think EA cares if your computer can't handle it at max? YOu think they intentionally make the game slower overall so that they can accomodate shitty computers? You're dreaming. By the way silky and smoothy normally implies >75fps for most ppl. ANY high end graphics card can do that and maintain high detail level AND include AF and AA at higher levels than the X-box can dream of.

fvdmc wrote:I can catalogically back this up ith 100% truth.

Please do so cuz i have no clue what you're talking about.

fvdmc wrote:I have called EA MYSELF!!! AND PLEASE... EA WON'T LIE. Lastly, why in the world would you think PC-CD comes out last. Hmmm, maybe because EA is cutting out things and rounding things up so it fits all computer PERFORMANCE RANGES. People here are so presumptuous. Especially you, bishibashiboy. Not only your backed up info sucked, it was incoherent. DON'T WITH!!!

First of all that's a pretty stupid thing to phone EA about. Second, the PC comes out last because EA normally does all the console versions and slowly ports to the PC along the way. Dont' ask me why they do that. That's just what they do. That has nothign to do with the PC being inferior. Name me ONE game that looks better on the X-box than the PC, assuming both were ported identically.

fvdmc wrote:People here are so presumptuous. Especially you, bishibashiboy. Not only your backed up info sucked, it was incoherent. DON'T WITH!!!

Don't with what? Incoherency is your specialty.
How am i being presumptious? How are you NOT being presumptious? I know what PC graphics are capable of. I also know what consoles aren't capable of. And as of right now the X-box is inferior graphically to the 9800pro.

fvdmc wrote:Sports games, in particular, will excede console ONLY WHEN QUANTUM COMPUTERS COME OUT -- for the third TIME! Geeeish.

That is your opinion. I happen to think you're absolutely wrong since they have already exceeded consoles. I honestly think you're the only one that thinks console games look better than what's possible on a PC.

by **fvdmc** on Tue Sep 16, 2003 12:35 pm

BISHI BOY, Take it slowly this time, and read again. Don't worry, I'll give you all the time you need.

Oh yeah... THE FPS THING. I advise you to take a tour around EA. NBA LIVE 2003 has MORE frames than 2001. Therefore, making your statement false. For real and please, READ IT AGAIN!

by **bishibashiboy** on Tue Sep 16, 2003 12:39 pm

fvdmc wrote:BISHI BOY, Take it slowly this time, and read again. Don't worry, I'll give you all the time you need.

I don't need more time.
Explain what you said.
You're not clear.
Just type it again SLOWLY.

by **fvdmc** on Tue Sep 16, 2003 12:41 pm

bishibashiboy wrote:
fvdmc wrote:BISHI BOY, Take it slowly this time, and read again. Don't worry, I'll give you all the time you need.

I don't need more time.
Explain what you said.
You're not clear.
Just type it again SLOWLY.

Like you I don't dwell on the internet. JUST READ IT AGAIN, and UNDERSTAND IT through "BETWEEN THE LINES".

by **bishibashiboy** on Tue Sep 16, 2003 12:42 pm

fvdmc wrote:
bishibashiboy wrote:
fvdmc wrote:BISHI BOY, Take it slowly this time, and read again. Don't worry, I'll give you all the time you need.

I don't need more time.
Explain what you said.
You're not clear.
Just type it again SLOWLY.
Like you I don't dwell on the internet. JUST READ IT AGAIN, and UNDERSTAND IT through "BETWEEN THE LINES".

hahaha it's obvious i don't know what you're TRYING to say..so why don't you just explain to me in one sentence why an x-box should display better graphics than a pc can.

by **fvdmc** on Tue Sep 16, 2003 12:42 pm

I've edited some things, I advise you to read my PERFORMANCE RANGE concept, WHICH IS TRUR -- backed up by EA.

by **bishibashiboy** on Tue Sep 16, 2003 12:44 pm

fvdmc wrote:Oh yeah... THE FPS THING. I advise you to take a tour around EA. NBA LIVE 2003 has MORE frames than 2001. Therefore, making your statement false. For real and please, READ IT AGAIN!

And what the hell does this mean? Take a tour around EA? The company? Why would i do that to see how many FRAMES 2003 has?
You mean take apart the game and see how many more frames 2003 has? Of course it has more frames..duh!

by **fvdmc** on Tue Sep 16, 2003 12:44 pm

BETWEEN THE LINE... DUMB FUCK! Damn, I'm not a person take utilizes foul language to get my point across, but DAMN!!! You are, BY FAR, the DUMBEST SHIT I have ever met.

what version are you going to nba live 2004 for?

Who is online