testing people's biases on nba live......

Those screens don't tell shit. Ya know why? Because they don't look like that! I can't speak for NBA Live, but I will say that ESPN's graphics on any television look much better than that. More crisp, more detailed, more smooth.

I can't believe we're even debating this. ESPN's graphics last year were clearly better than Live's if you were to compare them on a console. This is ridiculous.

Glove, I have a question: Who looks better, Beyonce Knowles or Carmen Electra? My point? What looks good or "better" will always be debated because it's so damn subjective. I thought Live was "Clearly" the winner in the graphics department last year, so who's right? Who's wrong?

Those screens don't tell shit. Ya know why? Because they don't look like that! I can't speak for NBA Live, but I will say that ESPN's graphics on any television look much better than that. More crisp, more detailed, more smooth.

I can't believe we're even debating this. ESPN's graphics last year were clearly better than Live's if you were to compare them on a console. This is ridiculous.

Man you've got to be kidding me... Those are the right pics and they are the right pics for console Live as well... It's just that on the PC screen with high resolution, they look like crap! That's what the games with identical graphics would look like on PC... They are not crisp and smooth etc. it's just that the TV can only run at such a low resolution that even crappy graphics look good.

PC is in it's own class when it comes to graphics... I would hope that they would increase the TV resolution to get better output just to get a sharper image... It is way too outdated as it is... But with so many televisions in the world, it ain't never going to happen.

PC rox... As long as the 2k series stays off the PC it will lose everytime when compared to Live. PC is the only way to play...

Those screens don't tell shit. Ya know why? Because they don't look like that! I can't speak for NBA Live, but I will say that ESPN's graphics on any television look much better than that. More crisp, more detailed, more smooth.

I can't believe we're even debating this. ESPN's graphics last year were clearly better than Live's if you were to compare them on a console. This is ridiculous.

thank you, there is someone in here with some common sense, that's all I'm wanting. I don't care if you guys think the gameplay is better, i'll give you that, but if you guys thought the graphics were better last year, then i wont read any of your reviews for this year because u guys are really, really blind, it's the difference btwn night and day, yet most of you wont admit it except him!

thank you, there is someone in here with some common sense, that's all I'm wanting.

Excuse my french, but who the fuck do you think you are? You started this whole thread so people will say "ESPN rocks"--and when you didn't get the result you wanted your trying to say people are dumber than you because they don't share the same opinion? Wow real open minded of you, you must live in a world where it's one way or the highway. If someone doesn't agree with you, it doesn't mean they don't have common sense, it means they see things differently. Accept it. People are different. You and gloveguy share the same opinion, WONDERFUL!

I'm willing to bet a good majority of the people here don't have an HDTV, so that's what ESPN does look like in real action. It seems like you are working for Sega with your narrow viewpoints and name calling. I remember popping 2k4 for the first tiime, and I was like "huh". Now the replays looked good and very detailed--but the ingame action looked exactly like those pics in the screen.

I guess I have no common sense, because I like Live better--and those screens look exactly what I've been trying to say during real gameplay. Plus, do you even take in account animation? I'm sure you've got a wonderful perfect opinion on why the gorilla animation in 2k series is better than Lives?

About reading reviews, it seems the only reviews you want to hear are on the ESPN 2k boards. This here is an NBA Live forum. Don't come over here accusing people and questioning people's opinions just because they don't agree. Take that "ESPN-Operation Sports and what use to be IGN boards" mentality out of these forums. You can take your "ALL Mighty" cock-e-ness" attitude to the birds man. Or grow up.

And to coincide with my first analogy, obviously--you haven't had good p*uSS*y yet.

Plus, do you even take in account animation? I'm sure you've got a wonderful perfect opinion on why the gorilla animation in 2k series is better than Lives?

"Gorilla Animation"? C, you've done it again!

And what kind of response was he really expecting on NBA Live Message Board?

because u guys are really, really blind

there is someone in here with some common sense

We all know that blind people can't play video games... This is common sense...

