How NBA Live Could Dethrone NBA 2K

[Sirs]

Dribbling is and should be important because it affects the players feet, mobility and fluidity of animations. Just look at the vid with the differences between 10 and 14. Major improvement not just in dribbling.

[Halfamazing]

Quote: Originally Posted by bigeastbumrush

Look. It's time to put this dribbling nonsense to bed. But it's seriously time to stop all the talk about size ups and breaking ankles because a regulation NBA game has very few perimeter clear out size up moments during a game. It's a pick and roll league. That being said, what has been done to improve Live's weakest points which is player animations? The only trailer we saw had Raymond Felton being stuck in an animation. He didn't even move. Do you care about that or is it just about how you can Shammgod your way to the hole? The Live team has done nothing in my opinion that warrants a purchase, besides actually releasing the game. Until they show 10 guys on a court animating fluidly together, they can flush this entire dribbling agenda down the toilet along with all of their other buzzwords and rhetoric.

I care about balanced game offensively and defensively, I prefer a game more defensive than offensive. Worried about that and other stuff which is why I said I don't think Live will fall in a dribbling way. The dribbling looks more fluid than everything else in the game, all else looks straight out of Live 10 animation wise.

Probably not really a question to me, but I'm a answerholic.

[yungflo]

Quote: Originally Posted by bigeastbumrush

Look. It's time to put this dribbling nonsense to bed. I'm all for signature dribbling. I think we all are. And I think it's a good idea that the Live crew is borrowing some of the "ball physics" concepts from FIFA using shared technology. But dribbling was never a sore point for the Live series. If anything, it was one of their advantages going back to the implementation of Freestyle vs IsoMotion. So, in essence, Live has improved one of their already strong points. Kudos. But it's seriously time to stop all the talk about size ups and breaking ankles because a regulation NBA game has very few perimeter clear out size up moments during a game. It's a pick and roll league. That being said, what has been done to improve Live's weakest points which is player animations? The only trailer we saw had Raymond Felton being stuck in an animation. He didn't even move. Do you care about that or is it just about how you can Shammgod your way to the hole? The Live team has done nothing in my opinion that warrants a purchase, besides actually releasing the game. Until they show 10 guys on a court animating fluidly together, they can flush this entire dribbling agenda down the toilet along with all of their other buzzwords and rhetoric.

He got shook. You tend to freeze for a moment when you do. The same thing happens in 2k if it isn't an ankle breaker. The crossover was a slowmotion trailer. with various angles. I'm not saying you don't have a legitimate point, I'm just think thats heavy scrutiny and I guess I fail to see the issue?

I do agree with everything else. This dribbling tech is overstated. For the past for years, whenever EA started with gameplay improvements, they always mention dribbling first. They did this for Live 10, Elite 11. Dribbling the minor problems they have. I think they are trying to adapt the fifa philosophy to basketball.

Either way, if this game is a failrue, I hope EAC gets a chance again.

[DBMcGee3]

Same old song and dance from EA. If they were really holding such an ace up their sleeve, surely they would have tipped their hand just a little bit to get some momentum going. But no, here we are in mid-October and I've yet to see any gameplay footage, or anything at all behind the usual "sizzle" trailer. NBA Live '10 was one of my favorite hoops games ever, I'll never understand why they chose to blow that thing up instead of perfecting what they had, a la 2k.

[stlpimpmonsta]

Anything is possible. To think otherwise is crazy especially since the landscape of video games can change drastically in a blind of an eye.

Remeber we wondered if 2K could overthrow Live a decade ago and they have. The same can happen to 2K. Nothing is untouchable in video games.

[King_B_Mack]

Quote: Originally Posted by stlpimpmonsta

Anything is possible. To think otherwise is crazy especially since the landscape of video games can change drastically in a blind of an eye. Remeber we wondered if 2K could overthrow Live a decade ago and they have. The same can happen to 2K. Nothing is untouchable in video games.

You're talking about two different things though here. The questions about 2K being able to overthrow Live a decade ago stemmed solely from a sales perspective because 2K's name just wasn't an established name going up against a juggernaut in EA Sports. Since NBA 2K has come on the scene they have owned Live in gameplay and presenting an accurate simulation of NBA basketball in video games. The sales eventually came years later, but EA's name value made it a "fight" for much longer than it should have been.

[Gosens6]

Quote: Originally Posted by stlpimpmonsta

Anything is possible. To think otherwise is crazy especially since the landscape of video games can change drastically in a blind of an eye. Remeber we wondered if 2K could overthrow Live a decade ago and they have. The same can happen to 2K. Nothing is untouchable in video games.

Not only has 2K been winning the "War" way before EA cancelled Elite 11, Live 12, and 13, but now, they have a 3 year lead on an already one sided battle.

It's great that Live is back for the fans that enjoy this series, but to say that EA has a huge chance of dethroning 2K as the king of the virtual basketball court is just blind optimism. Realistically speaking, it probably won't happen ever, and if it does, it won't be for a very, very long time.

[NoTiCe_O]

I think the problem is too many people are concerned with "winning the battle" when it's really not about winning the battle, at least from consumer standpoint. I mean if you're working for EA or 2k sure you want one company to do better, but to argue and shutdown other peoples opinions of a game because you don't think it's better is childish.

The fact of the matter is we have two basketball games on the market again, and if you like the sport of basketball you should be rooting for both, so that when you get tired of one style of gameplay you can switch to the other but still enjoy the sport of basketball.

When I had Live 10 and 2k10 I would play both, once I got sick of 2k I would switch to Live, after playing Live and getting sick of it I switch back to 2k, but overall I was having fun with BOTH games.

Who cares if Live messed up in the past, I mean some of you people must hold grudges in real life like no other, me I'm a fairly forgiving person so it's in my nature to want to see people do better than before. I'm giving both Live and an established 2k a chance. I'm not gonna knock someone because they pre-order Live over 2k, it's their choice. We as gamers should be happy we have options, yet people continue to argue over foolishness.

Live and 2k both have the potential on next gen to become great basketball games in their own right.