What is it good for?

by **T-Comm55** on Tue May 31, 2005 7:00 am

I have been reading a lot of articles about NBA Live 2006 and almost all of them say that NBA Live 2006 has better graphics. The Team XBOX articles said that NBA Live 2006 has a new camera view that makes it feel like watching a game on TV. But what is NBA Live for? If I want to watch a basketball game, I will watch it on TV, I play NBA Live so I can feel like a player not like a fan watching it on TV. NBA Live should be about gameplay first, graphics second.

YouTube · by **Andrew** on Tue May 31, 2005 10:32 am

There was a thread about this last week, in fact I'm almost sure you posted in it. Without a playable demo, no one can really give their impressions on the gameplay or the features.

Our early glimpses of the game almost always are graphics orientated with a couple of snippets about improvements to the gameplay and game modes, that kind of information comes later.

by **T-Comm55** on Wed Jun 01, 2005 7:04 am

Sry Andrew that wasnt me who posted it. If I knew there was a thread about this topic I wouldnt have posted it again.

YouTube · by **Andrew** on Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:31 am

No apology necessary, my mistake. I could have sworn you replied to it though, I generally recognise avatars.

by **T-Comm55** on Fri Jun 03, 2005 12:16 pm

Another thing about NBA Live 2006.
Is it the last NBA Live?????
I mean with the ESPN contract the 2007 edition could be drastically different and does that mean the name of the game will be changed too.
Personally I want to see NBA Live 2007 and I know it is a little too early.

by **Sauru** on Fri Jun 03, 2005 12:21 pm

thats a good question. i hope they keep the name the same but i would like to see some of the espn features brought into live.

by **T-Comm55** on Fri Jun 03, 2005 12:23 pm

Like sportcenter to recap the action and update on the news around the league every month. And breaking news if there is a blockbuster trade was done.

But I know this should go in the wishlist for the next year.

YouTube · by **Andrew** on Fri Jun 03, 2005 12:41 pm

It might be changed, though the "NBA Live" name has familiarity and a long lineage. They've changed the name slightly this year by cutting it down to 06, but I don't expect they'll change the whole title just yet. I guess it's a possibility, but it's too early to tell.

by **Blazers** on Fri Jun 03, 2005 5:28 pm

i have to agree T-Comm55 that nba live 2003 was the best game. nba live 2004 and
2005 really sucks because of the really bad graphics and the gameplay not that improving. the first nba live that i played was the nba live 2001 and i really liked it and since then i have to say that nba live 2003 is the best from the rest of the lives. i hope that nba live 2006 will be the best ever!!!

by **Drex** on Sat Jun 04, 2005 4:06 am

You have to be kidding. Live 2003 is so fast paced you can't do shit with it. It's the most arcadeish (

) Live so far. You can block Shaq with Boykins and send the freakin ball to the other side of the court. You do 360's in traffic, with Mutombo, and many other things I can't bother to explain right now

by **T-Comm55** on Sat Jun 04, 2005 8:40 am

well it may be fast paced but it didnt have many bugs as 2004 and 2005. The only major glitch it had was that it skipped a quater when u pressed esc during a timeout and that too was fixed later.

by **Drex** on Sat Jun 04, 2005 10:09 am

What about the comeback bug? Hitting 3's with Ben Wallace and Steven Hunter? 2004 and '05 both have sliders, that can change the whole gaming.

YouTube · by **Andrew** on Sat Jun 04, 2005 10:23 am

Or for that matter, Darrell Armstrong blocking Shaquille O'Neal all the way back to the opposite baseline, accompanied by a loud booming sound effect? Chris Whitney scoring 48 points and dishing out 12 assists? Top free agents staying stuck in the Free Agent pool?

by **Oosh** on Sat Jun 04, 2005 2:32 pm

Please dont remind me! Its taken me too long to erase those evil thoughts from my mind!

by **T-Comm55** on Sun Jun 05, 2005 12:20 am

Ah come on no game is perfect.

by **Drex** on Sun Jun 05, 2005 1:26 am

by **T-Comm55** on Sun Jun 05, 2005 4:19 am

What I mean every game in the series has a bug unique to itself and the Point Gaurds having double-double in almost every game is NBA Live 2003's signature glitch.

And I don't think the free agents thing is fxied in NBA Live 2005 :mrgreen:

by **Drex** on Sun Jun 05, 2005 8:10 am

Yes it is. Most of the time they resign with their former team. But sometimes they don't, and go to another team with the salary available. If you sim this season in Live 2005, most of the time Charlotte and Atlanta sign big FA's to their team.
So there you go, it is fixed :lol:

YouTube · by **Andrew** on Sun Jun 05, 2005 1:46 pm

T-Comm55 wrote:Ah come on no game is perfect.

True, but for me NBA Live 2003 just wasn't close enough to realism. I did get a bit of enjoyment out of it, but I felt the last two titles showed significant improvement in nearly all areas. But to each their own. (Y)

by **T-Comm55** on Mon Jun 06, 2005 1:15 am

Well as long as the games continue to improve its good. But for me NBA Live 2003 stood out because it was the first to feature "freestyle" and that was so good and different that it automatically covered all the faults of the game.

by **number___10** on Tue Jun 07, 2005 12:57 am

i agree

YouTube · by **Andrew** on Tue Jun 07, 2005 11:17 am

T-Comm55 wrote:Well as long as the games continue to improve its good. But for me NBA Live 2003 stood out because it was the first to feature "freestyle" and that was so good and different that it automatically covered all the faults of the game.

That's one way of looking at it I suppose. Like I said, to each their own.

What is it good for?

What is NBA Live for?

What is it good for?

Who is online