We all play video games here so we are obviously not blind...

Therefore you must be LACKING SOME COMMON SENSE!!!

That is common sense... Having different opinions isn't!!!...

You dig???... I guess you don't, cause you have no common sense...

Glove, I have a question: Who looks better, Beyonce Knowles or Carmen Electra? My point? What looks good or "better" will always be debated because it's so damn subjective. I thought Live was "Clearly" the winner in the graphics department last year, so who's right? Who's wrong?

If you're playing it on your PC, then I understand, but I played both on console and I found it to be comparing Vermont maple syrup(ESPN) and Aunt Jemima syrup(Live) -- there's just no turning back until you taste the real thing. That was just my opinion.

Gut and Metsis -- that's not how they look! FACT! Stop giving these bullshit screens. In fact, if you were to look more through the Gamespot screens instead of choosing the first and worst one's you could find, you would find some in-game screenshots that do look more like what they'd resemble on a television screen. Whether you have an HDTV or not, I'm telling you that that's not how they look.

I'll say it again. Everyone has thier own opinion, but the overall consensus is that 2K4 looked better (graphically) than Live 2004, but Live 2004 was clearly the better basektball game, and that to me is what matters. Who gives a fuck which one was prettier, if it don't play like basketball, it ain't basketball.

I'd hate to see the kind of women some of you would try to have a relationship with. Only thing that matters is how she looks, no substance at all, she can be dumb as dirt, but she's pretty though.

Glove, I have a question: Who looks better, Beyonce Knowles or Carmen Electra? My point? What looks good or "better" will always be debated because it's so damn subjective. I thought Live was "Clearly" the winner in the graphics department last year, so who's right? Who's wrong?

If you're playing it on your PC, then I understand, but I played both on console and I found it to be comparing Vermont maple syrup(ESPN) and Aunt Jemima syrup(Live) -- there's just no turning back until you taste the real thing. That was just my opinion.

Gut and Metsis -- that's not how they look! FACT! Stop giving these bullshit screens. In fact, if you were to look more through the Gamespot screens instead of choosing the first and worst one's you could find, you would find some in-game screenshots that do look more like what they'd resemble on a television screen. Whether you have an HDTV or not, I'm telling you that that's not how they look.

well said once again I swear to god people in here are the most biased people I have ever seen. If you guys to the espn boards people will be saying good and bad stuff about the games all day long, but if anything is said that is true and proven to be true like live's graphics, u guys flip! I can admit ESPN's gameplay wasn't up to par to nba live's last year, but u guys have to be able to admit that the graphics weren't even close on consoles. That's a fact, look it up. It's not my opinion, it's a fact! That's why when you look at all the reviews for last years games, most of them rated ESPN almost a 10 on graphics and NBA live at the best got an 8(and that was being very kind). This is why people hate EA fan because of how biased they are, it's crazy! I don't see anyone on the sega boards saying that live sucks and that they would never purchase an EA game even though they have never played one like on here, u guys are hilariously biased. that was my point of this subject and I beleive i proved my point hands down minus 2 people on here

omg....

we're biased? Did you see those screens? When we give you FACTS you deny them and say it doesn't look a thing like it. You said ESPN looks better than those screens...so then Live must look better than those screens too? Right? It's only fair.

I've played both games. After 3 weeks I brought ESPN back because it wasn't even close to as fun as Live. Graphics wise they were very similar. In game that is...

so far i would say that sho89mtx is the most biased poster that i have noticed. you clearly are only on this board to try and convert people. why dont you go to a forum with espn fans, i am sure they have enough fans to support a forum. like i said in another topic, i can usually argue with gloveguy over this, or real nba issues as even though he is a espn fan, he makes valid points. you come on here saying "whoever dont agree with me is a fucking retard and should be shot". get over yourself man. go play your espn game and i(and many others) will play nba live. while you sit there watching replays for 3 hours getting orgasmic over the graphics i will be playing my franchise trying to earn a spot on the all star team and into the 3 point contest,dunk contest, and rookie game.

