NBA Elite 11 OS Exclusive Video: Milwaukee Bucks @ New York Knicks

[Jesus]

Quote: Originally Posted by rEAnimator

I've posted this before, but I'll post it again. The choices we made about the jumping animations, specifically the minimal gather, was deliberate. We wanted to nail the proper feeling of playing basketball in real life. Unfortunately in video games the anticipation of the user is completely lost on the game, so you have two options. 1. Make the game feel less responsive and have the anticipation built into the action. Makes for a good looking game, but feels wrong and the user has to compensate by performing their actions early. 2. Go with something that is visually unrealistic by reducing or eliminating the anticipation portion of the move. This makes the game look less realistic, but gives you a more satisfying feel (imho) that better matches the experience you get when playing ball in real life. Clearly, we chose option two. There is no right or wrong answer, both have advantages and disadvantages. Some people will like one more than the other. But it's not fair to judge the game solely based on the look which is the part we deliberately sacrificed, without trying the game and feeling the good part (the responsiveness and gameplay balance). (I know you've played t 23, but many here haven't so that part is directed more to them).

Actually in real basketball you have to anticipate your opponents next move to effectively counter it. So option one would have been the most accurate one.

[michaeljordanjr]

Quote: Originally Posted by rEAnimator

I've posted this before, but I'll post it again. The choices we made about the jumping animations, specifically the minimal gather, was deliberate. We wanted to nail the proper feeling of playing basketball in real life. Unfortunately in video games the anticipation of the user is completely lost on the game, so you have two options. 1. Make the game feel less responsive and have the anticipation built into the action. Makes for a good looking game, but feels wrong and the user has to compensate by performing their actions early. 2. Go with something that is visually unrealistic by reducing or eliminating the anticipation portion of the move. This makes the game look less realistic, but gives you a more satisfying feel (imho) that better matches the experience you get when playing ball in real life. Clearly, we chose option two. There is no right or wrong answer, both have advantages and disadvantages. Some people will like one more than the other. But it's not fair to judge the game solely based on the look which is the part we deliberately sacrificed, without trying the game and feeling the good part (the responsiveness and gameplay balance). (I know you've played t 23, but many here haven't so that part is directed more to them).

Option 1 could work if you even it up on both sides. In real life you know when the guy youre guarding is gonna pull up. So you're always anticipating the perfect timing to spring up. It looked like from the video, shooters rose up into their shot pretty quickly so the defender needed to have instant quicks to have a chance. If you make the process of rising up for a jump shot a little longer(depending how quickly the user wants to release) perhaps then it would make sense to have less response on the defensive side.

I'm judging this based on real life, it's really hard to time a block for a jump shooter, especially if you dont have the hops to get high enough. I only successfully block jump shooters if I'm close enough to them and I'm the same height or taller than them. Anyone taller than me I have no shot at blocking, unless I get a running start but then that makes things even harder.

(also hasnt defenders springing up max vertical been in every NBA video game since jordan vs bird?)

[sportyguyfl31]

Quote: Originally Posted by Jesus

Actually in real basketball you have to anticipate your opponents next move to effectively counter it. So option one would have been the most accurate one.

I think what he is trying to get at, is have the action dictated more by the user.

The user is the one who is going to have to anticipate, rather then an animation sequence taking over the game.

[Jesus]

Quote: Originally Posted by sportyguyfl31

I think what he is trying to get at, is have the action dictated more by the user. The user is the one who is going to have to anticipate, rather then an animation sequence taking over the game.

its not about animations taking over the game, its about being accurate to the sport. In basket ball people get head faked because they attempt to anticipate the shot or move, so an animation that requires that you que it a little bit early would not be unrealistic.

If u want to give users options add branching windows so it can be tapped or held for the appropriate action.

[sportyguyfl31]

Quote: Originally Posted by rEAnimator

I've posted this before, but I'll post it again. The choices we made about the jumping animations, specifically the minimal gather, was deliberate. We wanted to nail the proper feeling of playing basketball in real life. Unfortunately in video games the anticipation of the user is completely lost on the game, so you have two options. 1. Make the game feel less responsive and have the anticipation built into the action. Makes for a good looking game, but feels wrong and the user has to compensate by performing their actions early. 2. Go with something that is visually unrealistic by reducing or eliminating the anticipation portion of the move. This makes the game look less realistic, but gives you a more satisfying feel (imho) that better matches the experience you get when playing ball in real life. Clearly, we chose option two. There is no right or wrong answer, both have advantages and disadvantages. Some people will like one more than the other. But it's not fair to judge the game solely based on the look which is the part we deliberately sacrificed, without trying the game and feeling the good part (the responsiveness and gameplay balance). (I know you've played t 23, but many here haven't so that part is directed more to them).

Question..Will we be able to perform or see players do signature moves..or shoot with their signature shots?

For me, I really am not concerned with animation depth.

What I consider more important, is for the animations that are in the game, to make sense given the situation.

The number 1 important thing for me, gameplay wise, is that I must feel like I am in complete control of my player, at all times.

I'm not a fan of programed animations, dictating what happens to me.

[bigball12]

Quote: Originally Posted by rEAnimator

Go with something that is visually unrealistic

Why would you guys do this, and not get the best of both worlds? Pointing out the game's major lack of authenticity before the product even hits the market? Come on now, this is ridiculous! From the 2 videos that you guys have shown use yourselves, the game looks terrible, and does not 'appear' to play well. I know you said that we need to play it to get an 'accurate representation' but if that is the case, and predominately 90% of the comments on your 2 videos have been negative, why even come out with them in the first place? We are essentially paying $60 for NBA Jam, and getting this for free.

[michaeljordanjr]

Quote: Originally Posted by Jesus

its not about animations taking over the game, its about being accurate to the sport. In basket ball people get head faked because they attempt to anticipate the shot or move, so an animation that requires that you que it a little bit early would not be unrealistic. If u want to give users options add branching windows so it can be tapped or held for the appropriate action.

In live 10 you could tap it to just raise your arm, not sure if that did anything to contest.

[Da_Czar]

Quote: Originally Posted by rEAnimator

I've posted this before, but I'll post it again. The choices we made about the jumping animations, specifically the minimal gather, was deliberate. We wanted to nail the proper feeling of playing basketball in real life. Unfortunately in video games the anticipation of the user is completely lost on the game, so you have two options. 1. Make the game feel less responsive and have the anticipation built into the action. Makes for a good looking game, but feels wrong and the user has to compensate by performing their actions early. 2. Go with something that is visually unrealistic by reducing or eliminating the anticipation portion of the move. This makes the game look less realistic, but gives you a more satisfying feel (imho) that better matches the experience you get when playing ball in real life. Clearly, we chose option two. There is no right or wrong answer, both have advantages and disadvantages. Some people will like one more than the other. But it's not fair to judge the game solely based on the look which is the part we deliberately sacrificed, without trying the game and feeling the good part (the responsiveness and gameplay balance). (I know you've played t 23, but many here haven't so that part is directed more to them).

Reanimator with respect that is wrong man. Just wrong. In real life you do have to anticipate to get a block. Not to just challenge a shot but to block it you have to anticipate it in real life unless you have a matchup advantage.

There is NO WAY "that better matches the experience you get in real life"

No way.

In one play durant was standing straight up with his arms high the offensive player goes to shoot the ball and you mean to tell me it's more realistic for durant to go striaght up and get that block ?

How then would you or can your game account for close combat one on one situations ? Your giving the defense an unfair advantage. How can you balance that ?