Live 2004 Franchise Depth

[killerht]

I was just wondering, is the Franchise just going to be better, more realistic and stuff or is it even going to be longer?
Because depth means distance and years is also distance.

Right now the Franchise is 25 years long. I hope 2004 will have a 40 year franchise or something.

[Andrew]

I'm assuming that by depth in this case means a wider range of features for Dynasty Mode compared to previous incarnations of Franchise Mode. One of those features might be the ability to play more than 25 years, I couldn't say for sure either way. EA is still keeping most of those details well-guarded.

[Power And Proud]

I think 25 years is too much. No one will play 25 seasons. You'd be playing atleast 5 games per day prolly just to play 15 seasons.

[Nick]

I accidently voted for 'No' instead of 'Yes'.

I think 25 seasons is a good amount. No need wasting time on making more...but no use in making it less.

[Andrew]

Extending the length of Dynasty/Franchise Mode would probably only be suitable for those times when you simulate all the games. I'm satisfied with 25 years, although I'd like to be able to set the number of years, or have an "End Dynasty Mode" option if you wanted to end the game and get a final grade before playing all 25 years.

[Amphatoast]

Yeah, that sounds like a better idea, letting us pick how many years for Dynasty Mode ( from 10 to 50 probably) Some like it looong, some like it short, you picking your own will satisfy everyone.

[Swoosh]

The ennoying thing about playing a looooong franchise is that u cant really "identify" with players anymore, this already happens when u played about eight to ten years, only some rookies and second to four year pros are left in the game that u actually know, all those generated rookies dont exist and i still think one of the charms to play nba is that u can play with existing players and sort of "live the experience", but if its all non existent players its just playin some hoop, not that it cant be fun but i guess u know what i mean

[Metsis]

Yes Swoosh, you touch some very familiar grounds with me. We should be able to determine how long of a dynasty we wish to play. The generic players are too generic. They need to have some sort of a character to come to life. And this is something that needs to be added to the game. The fact Isaiah Rider is a good player in Live 2003 says it all. Where is he for real at the moment??? Nowhere to be found because he is such a difficult person.

The players need to have off-court stats too that determine how they interact with each other. There are players that keep to them selves and leave spot lights for others and then again the opposite. There are more offensive minded players and more defensive minded players... How do these guys mix. I couldn't think of a team filled with guys all wanting to share the lime light cause there just isn't enough publicity to go around. Some sort of personality ratings or something. Do you think that Stockton-to-Malone could have succeeded if the guys hated each other? I don't think so. They just became very good friends and wanted to play with each other till the end. The players make friends of each other and then there are the reasons why the Sixers traded Van Horn to NJ without playing him in a single game -> he didn't want to play with Iverson. They're stuck with each other now, but I think both would benefit if they parted ways again...

These kinds of things need to be added to the players to make it feel more real. It would force you to manage your team! Not just throw together the best overalled players and putting them on court and win it all.

[Andrew]

Following that idea of individuality, I think some drafts should produce a special player, a Magic Johnson, Larry Bird or Michael Jordan; a Shaquille O'Neal, David Robinson or Hakeem Olajuwon etc. A guy who is going to come into the league and be a star. He'd be rated higher than the average generated first overall pick, with great potential and capable of having an immediate impact.

[Swoosh]

That would idd be really nice, but it may not occur too often(which is every year or two years), like this year was an exceptional draft(thats what everybody is sayin, be we wont know for sure until three years from now), and thats fun but it cant be overdone

[diafenes]

totally agree:

The ennoying thing about playing a looooong franchise is that u cant really "identify" with players anymore

going anywhere past 5-10 years reguires constant patching to give any identity to the players, and the more complex the patching system (advancing graphics each year) the more time consuming it becomes.

Following that idea of individuality, I think some drafts should produce a special player

not sure if this will work, especially with those generated graphics.

i think 25 years is more than plenty, but if they had a slider to ajdust the franchise length it would be even better

[hetoft]

Even though i'd never play any more than 10 seasons, i think the best solution would be a slider .

[Metsis]

Following that idea of individuality, I think some drafts should produce a special player, a Magic Johnson, Larry Bird or Michael Jordan; a Shaquille O'Neal, David Robinson or Hakeem Olajuwon etc. A guy who is going to come into the league and be a star. He'd be rated higher than the average generated first overall pick, with great potential and capable of having an immediate impact.

Star players do come off the draft, but they come off every year. There's always a rookie that scores more then 20 points a game (not every year, but almost) and that is just unrealistic. Again the stats say how good a player is, but most players do have to take a few years to get into the groove of things (Kobe, Jermaine, McGrady etc.) although we've had these ready stars in recent years (Amare and Pau). A player can be good, but his head might take a few years before breaking through. It's all psychology and it is harder to fix then a flaw in a players shot.

The DSTATS should be fixed to tune into this kind of thing. The player might be a very good shooter, but he might never realise his potential.

I'm ranting about something that really isn't a problem cause most of the rookies need a few years to be impact players, but very rarely there are rookies that score 20+ points in their rookie season. I think Tim Duncan was the last to accomplish this wasn't he? The best rookies usually score in the high teens, but gradually raise the scoring to a higher level.