I swear to god people in here are the most biased people I have ever seen. If you guys to the espn boards people will be saying good and bad stuff about the games all day long, but if anything is said that is true and proven to be true like live's graphics, u guys flip! I can admit ESPN's gameplay wasn't up to par to nba live's last year, but u guys have to be able to admit that the graphics weren't even close on consoles. That's a fact, look it up. It's not my opinion, it's a fact! That's why when you look at all the reviews for last years games, most of them rated ESPN almost a 10 on graphics and NBA live at the best got an 8(and that was being very kind). This is why people hate EA fan because of how biased they are, it's crazy! I don't see anyone on the sega boards saying that live sucks and that they would never purchase an EA game even though they have never played one like on here, u guys are hilariously biased. that was my point of this subject and I beleive i proved my point hands down minus 2 people on here

Wussup sho, I'm having a hard time understanding why exactly you need validation from the people here about the game. I have no problem giving any game it's due, because....we-ll...it's just not that serious...
Tell you what, console guy to console guy I'll tell you what I liked about 2K4 last year:

1. Practice Mode- I wish the EA would have the good sense to implement the ability to bring a whole team into practice mode as well as have multi-player. To most? That is absolutely trivial and they could care less......

2. 24-7 Mode- While I wasn't a big fan of the execution of it, it's a fantastic idea. I just wish you were able to change the camera in that mode, I prefer left to right as opposed to up and down (like a football game). And like i said before, I thought the gameplay was horrible. Just plain horrible.

And that's really it. I didn't care for the graphics, (I have an XBox in case you were wondering and no I don't have a super-duper HD plasma TV) Cocobee put it best when he referred to the men as having "gorilla animations". I hated the way they looked and the way they moved all "hunched over". What else do you want me to tell you doggy? I wasn't feeling it....

I have no reason to lie, or to feel that I can't give the game it's props because of some silly loyalty to the guys in Vancouver. Why is it that you can't accept the fact that people are different? For instance some guys go wild for a set of double-D's while I could care less, I'm an ass man all the way and would knock Pamela Anderson (Or whomever) flat on her back to get to the likes of big booty Beyonce or Alicia Keys.....

Now, I've got some questions for you:

1. How old are you?
2. How did you come upon this message board?
3. Were you expecting to come here and "wow" PC guys with your console pics?

sho, sho, sho, sho, I bet you're a cool cat but you're one stubborn muthaphucka! Live 2004 blows away all the competition and 2005 will take it to another level. That's how I feel man, and why do you even GIVE A PHUCK??? Why not just lighten up and get to know the cool cats here without the constant harrassment about a game we ALL agree is clearly inferior? Peace, Dre.

P.S. In no way was this intended to dis or offend you and if I have, I apologize, sincerely.

so far i would say that sho89mtx is the most biased poster that i have noticed. you clearly are only on this board to try and convert people. why dont you go to a forum with espn fans, i am sure they have enough fans to support a forum. like i said in another topic, i can usually argue with gloveguy over this, or real nba issues as even though he is a espn fan, he makes valid points. you come on here saying "whoever dont agree with me is a fucking retard and should be shot". get over yourself man. go play your espn game and i(and many others) will play nba live. while you sit there watching replays for 3 hours getting orgasmic over the graphics i will be playing my franchise trying to earn a spot on the all star team and into the 3 point contest,dunk contest, and rookie game.

Well said Larry Legend. Why can't we just enjoy the game that we all love? why must he try to convert us if we don't give two phucks? And to kill it more unlike most of my NLSC brethren I'm a console gamer so i will in fact pick up his beloved game. It's only $20.00! But GYO-DAMN man, what's with this dude? Just CHILL.......

2. 24-7 Mode- While I wasn't a big fan of the execution of it, it's a fantastic idea. I just wish you were able to change the camera in that mode, I prefer left to right as opposed to up and down (like a football game). And like i said before, I thought the gameplay was horrible. Just plain horrible.

