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

[k beast]

terrible live graphics remind me of 2001

[Playmakers]

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).

With all do respect reanimator,

I've never at any point felt like Live lacked player control....

Are you telling me that EA has never taken a chance on Next Gen to improve animations because you feel it would hurt player control?

Has there been at any point you guys would consider just for once taking a chance and releasing some of that player control to add more animations.

I mean for 5 years we've had great player control and yet the basic gameplay has never crossed over that level to greatness. It's always been avg at best. Are the EA heads going to for ever stay conservative and never take a chance and see how the other end of the spectrum might play out.

[23]

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).

I gotcha, its always something I've had issue with... I understand your reasoning, but that poster is just being ridiculous in here thats all.

Ive said this a couple of times though, because of those decisions, some will like it and some just wont. Im not sure where the end result will end up between the two but I'd watch the consumer closely to see the response to it.

[JWiLL02]

Quote: Originally Posted by 23

Ive said this a couple of times though, because of those decisions, some will like it and some just wont. Im not sure where the end result will end up between the two but I'd watch the consumer closely to see the response to it.

For the last 2 years Live's controls have blown 2k's out of the water and look at what the consumer's response was...what more do they need to see?

Live 10 was the best controlling basketball game I've ever played while 2k10's movement was almost broken, but the depth of animations carried it.

I just don't understand the decision to dedicate an entire year on controls when you already had the best 'feeling' game on the market. Now they've awoken a sleeping giant on the other side and may not even have the best controlling game this year, while their competitor continued to build on it's massive signature animation collection.

Opportunity missed, IMO.

[t-mac357]

I love the commentary and espn integration but... the gameplay seriously looks 10 steps behing Live 10

[WTF]

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).

I'm not going to get tied into the argument here, but just wanted to throw out my opinion for what it's worth. I've already commented on the video as a whole, and my viewpoint on the series.

Last year, I have to admit, I was more excited about Live than I've been about any bball title since Inside Drive 2004, and that's saying a lot. The new "Sim Direction" had me excited. The new controls for PnR was sweet, and the passing system was second to none. The animations weren't there, but the gameplay was getting better. In fact, the demo probably got more playtime from me than any NBA game has in the past few years.

Now, with that said, when I saw the comments from Mike about EA going a different direction, I was not hopping on the EA boat. Finally we had a product that was resembling a game that had some longevity. The graphics weren't perfect, nor were the animations, but the gameplay and play system was getting there. Finding that they possibly weren't going to just upgrade the solid foundation, and going a "new direction", I didn't know what to think, but wanted to keep an open mind.

Seeing the "It's all in your hands" type deal, was fine an dandy, no real problem with that. If I'm getting beat, I'm getting beat because of me. Cool. Whatever. Real Time Physics? If done correctly, sweet. Very nice addition, and could possible make those "wow" 1 of a kind situations.

After watching the first videos from the devs, the Quick Clips, things started jumping out at me that this was not an NBA title, more of a "basketball" title. I wasn't impressed with the animations, wasn't impressed with the visuals, and none of the visuals "did it" for me. Wasn't writing them off yet, waiting to see more.

Then 23's videos come out... WOW. Not a pleasing representation of NBA basketball, or even organized basketball at all. Animations were just awkward, gameplay was frantic, and it had nothing whatsoever that drew me to the title. It was a pitiful "advancement" from the solid base from last year. Going back to the early vids from last year really showed some decent AI and gameplay. The dumb hopping up the court celebration was awful, but other aspects of the game was actually pretty nice looking. Were some of the animations scripted, yeah, but it kept things a little more... ummmmm... accurate. I guess the Real Time Physics was the answer to this. Supposedly.

Watching the video that you all just put out, just reeked of "damage control". I talked to several guys on here prior to this, and basically said exactly what we'd see. Two of the devs basically playing the game at a slowed down pace, working the ball around, using the shot-clock, trying to show that the game is not an up and down, rocket dunk, easy fast break, highlight fest. And what did we get? I counted a few times in the video where the user could have easily went to the hoop basically uncontested... and instead, backed it out to "run a play" and try to show the title in a sim aspect. And it was not appealing to me at all.

Then I come to read your debate with 23 about the "jumping" and pre-gather. I don't care if it's for the sake of being in control or not. It looks ridiculous, no matter how much anyone tries to defend that executive decision. A quick bend of the knees would not have taken the control out of the users hands, it would actually do the exact opposite. Basketball, and rebounding/blocking in general, is all about anticipation. If you anticipate the bounce, and jump on time (including the gather) you could grab the board. If you jump too early or late, then you miss the board. Deal with it, learn how to time your jump. Removing the "gather" looks awful, and just doesn't represent basketball at any level, other than possibly pee-wee league, where the kids jump stiff legged anyway. Guys rocket jumping, using nothing but their calves I'm assuming, just isn't right, no matter how you swing it, and it looks crazy.

I'm not saying that this game won't be fun for some people. I'm glad that there is an alternative, and it won't feel the same as the other game. However, it's not for me.

Because someone at EA made the decision to eliminate the "gather" portion of jumping, doesn't mean it was the right one. Doesn't mean it was the wrong one. It's up to the interpreter. In this case, I'm with 23. Looks awful, and I'd rather take the extra 1/2 second to time my gather, to have a game that looks realistic.

No matter how much that video was supposed to show a "sim style" gameplay, in my opinion, it failed miserably.

[travis72]

Quote: Originally Posted by JWiLL02

For the last 2 years Live's controls have blown 2k's out of the water and look at what the consumer's response was...what more do they need to see? Live 10 was the best controlling basketball game I've ever played while 2k10's movement was almost broken, but the depth of animations carried it. I just don't understand the decision to dedicate an entire year on controls when you already had the best 'feeling' game on the market. Now they've awoken a sleeping giant on the other side and may not even have the best controlling game this year, while their competitor continued to build on it's massive signature animation collection. Opportunity missed, IMO.

Right on spot with that. Thats what I think as well

[WTF]

Quote: Originally Posted by Playmakers

With all do respect reanimator, I've never at any point felt like Live lacked player control.... Are you telling me that EA has never taken a chance on Next Gen to improve animations because you feel it would hurt player control? Has there been at any point you guys would consider just for once taking a chance and releasing some of that player control to add more animations. I mean for 5 years we've had great player control and yet the basic gameplay has never crossed over that level to greatness. It's always been avg at best. Are the EA heads going to for ever stay conservative and never take a chance and see how the other end of the spectrum might play out.

I agree with this wholeheartedly.