Fri Jul 23, 2004 8:17 pm
The dunk contest will be stretching the reality atleast by some measure. I like it that way. You can make just incredible dunks with it... It's just a game. A bit of fantasy, a bit of what the dreams are made of. It certainly won't have to be realistic in my mind, just as long as it isn't stretching it too much. I just hope they can capture the atmosphere of the event, cause that is what it's all about.
Realistic game... You can't create a totally realistic person or can you? You would have to create ten totally realistic people with total life histories etc. etc. to get more to the real life... To get realistic game you have to get realistic everything. So you can't get that in a game, as it is at best a simulation of reality... The AI will cheat a bit to keep the scores close, which is acceptable as I would rather play a close game than one where I beat someone 140-50... Cause that would certainly get boring fast... And how much more rewarding it is when you can win a game by 30 points when the AI cheats a bit? Bloody more rewarding. Realism is good, but the game needs to entertain and the closer games are just more entertaining...
And on why EA does not patch their games... Well let's just say that NBA Live 2003 patch is called NBA Live 2004 and NBA Live 2004 patch will be called NBA Live 2005... They don't have time to patch their games. They have a year to create the game to all the consoles and the PC and that's one hell of a pace. We have a good community here that makes patches when they can...
And kelpie... Never say never... No one will ever dunk a 720... Someone said that 640kB of memory would be sufficient forever with a PC! Someone was very wrong. They couldn't imagine what we have right now. The rookies are getting more and more athletically gifted as the time goes by so don't say no one can ever do a certain dunk... Maybe no one's tried it yet. Maybe someone might get the idea out of these games and work on it... The world is full of possibilities... If someone would have said to me five years ago that you can dunk over a 7'2" guy I would have said no, but Vinsanity did it in the olympics... And that was an ingame dunk not something set up for show. Still it is the craziest thing I've ever seen in a ball game... Never say never... You just end up eating your words for dinner.
Realistic game... You can't create a totally realistic person or can you? You would have to create ten totally realistic people with total life histories etc. etc. to get more to the real life... To get realistic game you have to get realistic everything. So you can't get that in a game, as it is at best a simulation of reality... The AI will cheat a bit to keep the scores close, which is acceptable as I would rather play a close game than one where I beat someone 140-50... Cause that would certainly get boring fast... And how much more rewarding it is when you can win a game by 30 points when the AI cheats a bit? Bloody more rewarding. Realism is good, but the game needs to entertain and the closer games are just more entertaining...
And on why EA does not patch their games... Well let's just say that NBA Live 2003 patch is called NBA Live 2004 and NBA Live 2004 patch will be called NBA Live 2005... They don't have time to patch their games. They have a year to create the game to all the consoles and the PC and that's one hell of a pace. We have a good community here that makes patches when they can...
And kelpie... Never say never... No one will ever dunk a 720... Someone said that 640kB of memory would be sufficient forever with a PC! Someone was very wrong. They couldn't imagine what we have right now. The rookies are getting more and more athletically gifted as the time goes by so don't say no one can ever do a certain dunk... Maybe no one's tried it yet. Maybe someone might get the idea out of these games and work on it... The world is full of possibilities... If someone would have said to me five years ago that you can dunk over a 7'2" guy I would have said no, but Vinsanity did it in the olympics... And that was an ingame dunk not something set up for show. Still it is the craziest thing I've ever seen in a ball game... Never say never... You just end up eating your words for dinner.
Fri Jul 23, 2004 9:46 pm
You are right in some ways but, obviously, there's always more than just one viewpoint. Realism - I don't think you need to capture several personalities and their lifes and everything when you just want to simulate movements of a basketball player and some principles of a basketball game. Don't go beyond that, we're still talking about one game of basketball. You don't need to give your PC game a soul and make it that much real. You just want to create something that looks good and plays good. Can we agree on that?
And that relates to your another point - you really believe that AI cheating on you is a good way to make the game close? Nah, this is, I believe, very blind. I guess you're thinking within the boundaries of what you've experienced with NBA Live so far, not with what your logic tells you that could be in the game. I think Live 2000 did probably about the best job in this area. The game was pretty much balanced in all statistical areas and the scores were close even without the AI cheating in a frustrating ways like the fast breaks are. There was number of other gameplay mishaps but for me that was one of the best balanced gameplays as for the stats and - to certain extent - the overall feeling from the game. And with no sliders and stuff.