I always thought they should have linked up 24/7 mode with franchise mode... say once you're on the third level, you can goto nba summer leagues or declare for the draft and try to get in.
As for whats better.. just get both

They had something like that for NBA Shootout. You could take control of a player, start in the NBDL(they actually had a license), and make your way up. It would be cool for either Live or ESPN do that. Shootout sucked so it was pretty much a waste of game mode.

Now, I've got some questions for you:

1. How old are you?
2. How did you come upon this message board?
3. Were you expecting to come here and "wow" PC guys with your console pics?

.

1)27
2)i've been posting on this website for about 4 years and came across it because I used to have an all-nba gaming website that I made and this site used to add me to their links because I had info on all the games, but that was a long time ago
3)No, I hate PC games and never will understand the facisnation of them, a PC to me is for the internet and files, not video games, that's what consoles are for.

also, u can't offend me because i"m a big boy and can dish it out and take just as much as i dish it out.

Gut and Metsis -- that's not how they look! FACT! Stop giving these bullshit screens. In fact, if you were to look more through the Gamespot screens instead of choosing the first and worst one's you could find, you would find some in-game screenshots that do look more like what they'd resemble on a television screen. Whether you have an HDTV or not, I'm telling you that that's not how they look.

wow wow, it's not fair to me, damn it!!!!

Damn.
did you ever go to gamespot's screens page? Hah?

I went to "gamespy.com" first, I search ESPN BASKETBALL on xbox,
and I find that the screens are VERY BAD and old (it dated March 2003),

SO I WENT TO GAMESPOT.COM and GAVE YOU GUYS THE LATEST and NICE screen of ESPN's in-game screenshots,

but you said I've picked the WORSE SCREENS ?? I FXXK YOU !!!

THOSE PIC dated OCTOBER 2003, FXXK IT

I choose these real in-game screens are much fair than YOU (and sho) picked up some cut-scene shots and replay shots.

But if you two still cannot accept this fact, then you just play your best game on your console.

I stated at the very beginning, I didn't own any console so I don't know the actual graphics of both game (on xbox),
but according to the screenshot by some websites, I don't see any big difference between ESPN & Live graphically.

If gamespot post the worst screens on their web (I highly doubt it),
would this because they want to help EA for advertisement ?

NO! They rate ESPN (8.9) higher than Live (8.3) and Live for PC is even worse (7.7).

DAMN, am I bias !!!

who's bias??

Last edited by gut on Fri Sep 03, 2004 12:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

also...i might come across rude, arrogant and mean when I argue about things and people please don't take it personal, that's just the way I argue about stuff. I will never understand how you guys can play a game that doesn't look good and probably never will. I bet most of you in here think Madden looks better than ESPN football also, right? I just don't see it. I love everything about the espn football and basketball games, now the other sports, usually EA dominates and i have all their other games, so i'm definately not an ALL SEGA guy. But nba live this year I'm sure is at least 10 times better with all the additions that it was last year and hopefully that will send it over the edge to beat sega this year if they improve the graphics also, but don't be suprised if the grapics aren't improved a lot and even with all the additional features if ESPN wins in most of the reviews this year for the umpteenth time because the majority of the people like a game that looks great and plays good, not a game that looks like crap and plays good. Just my 2 cents

forgot to post the links:

ESPN screenshots on gamespy:
http://media.xbox.gamespy.com/media/552 ... mgs_1.html

ESPN screenshots on gamespot:
http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/sports/nba ... index.html

ESPN screenshots on IGN:
http://media.xbox.ign.com/media/552/552377/imgs_1.html

which one shows the best ??

ok forgive me if i sound like a complete dick here but.......

you say you cant understand how people can play game with lesser graphics? ok understood. now tell me, WTF ARE YOU ON A CONSOLE OVER A PC? you make no sense at all man. all you do is talk about graphics being gods gift to the world and then you say you dont get why people play games on pc? imo there is only 2 reasons to even own a console. 1. exclusive games 2. if you are to impatient for the console games to get ported to pc(gta for instance). i bought my ps2 for gta3 and i will buy a ps3 for gta4.

