NBA Live 14 Q&A with Executive Producer Sean O'Brien

[headsteez]

Quote: Originally Posted by Sundown

Movement and immersion contribute hugely to the gameplay experience. Look and feel is what makes many games fun and ties into how controls "feel" as part of the interactive illusion. If you're okay with bad looking, jerky games, then by all means, play your GameCube. Don't expect people to appreciate spending 60$ on a next-gen console game for current gen visuals and seemingly rougher-than-current-gen gameplay. That's just not "fun" for many. There are plenty of bad looking, bad moving games people can play now. Live should rightfully be torched for destroying their franchise, hyping expectations, failing to deliver, just to make another bad looking, unpolished game while charging full price for it.

I think your debating something different than I am. There are plenty of games that look great but are so boring. Feel and Look are different. Live may not look great, but it can still feel like a good basketball game in spite of some funky animations. I remember playing Madden 99( psx version) and players had no hands. Did it stop me from enjoying the rest of the game? No. I loved that it had franchise mode.

Yes I'll be okay paying $60 for a game with less visuals if it does something that 2k doesn't do. Lets be honest, 2k hasn't raised the bar for franchise mode and online modes. If Live plays like 10 did but smoother, more animations, fixed some nuances here and there, and add bounce tek , better post play(offense and defense), throw in Synergy, I'll be okay with that because we now have a solid foundation.

Lets all be open minded about this. We're only talking about Live 14. Not any other version. Lets put down the pitch forks, and shovels and what ever other tool we've grabbed. Mob mentality is real around here I see. Live 14 should not rightfully be torched as you want to do. Nobody here has played the game or experienced any of the game modes. If Live sucks, I'll just go buy 2k. Its that simple. No burning necessary.

I Feel everyone's passion for sports video games, that's why we all come to OS in the first place, BUT we got to do better as a community about being OPEN MINDED!!!

[Sundown]

Quote: Originally Posted by Sirs

That game you speak of isn't live though. They have great feel, responsiveness and control. What they don't have is smooth looking animations. Give me control over looks as far as immersion any day. When I'm playing all I care about is if the inputs I execute do what I want and create the space I want. With that comes the feeling and satisfaction of pulling off moves, making the extra pass etc. I never got that from the other game. Simply why Mario bros is one of the best game of all time. They got the controls of simply running, moving and jumping tied into the feel and control so good. Makes any graphical deficiencies nothing more than cosmetic. I want to play a game and be amazed. Not watch it and be amazed in replay mode.

I can understand that to some extent. But I'm no longer amazed by Mario Brothers and I'm not amazed by sports games that don't look like the real thing. I am amazed when I do pull off plays that look authentically like broadcast basketball, which I do regularly with 2K. I'm amazed by immersion.

I also don't get much satisfaction from jittery and unrealistic movement models. What feels like "control" to some feels like arcade cheese to me, and there's little reward in breaking down defenses with twitchy moves.

Bad animations are usually a sign of bad movement modeling and what you feel is "unresponsive" is actually what I appreciate in realistic games where momentum is fully modeled. Having movements play out AND look realistic as the play develops is what amazes me.

[royounggoku]

Quote: Originally Posted by Sundown

I can understand that to some extent. But I'm no longer amazed by Mario Brothers and I'm not amazed by sports games that don't look like the real thing. I am amazed when I do pull off plays that look authentically like broadcast basketball, which I do regularly with 2K. I'm amazed by immersion. I also don't get much satisfaction from jittery and unrealistic movement models. What feels like "control" to some feels like arcade cheese to me, and there's little reward in breaking down defenses with twitchy moves. Bad animations are usually a sign of bad movement modeling and what you feel is "unresponsive" is actually what I appreciate in realistic games where momentum is fully modeled. Having movements play out AND look realistic as the play develops is what amazes me.

I always thought that if you want the game to play well and look like actual humans there has to be times where you're not in control. That's how it is in real life, if you're going in one direction at max speed most of us can't just stop on a dime and go in a different direction because we want control, that's not how it works. If the game is to be a true simulation of real life NBA basketball then there has to be times where control is out of your hands.

