NBA 2K16 Road to the Finals Qualification System Rewards Best Cheesers, Not Best Teams

Feature Article

Submitted on: 02/01/2016 by Jayson Young

In the real NBA, it doesn't matter how you win -- all that matters is that you win. But in NBA 2K16's preliminary Pro-Am events, winning all of your games is not enough to ensure qualification for the eventual 16-team tournament. Road to the Finals is the only team competition I've ever seen where running up the score and padding everyone's stats is the key to becoming champion.

Under Road to the Finals' current scoring system, the teams at the top of the leaderboard will be the ones who are exploiting the mode's gameplay flaws by constantly throwing 90-foot outlet passes for fast-break dunks or corner threes, and trying to cause turnovers every defensive possession by repeatedly going for steals and charges.

If your team prefers to run a patient half-court offense with set plays that take time to develop, or tries to play positional defense without mashing the steal and charge buttons, then you'll be decreasing the number of possessions in a match. If you do this, you're killing your team's chance of achieving an event-winning rating because nobody is going to give you an award if your points per possession is higher than the next team.

Even if you get out to an early large lead, your team's score still won't come close to ranking at the top of the leaderboard if your opponents suddenly quit the match mid-game.

Collusion is also possible under the current matchmaking system -- unless 2K is doing something we don't know about -- because participants aren't limited to playing for only one team. If two team captains are geographically close and are hitting the "search for match" prompt at the same time, "dummy squads" could quickly be created to rig oodles of blowout wins.

A potential fix for Road to the Finals' structural problems exists inside another NBA 2K16 mode.

In MyTeam, users must progress from the eighth seed to the first seed by winning several series of games and climbing up the tiers.

Visual Concepts should let Pro-Am teams work their way up the seeds for a full month of unlimited, uninterrupted preliminary play. Once a team wins the first seed, it qualifies for the Road to the Finals knockout tournament:

8th seed, 10-game series -- 2 wins to advance, you can't drop any lower than this
7th seed, 10-game series -- 3 wins to advance, 1 win to stay put, 8 losses for a demotion
6th seed, 10-game series -- 4 wins to advance, 2 wins to stay put, 7 losses for a demotion
5th seed, 10-game series -- 5 wins to advance, 3 wins to stay put, 6 losses for a demotion
4th seed, 10-game series -- 6 wins to advance, 4 wins to stay put, 5 losses for a demotion
3rd seed, 10-game series -- 7 wins to advance, 5 wins to stay put, 4 losses for a demotion
2nd seed, 10-game series -- 8 wins to advance, 6 wins to stay put, 3 losses for a demotion
1st seed, 10-game series -- 9 wins to advance, 7 wins to stay put, 2 losses for a demotion

If an even number of teams make the final tournament field, then the bracket is easy to setup:

Seed the teams based on how quickly they completed the ladder. The first team to qualify plays the last team to qualify, then so on down the list.

If an odd number of teams make it in, then all you have to do is hold a single play-in game between the last two teams to qualify, with the winner earning a spot in the even-numbered field.

We're only in the “preseason” stages of Road to the Finals, with the first official qualification event not starting until February 15, so why not scrap this easily exploited points-based system and switch to something where winning is all that matters?

NBA 2K16 Videos

Member Comments

# 1 ffaacc03 @ 02/01/16 06:33 PM

Agree with this, the current method is flawed on its nature.

# 2 The 24th Letter @ 02/01/16 06:45 PM

Speakownit....good post

# 3 infam0us @ 02/01/16 06:49 PM

Good write up, my squad was so excited for the Road to the Finals but the current system is so flawed that there's not point in trying.

# 4 Ray Vibes @ 02/01/16 06:54 PM

NBA 2k16: Where winning isn't enough.