I hate the fact how DSTATS are used at the moment... They are currently too rigid system. Players do change their game over the years. Take Larry Hughes for example... He was scoring for Golden State like crazy until he was moved to the point guard position. This wouldn't effect his game in Live 2003... His stats are much lower now then they were in the Golden days, and thus he scores much less. All things effect players and they should effect them in the Live games too.

But to sum this up: I think the best rookies should be tuned down and the poorest rookies should be tuned way better and there should be a Tim Duncan or LeBron James or Amare Stoudemire in a draft every now and then.

[Andrew]

not sure if this will work, especially with those generated graphics.

True, a deeper create-a-player mode would result in a greater variation in generated appearances.

Star players do come off the draft, but they come off every year. There's always a rookie that scores more then 20 points a game (not every year, but almost) and that is just unrealistic.

I know, but I was referring more to their ratings. A special, "once in a generation" kind of player would be generated with ratings that already compare to established players - still with a way to go, but already well on the way to being a superstar.

[Bill Russell]

I think 25 years is enough. Usually I start a franchise, get bored with the team and start a new one... I've been playing with my Warriors franchise, played 15 games, got bored, started a Cavs one, played a season, and just started a Celtics one...

[Metsis]

I know, but I was referring more to their ratings. A special, "once in a generation" kind of player would be generated with ratings that already compare to established players - still with a way to go, but already well on the way to being a superstar.

This was in Live 2000 or 2001, but I had a rotten year and then got me a seven foot power forward with the second or third overall pick. His stats were just incredible. He dunked with the best of them, shot the ball extremely well, ran the floor like a gaselle (speed 90), was strong, played good defense, and he also had an ok threepoint shot. And how does he play while simulated -> 10ppg, 10rpg etc. The guy was an animal and yet because of the rigid DSTATS he played like an average guy. The guy had an overall of 85 (in Lives 2k and 2k1 the best players were around 90).

This is a problem with the stats... A player plays a totally different game when you play him and when the AI simulates games. There should be something that you could do to make a guy do more on offense. You should be able to make a guy your #1 option on offense and thus giving him more shots and running more plays through him. I just hate the fact that there are players that when you play, you just can't seem to score under 30 points with and then in simulation they score 12... That is just dumb. If a player has high scoring ratings, then he should score more.

This is what I'm talking about on this one... But yes I'm with you Andrew on the fact that there should be some players in the draft that are just better then everyone else and more ready to take on the NBA challenges.

But still: The best players tuned down, the worst players tuned way higher and they shouldn't be projected according to their overall.

(LeBron 14pts, 7 boards and 6 assists... Pretty good)

[Swoosh]

I just would like to say, everybody is gettin up their hopes(including me ),but we should be careful cuz for all we know the dstats and simulation engine aint modified so nba live 2004 will be just 2003 with a few more options, im really hoping this wont be the case but im not really confident

[Full Surface]

The only thing that bugs me about Live 2003 are the rookie draftees. They all look alike and that's annoying.

[Andrew]

should be able to make a guy your #1 option on offense and thus giving him more shots and running more plays through him.

The ability to plan strategy for simulated games would be great - if you set your worst offensive player as your #1 option, you wouldn't do well in simulation. Better use of DSTATS (such as changing them according to the team's roster) would also help.

We can probably skip the specifics and just say we hope for a better simulation engine.

[Colin]

STATS that are re-evaluated when your roster changes, or when ratings of players change would be great.

[joemimic]

http://pc.ign.com/articles/427/427920p1.html

Yeah i know that's NHL 2004 but they're adding these sorts of modes for all their franchises (Madden,Live,NHL) I'm using this as a basis for what we could possibly see in live. It looks promising!

[Metsis]

There was one thing that bothered me about that NHL 2004 Dynasty preview! The player salaries are actual money and not some weird points system, but the NHL games have never had any sort of a salary system! And I've played each and every one of EA's hockey games.

But the mention of points system only reminds me of NBA Live games...

But yes it looks very promising... I hope EA won't make it a problem using an Athlon and a GeForce 4. NHL 2003's UI was all messed up and thus hard to use but not impossible. Civilization 3 has the same problem and thus I don't play it as much as I did... I just hope that this won't be a problem with 2004 edition games coming out of EA.

I hope that the dynasty for Live is something like the one described in the article.

[killerht]

I like the NHL 2004 dynasty mode. It's awsome, all those things are like impossible for Live 2004 or even 2005. Live would never make an awsome game like that.

[pinero]

ive never even played past the 10th year of my franchise usually because somethin happens to the save file, on ps2 ive gone all 10 years one time, i usually stop playin after awhile because seeing iverson, kobe, mourning, shaq, and nowitzki on the lakers and them finishing the season 80-2 is disgusting

[killerht]

Well, now you will see it in real life.

Shaquille O'Neal
Karl Malone
Rick Fox
Kobe Bryant
Gary Payton

Derek Fisher
Kereem Rush
Devean George
Mark Madsen
Jennero pargo
Luke Walton
Brian Cook
Slava Medvedenko
Eric Piatkowski (99% coming to Lakers)


unstoppable, yeah


LAKERS FOR LIFE