Now I don't believe that if they tweaked the Live 2004 a little more there wouldn't be no way to come up with a better balance. I don't think we should just find excuses for them all the time. They charge us for the game and still release a product like Live 2003, a nightmare for me. You're also saying they don't have time to release patches. Why not? Ok, each year should be an improvement upon the previous version, that's just a matter of course for me. Why would there otherwise be the next version. But you really think it was that incredibly hard for them to make a patch, for example, at least for Live 2001 just to tweak the offensive rebounds a little? C'mon, I just don't believe that. They did 4 patches for NHL 2004. Not sure how important those are but they did them. Four of them. A game is a product that also requires some support, so saying the next version is the patch can never be the answer. Many of us also do want to have the older version too - retired players, commentary, different atmosphere and stuff. I can really not agree with you on this one.
Hm, slam dunk contest. Today's players, in general, are much better athletes, no question about that. But you're saying that as if people were some upgradeable machines that will be able to fly or something in the future. Human body doesn't change all that rapid man. You think 90's MJ would not be able to do what Vince did in 2000? I think they're on a pretty same level. So you believe in 10 years or so somebody does a 720? C'mon man. There will be always some new tricks and stuff but not beyond what a human body is capable of. Spinning two times around your axis while staying in that height and dunk, forget it.
And that Vince dunked over a 7'2"? I mean ok, what's so revolutionary about it? This is where I should say what you said - maybe nobody tried before. I believe today's players are significantly more aggressive (I mean it in a good way) than the MJ's class. Everybody knows that today's sports are on a very different level than they were some 20 years ago. Back then it was much more clean and pure offense. Now it's more about defense, banging and playing more physically, there are many talks about these differences between the generations in pro sports. It's the same with hockey, soccer, just whatever you take. Even motor racing became much more tactical, not that wild as it was in the 80's. So when VC dunks like that it's because he just goes there and does it on purpose with no respect, the first dream teams played with a different mindset I think, the times were different. But don't tell me MJ would not do it just like that if he wanted to. He buried his opponents in a different way, you should know...
And that relates to your another point - you really believe that AI cheating on you is a good way to make the game close? Nah, this is, I believe, very blind. I guess you're thinking within the boundaries of what you've experienced with NBA Live so far, not with what your logic tells you that could be in the game. I think Live 2000 did probably about the best job in this area. The game was pretty much balanced in all statistical areas and the scores were close even without the AI cheating in a frustrating ways like the fast breaks are. There was number of other gameplay mishaps but for me that was one of the best balanced gameplays as for the stats and - to certain extent - the overall feeling from the game. And with no sliders and stuff.
Now I don't believe that if they tweaked the Live 2004 a little more there wouldn't be no way to come up with a better balance. I don't think we should just find excuses for them all the time. They charge us for the game and still release a product like Live 2003, a nightmare for me. You're also saying they don't have time to release patches. Why not? Ok, each year should be an improvement upon the previous version, that's just a matter of course for me. Why would there otherwise be the next version. But you really think it was that incredibly hard for them to make a patch, for example, at least for Live 2001 just to tweak the offensive rebounds a little? C'mon, I just don't believe that. They did 4 patches for NHL 2004. Not sure how important those are but they did them. Four of them. A game is a product that also requires some support, so saying the next version is the patch can never be the answer. Many of us also do want to have the older version too - retired players, commentary, different atmosphere and stuff. I can really not agree with you on this one.
Hm, slam dunk contest. Today's players, in general, are much better athletes, no question about that. But you're saying that as if people were some upgradeable machines that will be able to fly or something in the future. Human body doesn't change all that rapid man. You think 90's MJ would not be able to do what Vince did in 2000? I think they're on a pretty same level. So you believe in 10 years or so somebody does a 720? C'mon man. There will be always some new tricks and stuff but not beyond what a human body is capable of. Spinning two times around your axis while staying in that height and dunk, forget it.
And that Vince dunked over a 7'2"? I mean ok, what's so revolutionary about it? This is where I should say what you said - maybe nobody tried before. I believe today's players are significantly more aggressive (I mean it in a good way) than the MJ's class. Everybody knows that today's sports are on a very different level than they were some 20 years ago. Back then it was much more clean and pure offense. Now it's more about defense, banging and playing more physically, there are many talks about these differences between the generations in pro sports. It's the same with hockey, soccer, just whatever you take. Even motor racing became much more tactical, not that wild as it was in the 80's. So when VC dunks like that it's because he just goes there and does it on purpose with no respect, the first dream teams played with a different mindset I think, the times were different. But don't tell me MJ would not do it just like that if he wanted to. He buried his opponents in a different way, you should know...