Damn.
did you ever go to gamespot's screens page? Hah?

I went to "gamespy.com" first, I search ESPN BASKETBALL on xbox,
and I find that the screens are VERY BAD and old (it dated March 2003),

SO I WENT TO GAMESPOT.COM and GAVE YOU GUYS THE LATEST and NICE screen of ESPN's in-game screenshots,

but you said I've picked the WORSE SCREENS ?? I FXXK YOU !!!

THOSE PIC dated OCTOBER 2003, FXXK IT

I choose these real in-game screens are much fair than YOU (and sho) picked up some cut-scene shots and replay shots.

But if you two still cannot accept this fact, then you just play your best game on your console.

I stated at the very beginning, I didn't own any console so I don't know the actual graphics of both game (on xbox),
but according to the screenshot by some websites, I don't see any big difference between ESPN & Live graphically.

If gamespot post the worst screens on their web (I highly doubt it),
would this because they want to help EA for advertisement ?

I'm telling you right now: THAT'S NOT HOW IT LOOKS! The graphics are much more crisp and clear. In fact, I'm almost sure that the Live graphics are distorted too. If you could actually find some screenshots that look the right way, then you can compare the graphics. And by that I mean the faces, the lighting, the body models, the crowds... Those screens are bogus, for both ESPN and Live so stop giving the bullshit.

forgot to post the links:

ESPN screenshots on gamespy:
http://media.xbox.gamespy.com/media/552 ... mgs_1.html

ESPN screenshots on gamespot:
http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/sports/nba ... index.html

ESPN screenshots on IGN:
http://media.xbox.ign.com/media/552/552377/imgs_1.html

which one shows the best ??

IGN shows the best. Check out the 24/7 screens. That's how it looks.

I'm telling you right now: THAT'S NOT HOW IT LOOKS! The graphics are much more crisp and clear. In fact, I'm almost sure that the Live graphics are distorted too. If you could actually find some screenshots that look the right way, then you can compare the graphics. And by that I mean the faces, the lighting, the body models, the crowds... Those screens are bogus, for both ESPN and Live so stop giving the bullshit.

omg...

are you telling me the ESPN shots is 1000 times better in the real game.
and the Live shots is only 2 times better in the real game,
so that you can comes up the conclusion that ESPN is much better than Live?

according to the screens (you called bullshit), I can't see any big different.
if both of their screens are distorted, then the COMPARISON (main point) isn't affected that much !! you know what I mean?? I doubt you not...

according to the screens (you called bullshit), I can't see any big different.
if both of their screens are distorted, then the COMPARISON (main point) isn't affected that much !! you know what I mean?? I doubt you not...

That's because they're not the right screens -- for either game!

Both are distorted, so the finer details aren't actually shown. That's why you can't compare the two. Even if they're distorted at the same level, you still can't compare them unless you get the real thing.

according to the screens (you called bullshit), I can't see any big different.
if both of their screens are distorted, then the COMPARISON (main point) isn't affected that much !! you know what I mean?? I doubt you not...

That's because they're not the right screens -- for either game!

Both are distorted, so the finer details aren't actually shown. That's why you can't compare the two. Even if they're distorted at the same level, you still can't compare them unless you get the real thing.

Gamespot gave me shit and I passed the shit to you...

I feel sorry about that.

They're not the right pic, maybe someday I can go to my friends home and take photos by camera. But I guess you will say something like "the photos are too blur, the finer details aren't actually shown", "you zoom too much and many noise on the photo", "the quality of your camera is shit, it's doest show the right one", "oh, out foucs", etc.

So, I quit.
don't want to waste my time on that.

To Live fans, only a month to go for the Live 2005 (hopefully not delayed)
Cheers