# 5 Junior Moe @ 02/01/16 07:01 PM

Playing devil's advocate and prefacing my comment with the fact that I'm a strictly offline MyLeague player. : Isn't it generally understood that online sports gaming is anything but "sim"? No matter what they do people will find ways to exploit it. And if they do, it's their game, if they're finding success doing something and having fun then why not do it? I get that 2K's ranking system may encourage shenanigans. But what's wrong with just accepting that. Am I missing something?

# 6 ChaseB @ 02/01/16 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Junior Moe


	Playing devil's advocate and prefacing my comment with the fact that I'm a strictly offline MyLeague player. : Isn't it generally understood that online sports gaming is anything but "sim"? No matter what they do people will find ways to exploit it. And if they do, it's their game, if they're finding success doing something and having fun then why not do it? I get that 2K's ranking system may encourage shenanigans. But what's wrong with just accepting that. Am I missing something?

The simple point here is that "gaming" the system itself -- not even the gameplay in this case -- should not push you up the leaderboard.

Beyond that, I think you're making a broader point where we don't know what the future holds. As sports games try to get more and more into the "eSports" scene, there's going to continue to be this clash of what the heck it wants to be. Games like DOTA 2 don't have to worry about their game being exploited in the same way as there's no basis in reality and the way the game mechanics function are wholly different. With Counter-Strike you worry about making sure things like aimbot etc. stay out of the game as that's just straight cheating.

But with sports games, where is the line drawn with gameplay? And what would the audience even want to see? Who is the audience for a sports game eSport? Is it the person who wants to watch something that's like the real sports itself, or is it people who just want to see someone who is the "best" at the game no matter how it looks.

Having watched some competitive sports gaming, it generally hasn't been fun to watch like something such as Starcraft or CS:Go can be because the variety of what I see happening boils down to just trying to abuse the game to win rather than playing the game. It's just something on a broader scale that will be interesting to witness. I mean did people enjoy watching competitive Madden stuff when it was originally at its peak "eSports" popularity years ago?

# 7 Junior Moe @ 02/01/16 07:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChaseB


	The simple point here is that "gaming" the system itself -- not even the gameplay in this case -- should not push you up the leaderboard. Beyond that, I think you're making a broader point where we don't know what the future holds. As sports games try to get more and more into the "eSports" scene, there's going to continue to be this clash of what the heck it wants to be. Games like DOTA 2 don't have to worry about their game being exploited in the same way as there's no basis in reality and the way the game mechanics function are wholly different. With Counter-Strike you worry about making sure things like aimbot etc. stay out of the game as that's just straight cheating. But with sports games, where is the line drawn with gameplay? And what would the audience even want to see? Who is the audience for a sports game eSport? Is it the person who wants to watch something that's like the real sports itself, or is it people who just want to see someone who is the "best" at the game no matter how it looks. Having watched some competitive sports gaming, it generally hasn't been fun to watch like something such as Starcraft or CS:Go can be because the variety of what I see happening boils down to just trying to abuse the game to win rather than playing the game. It's just something on a broader scale that will be interesting to witness. I mean did people enjoy watching competitive Madden stuff when it was originally at its peak "eSports" popularity years ago?

I can see that. I remember seeing that terrible Madden Nation (or whatever it was called) show. The best players were always cheesers. I never saw a true X's and O's matchup or anything that I or many OS'ers would consider "sim". But, still, they were the "best" and the producers were aware of their tactics. So I assumed that it was how the producers thought the game should be played; or, accepted it as just a fun thing to do.

# 8 tril @ 02/01/16 08:40 PM

all players ratings should be the same, when playing and starting these type of tournaments.
player ratings should increase or decrease based on how one plays in that said game. you get rewarded for playing smart -similar to the my player mode-from the first few releases.
winners of said matches get a set amount of points plus the experience points they accumulated during the game.
when they play the next match. the ratings should then be reset again for said match. and the process repeated. you get rewarded for wins and good game play. these points then get added to a cumulative total.
so technically a player could win and still lose points for poor game-play. and starting every match puts all players at the same level. skills and wins is what determines total points.

if I were a developer I would add a loss of points with known exploits. so that full court pass after basket for a layup is a known exploit. the player may score two points and could win the game, but f you code so that you lose overall user points. folks wouldnt use the exploit as much.