Fri Jul 23, 2004 9:52 pm
f someone would have said to me five years ago that you can dunk over a 7'2" guy I would have said no, but Vinsanity did it in the olympics...
please don't speak anymore of this French tragedy
Sat Jul 24, 2004 1:01 am
i'll admit it, i had my mafia friends put a hit on NBA Live. I JUST COULDNT TAKE IT ANYMORE, I SNAPPED!
now that i've made you think "wow, that was a shitty joke" my shitty explination of why live isn't dead wont seam as shitty.
A. In order for live to be dead, i'd say at least 2 or 3 other basketball games would have to definatly be better than it.
B. The NLSC or nbalive.org couldnt exist, because when ever you have patching sites like that you know you must be pretty popular..
C. Live has pretty much improved each year. sure theres always more they could add, but most games could add more. Look at madden for example, at this point i cant truely tell you the gameplay has changed over the last 3 years, its been exactly the same. Why? because almost everone is pleased with it.....I'm going to buy ESPN football this year simply because i need a change of pace...
D. There is no d, but i figured if i only had 3 points it wouldnt look very good..
now that i've made you think "wow, that was a shitty joke" my shitty explination of why live isn't dead wont seam as shitty.
A. In order for live to be dead, i'd say at least 2 or 3 other basketball games would have to definatly be better than it.
B. The NLSC or nbalive.org couldnt exist, because when ever you have patching sites like that you know you must be pretty popular..
C. Live has pretty much improved each year. sure theres always more they could add, but most games could add more. Look at madden for example, at this point i cant truely tell you the gameplay has changed over the last 3 years, its been exactly the same. Why? because almost everone is pleased with it.....I'm going to buy ESPN football this year simply because i need a change of pace...
D. There is no d, but i figured if i only had 3 points it wouldnt look very good..
Sat Jul 24, 2004 6:28 am
I have NOT see any sites like this for ESPN. I know they do not have ESPN for computer but there could still be a fansite. 
Sat Jul 24, 2004 6:46 am
Ive heard of some espn boards. I never went though, don't have the game.
And as you said no espn for pc so no patching and all other nice stuff and no use of this type of site.
And as you said no espn for pc so no patching and all other nice stuff and no use of this type of site.
Sun Jul 25, 2004 10:59 am
Metsis wrote:Well, this thread is one of many... There have always been people saying that Live is awful and they get people to react... Then they just fade away and don't get back to answer all their claims.
What the hell are u talking about????
I said Live was pretty good and keeps getting better..right in my 1st post. I just pointed out 2 things that I don't like. But what's the matter with you guys? Either you must love it all or hate it all? Hello?? Can I like LIVE but be critique toward certain aspects of the game? Can I?
I understand the reasons you gave for spacing problems...but please don't say that I complain and then I fade away.
As for helping when you lose your guy....I think one of the first thing you learn in basketball is to always look at the ball and DON"T guard your guy too close if you're on the opposite side (far from the ball)...just make 2-3 steps toward the center of the court and be ready to close a penetration...in LIVE they guard you face to face no matter what...it's unrealistic.
Sun Jul 25, 2004 1:48 pm
I have NOT see any sites like this for ESPN. I know they do not have ESPN for computer but there could still be a fansite
Yeah it doesn't have a website like this, that game must really suck
Sun Jul 25, 2004 1:55 pm
i'll have to agree with that
Sun Jul 25, 2004 2:22 pm
To me this is a bad topic! I think that the NBA Live series is just beggining to get exciting again with these great new features like the full all-star weekend! 
Sun Jul 25, 2004 2:38 pm
i'll have to agree with that
I was being sarcastic
Sun Jul 25, 2004 2:44 pm
Carmo wrote:To me this is a bad topic! I think that the NBA Live series is just beggining to get exciting again with these great new features like the full all-star weekend!
Agreed...heck, it might even kick ESPN NBA's ass this year...but we won't find out for a couple of months; I might even buy both; $20 really isn't a big deal, anyway... around $70 for the two!! Also, I wonder if EA still has the exclusive rights to use M.J. this year...hmm...I'd like to see what they could do using M.J. in ESPN NBA this year...great graphics last year; damn, it will be VERY hard to choose just one...
Sun Jul 25, 2004 4:48 pm
this thread should be dead
Fri Aug 06, 2004 7:07 pm
Old School Fool wrote:LeBron and Vince to construct totally insane dunks that can never even be performed in real life
Excuse me?
