Just played ESPN, and all i have to say is...

[rookie1082]

Thank god for nba live. i know i gave a Live a dismal review as far as the franchise goes, and i mean ESPN is still far and away ahead as far as the franchise options, but the gameplay... man.... it was so.... unrelistic to me.

There were plenty of street moves in the game, and the isomotion moves arent all that convincing. If they could find a way to combine the gameplay of live and the franchise of espn, the game would be wonderful.

But all in all, i'm glad live is coming out for the PC, because its far and away the better gameplay, IMO.

[Bang]

Good to hear, good to hear!
(since I can't get ESPN basketball and I have Live)
now, if Live could just copy the dynasty mode of Madden!

[cyanide]

That's awesome news to hear! I think that's a greater achievement, getting gameplay as realistic as possible (although there are some minor flaws). Getting gameplay super-realistic is the hardest thing to do when making games, and EA is one step ahead in that department. It's mind-boggling though, that they can make an improvement in gameplay this year, but have Dynasty mode (IMO, much, much, easier to create and debug than gameplay) in heaps of issues. If they can fix the gameplay bugs for next year and get Dynasty mode perfected, they wouldn't even have competition.

[IluvitLIVE]

I have to respectfully disagree. I have also recently played ESPN 2k4 and it better than Live 04. I will agree however that there isn't as much of a separation as from 2k3 to Live 2003 but it is still better. I always found the recent Live series to be too street even more so than ESPN 2k4 or the overall 2k series. I feel that 2k4 beats Live in terms of realism and overall simulation gameplay. The graphics and player models are much better but I still feel Live has the best player animations of any basketball videogame I have ever played, period. But in 2k4 players actually look like themselves. The overall feel and package of 2k4 is much also better. Iso motion makes one on one plays fun and challenging and it ties Live's freestyle in that department. All in all, 2k4 is a much more quality package although I am a HUGE Live fan. 2k4 has toned down their "boring" sim this year and added some arcade but it still feels less arcadish than Live 04. It honestly is too bad that 2k4 will not come out on PC as a lot of PS2 reviews of it has it topping Live 04 so far. But it will be interesting to see what changes are implemented onto Live 04 for PC. Of course one advantage PC owners will always have over console owners are the number of great patchers there are who enchance the game's experience. But one thing certainly makes me wonder...what these patchers could do if the 2k series ever came onto the PC. If I rated Live 04 an 8.5/10 for PS2...I rate ESPN 2k4 a 9.25.

[Metsis]

Patch making... Never have done it etc. but I still believe that EA has gone out of it's way to make the game more patcher friendly... Correct me if I'm wrong!

So the 2k series might be a whole other ordeal... It might be that 2k series isn't as patchable as Live. You know why Half-Life is still the most played game over the internet??? Cause it has been easy to mod etc. And that is why the game is so darn popular.

And after half-life, well there's been all these games that have been trying to emulate that success. I don't think anything short of half-life 2 will be able to knock hl off it's throne as the king of the web.

This is one way to make the game last... But with Live and 2k, well there is no need to make the game last for years to come, cause the next edition is coming out the next year! So there really isn't any need to make the game patchable.

[Bang]

This is one way to make the game last... But with Live and 2k, well there is no need to make the game last for years to come, cause the next edition is coming out the next year! So there really isn't any need to make the game patchable.

So you have never patched Live 2003?
(It seemed like it by the way you talked. I might be wrong.)
If so, boy, you have missed A LOT.
If it weren't for NLSC roster patches my copy of Live 2003 would have only lasted me 3 months or so.
The tweaked rosters made the gaming experience 1327591% better.
Not to mention all the cyberfaces, the courts, etc. Everything was so much better thanks to the patches.
Sure, a year might not be a long wait, but why wait when all these patchers can patch it for you?

[Andrew]

I think Metsis is referring to the replay value of NBA Live. Because EA releases an annual edition of the game that will always have rosters updated to reflect the current season as well as additions, improvements and fixes from year to year, the game need not remain popular for more than a year - there will be another game succeeding it.

[Metsis]

All I was saying was that EA has probably gone out of it's way to make the game patchable. This is not something that would be too wise to put into the game especially if it makes for a lot more work.

So if ESPN 2k series would ever be ported to PC it just might not be as patchable as Live. Cause they might think that they are making another game in a year so there is no need for patches!

And they might think that the console players don't get to patch their game so why should PC users get to...

THIS PURELY FROM A GAME CREATORS POINT OF VIEW! Not exactly mine...

[JdotK]

Ive heard from friends, who all liked 2k3, that ESPN wasn't as good as it couldve been. And that they changed a lot of things for the worse.

[Doug]

yah i played it at my cousin's house aka espn nba 2k4 and it feels kinda the same as nba 2k3 just some stuff in it is worse. that's why i cant wait to try out live 04 when i get it cause it looks amazing this year.

[Old School Fool]

Dude...you know.....TONY is the reason i bought Live 2003 for the PC in June I saw his Cleveland Cavaliers patch and got Excited and i was like "OMFG I NEED TO BUY THIS GAME AND GET IT PATCHED" And yes....i patched NBA Live 2003....I only made Dornas for myself