# 9 ChaseB @ 02/01/16 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tril


	all players ratings should be the same, when playing and starting these type of tournaments. player ratings should increase or decrease based on how one plays in that said game. you get rewarded for playing smart -similar to the my player mode-from the first few releases. winners of said matches get a set amount of points plus the experience points they accumulated during the game. when they play the next match. the ratings should then be reset again for said match. and the process repeated. you get rewarded for wins and good game play. these points then get added to a cumulative total. so technically a player could win and still lose points for poor game-play. and starting every match puts all players at the same level. skills and wins is what determines total points. if I were a developer I would add a loss of points with known exploits. so that full court pass after basket for a layup is a known exploit. the player may score two points and could win the game, but f you code so that you lose overall user points. folks wouldnt use the exploit as much.

Interesting idea in a way, but I think just keeping everyone on the same ratings, period, would be a better way to go. It's so hard to find any semblance of balance right from the get go with so many attribute variables playing into this.

A reason I love the EASHL in NHL so much this year is because it's, if anything, at least balanced in terms of the player types and everything else because it's all stock "types" of players not players that have been customized to exploit weaknesses in the gameplay via each user.

# 10 kadzier @ 02/01/16 10:05 PM

Great article, and really simple solution too. Seems you almost put more thought into the system than 2K

# 11 jmaj315 @ 02/01/16 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChaseB


	Interesting idea in a way, but I think just keeping everyone on the same ratings, period, would be a better way to go. It's so hard to find any semblance of balance right from the get go with so many attribute variables playing into this. A reason I love the EASHL in NHL so much this year is because it's, if anything, at least balanced in terms of the player types and everything else because it's all stock "types" of players not players that have been customized to exploit weaknesses in the gameplay via each user.

I like that idea. The first thing i thought of was The Golf Club, how there aren't any attributes.

Although I think that there would have to be options for each style thats already in the game. faceup 4, 3 and D wing, etc

# 12 MontanaMan @ 02/02/16 12:35 AM

I'm starting to think that 2K facilitates cheesing to keep the casual consumer happy. There's just too many coincidences of them allowing garbage to take place.

# 13 Brinkus @ 02/02/16 01:06 AM

Would like to say that having a player foul out with 2k's inept foul system caused my team to be DQ'd. 3 animation "blocking fouls" when he had clear position and 2 fouls when he only had the right stick up to guard his opponent plus an illegal screen caused him to boot.

Having each player pick 3 "perks"/badges needs to be a fix for next year, or get rid of them altogether for ProAm. Also, get rid of break starter. As much as my team's big men use it, it's straight cheese and not simulation basketball.

# 14 jfsolo @ 02/02/16 01:51 AM

The best think that can happen IMO is for one team to win the championship easily utilizing a dizzying array of the most nonsensical exploits imaginable.

The hope is that someone making a complete mockery of the contest/game will get them to make fundamental change to the mode and to many gameplay aspects as well.

# 15 Caelumfang @ 02/02/16 06:00 AM

I picked up on the collusion bit as soon as I read the rules. Who thought that would be a good idea, knowing the type of community that we have?

# 16 Black Bruce Wayne @ 02/02/16 06:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MontanaMan


	I'm starting to think that 2K facilitates cheesing to keep the casual consumer happy. There's just too many coincidences of them allowing garbage to take place.

THIS will always be the case. Usually cheesers are teens or younger, and I dont think any gaming company wants to lose that demographic. As older sports gamers , we will always be faced with this

# 17 Jrocc23 @ 02/02/16 06:41 AM

You'd be surprised at how many of these "cheesers" are adults.