They made it a free system, I don't want to fucking do a gay ass Windmill, or see a 360 Performed 100 Times...That shit is like ESPN College Hoops, We don't want that shit...We want it where you can do anything...and 5 Years From Now..>LIVE will be REALISTIC....and you got the shittiest opinion ever...
a 720 is Possible...
Cartwheel is possible...
Off The GLass is possible...
Through the legs is possible...
You being ignorant as possible...
POSSIBLE
AHEM ........AMEN
Mon Aug 09, 2004 7:25 pm
Hey, I was in the same boat about NBA Live but that happened to me a few years back. I know capturing total realism isn't a realistic goal at this point but I thought EA really went off the track with NBA Live a few years ago when the game turned into garbage for sim freaks like myself. While you can't expect total realism, the dunk fests and poor game balance were unexcusable. I always wondered why developers had such a difficult time implementing the flow and feel of Basketball when they seem to do a good job with Football.
I will say that I'm finally coming back on the Bandwagon. After owning every EA Basketball game since Lakers vs. Celtics on the NES, I took a 3 year break starting with NBA Live 2002 which ran all the way until last year's game. While I rented last year's game and thought it was on the right track compared to previous years, there was still too many problems.
What I like about what EA is doing now is that they're finally paying attention to the little things that matter in real Basketball. Hopefully they deliver on what they're promising because reading their hype sheet has me pretty excited this year. I've been waiting for a game with realistic and differentiating player tendancies, a mid range game, off the ball movement, and a better representation of rebounding. This game seems like it's going to answer those questions.
My only concern now is that I still haven't heard if they are going to institute off-the-ball screens or if the A.I. will do a little more reactive adjusting from a coaching standpoint. Sometime in the future I hope to see more dynamic adjustments of offenses, defenses, and substitutions throughout a game depening on how you are playing.
Either way, now is not the time to stop playing this game. There were some pretty good excuses to stop a few years ago but it seems like EA has finally started throwing us hardcore, sim fans a few bones. Hopefully it keeps going in this direction.
I will say that I'm finally coming back on the Bandwagon. After owning every EA Basketball game since Lakers vs. Celtics on the NES, I took a 3 year break starting with NBA Live 2002 which ran all the way until last year's game. While I rented last year's game and thought it was on the right track compared to previous years, there was still too many problems.
What I like about what EA is doing now is that they're finally paying attention to the little things that matter in real Basketball. Hopefully they deliver on what they're promising because reading their hype sheet has me pretty excited this year. I've been waiting for a game with realistic and differentiating player tendancies, a mid range game, off the ball movement, and a better representation of rebounding. This game seems like it's going to answer those questions.
My only concern now is that I still haven't heard if they are going to institute off-the-ball screens or if the A.I. will do a little more reactive adjusting from a coaching standpoint. Sometime in the future I hope to see more dynamic adjustments of offenses, defenses, and substitutions throughout a game depening on how you are playing.
Either way, now is not the time to stop playing this game. There were some pretty good excuses to stop a few years ago but it seems like EA has finally started throwing us hardcore, sim fans a few bones. Hopefully it keeps going in this direction.
Mon Aug 09, 2004 8:42 pm
Andre wrote:What the hell are u talking about????
I said Live was pretty good and keeps getting better..right in my 1st post. I just pointed out 2 things that I don't like. But what's the matter with you guys? Either you must love it all or hate it all? Hello?? Can I like LIVE but be critique toward certain aspects of the game? Can I?
I understand the reasons you gave for spacing problems...but please don't say that I complain and then I fade away.
As for helping when you lose your guy....I think one of the first thing you learn in basketball is to always look at the ball and DON"T guard your guy too close if you're on the opposite side (far from the ball)...just make 2-3 steps toward the center of the court and be ready to close a penetration...in LIVE they guard you face to face no matter what...it's unrealistic.
First off, the first remark was towarded at kelpie... There's always someone that joins the forum just to say "THIS GAME SUCKS" and they are usually never seen again. Kelpie didn't exactly fall into this category.
You can gripe about things etc. And don't take any of this too personally...
About defense... Some guys you have to defend real close. I for one would nail the three on you every time if you gave me some space to work with. And when you would get close enough to stop my shooting, I'd just go around you. This is what makes basketball defense as hard as it is at the moment. You have to guard players like Redd, Reggie and Allen very closely or they'll sink a three on you. But it is true that there are guys that don't need so much guarding at the three point line... But the game is so intense that you never give your guy an inch you don't have to he'll burn you... That's just the way the pro's play it.