# 18 nuckles2k2 @ 02/02/16 08:56 AM

I'll just drop this quote in here instead of re-typing it:

Quote:

Originally Posted by nuckles2k2


	I think Pro-Am is exactly what 2K wants it to be. The problem is that it's packaged in NBA 2K16. The game that they champion as a "basketball sim". They hire one of the best basketball minds in the gaming community to oversee the different strategies, sets, & plays used by all of the teams in the association in most, if not all, of the given basketball situations & portray that in the digital arena (don't play video games, play basketball), then they drop Pro-Am into the same package. This is just the digital version of "can streetballers hack it in the league?" except 2K isn't concerned if the ppl who want it a little more "NBA reality" are satisfied or not. (I won't use the word "sim" since it's completely subjective). Pro-Am is exactly what it's meant to be. "Cheesers" would only be "cheesing" if they were doing something untoward, but it looks like 2K is giving "them" everything they need to do what it is they're doing. That's not cheese. Now if the question is, "are 2K being negligent and allowing this by not paying close enough attention?" my guess would be "nah", but I dunno that for sure.

The reason why I answered "nah" to my question is essentially right here:

Quote:

Originally Posted by A6_Foul_Out


	IF we are doing that that i'm not paying an extra 50$ for VC at the start of 2k17 to make my player 99 ... Never going to happen.

Understand, Take Two/2K Sports sell the physical copies, of NBA 2K, wholesale to the retailers we purchase it from. Once the wholesale is final, that's 2K's money right there (and it's tremendously marked down from $60).

VC is a way for them to double dip almost. If they wholesaled 500k copies of 2K at $35 a piece, that's $17.5M.. (keep in mind they actually shipped over 4 million copies of 2K16 in week 1, but I'm keeping the numbers easy)

So...if 250K of those copies had $50 worth of VC purchased, that's $12.5M. On top of the $17.5M they already made at wholesale prices.

There is absolutely no incentive to change anything about the way the game plays online. They're piggybacking on the name recognizability of NBA 2K#, and giving an online environment that fosters micro transactions, that give them a ridiculous revenue stream.

I said it before, and I'll assert it again, this is what they want.

# 19 Gosens6 @ 02/02/16 09:02 AM

For the guys saying this is how they want pro am, and this e sports thing, you're absolutely right.

You don't think 2K knows people are playing the game using these cheese tactics and exploits? They're fully well aware of this and they don't care.

Just a heads up, pro am and park will probably be the same way next year, and the year after that, and the year after that. If you were one of those people who complained all year about online play, get ready to "waste" your 60 bucks on 2K17 and start the complain train all over again.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

# 20 Junior Moe @ 02/02/16 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nuckles2k2


	I'll just drop this quote in here instead of re-typing it: The reason why I answered "nah" to my question is essentially right here: Understand, Take Two/2K Sports sell the physical copies, of NBA 2K, wholesale to the retailers we purchase it from. Once the wholesale is final, that's 2K's money right there (and it's tremendously marked down from $60). VC is a way for them to double dip almost. If they wholesaled 500k copies of 2K at $35 a piece, that's $17.5M.. (keep in mind they actually shipped over 4 million copies of 2K16 in week 1, but I'm keeping the numbers easy) So...if 250K of those copies had $50 worth of VC purchased, that's $12.5M. On top of the $17.5M they already made at wholesale prices. There is absolutely no incentive to change anything about the way the game plays online. They're piggybacking on the name recognizability of NBA 2K#, and giving an online environment that fosters micro transactions, that give them a ridiculous revenue stream. I said it before, and I'll assert it again, this is what they want.

True. But I don't think that that's a bad thing necessarily. Business is business. If people are buying and enjoying the "arcade" experience then let them. I guess the way I see it is that it would be cool of they had like a "sim" lobby or game mode where the gameplay was tailored (as much as possible) to real NBA hoops. Play calling, matchups, etc. That MyPark stuff we see wouldn't fly there. I played a game online and it was unbearable. I would play more in a "sim" lobby or game mode where it played to the real strengths and weaknesses of the NBA. I can control that experience offline

« Previous12 Next »

More Links