[Sundown]

Quote: Originally Posted by royounggoku

I always thought that if you want the game to play well and look like actual humans there has to be times where you're not in control. That's how it is in real life, if you're going in one direction at max speed most of us can't just stop on a dime and go in a different direction because we want control, that's not how it works. If the game is to be a true simulation of real life NBA basketball then there has to be times where control is out of your hands.

This. Precisely. We can't move our bodies as fast as we can move a tiny thumb stick. Games attempting to simulate real life movement should not allow that either-- and I would say real life movement is more important to realistic sports gaming than possibly any other genre.

The thing is, you need to model loss of control in an intuitive way and allow a chance to break out of movement in a realistic manner. If the loss of control is severe enough, you also need to give player some feedback that his input is being received but his player or avatar needs to fight physics first. Transitional animations are key for that feedback, and certain parts of the animation can be immediate-- like heads turning or weight shifting in the desired drection before the body has time to come around.

Some people grew up playing arcade games with twitchy controls and feel like that's what a video game should play like. Others of us grew up with the same but "outgrew" that and now want interactive, simulated reality and all its nuances.

This same dichotomy is what has held First Person Shooters back for more than a decade. The last really realistic tactical shooter was Rogue Spear and it still had a ton of flaws in its movement modelling. Unfortunately, Halo caught on and consoles took over that genre-- and most every game since has featured unrealistic but "responsive" and "fast paced" action, which means unrealistic movement and unrealistic tactics and gameplay. Mainstream games are starting to move back in the former direction mainly because as they look more and more realistic, it's harder to get away visually with unrealistic movement.

[Sundown]

Quote: Originally Posted by headsteez

Lets all be open minded about this. We're only talking about Live 14. Not any other version. Lets put down the pitch forks, and shovels and what ever other tool we've grabbed. Mob mentality is real around here I see. Live 14 should not rightfully be torched as you want to do. Nobody here has played the game or experienced any of the game modes. If Live sucks, I'll just go buy 2k. Its that simple. No burning necessary.

Some of the cyncism Live gets is rightfully deserved. The same parent company still manages it. The game's marketing and production direction still follows practices people were burned by over nad over before. The product itself looks extremely underwheming given its hype. It's one thing to be "open minded". It's another thing to be undiscerning and unwilling to acknowledge the usual troubling signs one sees (and that the product does not look like a great game).

So frankly, Live deserves its flack until it actually produces a solid next-gen product that fits the moniker in both look and play.

Anyway, I do agree that Live makes progress if they can keep what works, rework what doesn't, and improve everything in subsequent years-- even if the game's mostly bad. I just think it's ridiculous to recommend others to fund EA to do so through a full-priced purchase when they've shown no willingness or ability to commit to any long term plan in the last decade.

[MrBlackThumbz]

**** ea and nba live all they do is lie lie lie they said they would drop somthing today....NADA!!! Just like they said about the info later last summer so now I cant belive anything they say ill buy the game when its at gamestop for 20 bucks next year somtime since they drop no info they just want us to wait and try the game but those bastards wont get 65 dollars from me. Im officially crossing over to the 2k side

[Jay Jay]

Quote: Originally Posted by Sundown

This. Precisely. We can't move our bodies as fast as we can move a tiny thumb stick. Games attempting to simulate real life movement should not allow that either-- and I would say real life movement is more important to realistic sports gaming than possibly any other genre. The thing is, you need to model loss of control in an intuitive way and allow a chance to break out of movement in a realistic manner. If the loss of control is severe enough, you also need to give player some feedback that his input is being received but his player or avatar needs to fight physics first. Transitional animations are key for that feedback, and certain parts of the animation can be immediate-- like heads turning or weight shifting in the desired drection before the body has time to come around. Some people grew up playing arcade games with twitchy controls and feel like that's what a video game should play like. Others of us grew up with the same but "outgrew" that and now want interactive, simulated reality and all its nuances. This same dichotomy is what has held First Person Shooters back for more than a decade. The last really realistic tactical shooter was Rogue Spear and it still had a ton of flaws in its movement modelling. Unfortunately, Halo caught on and consoles took over that genre-- and most every game since has featured unrealistic but "responsive" and "fast paced" action, which means unrealistic movement and unrealistic tactics and gameplay. Mainstream games are starting to move back in the former direction mainly because as they look more and more realistic, it's harder to get away visually with unrealistic movement.

Your post explained why im interested in Live and if the good out weigh the bad I can live with it.

[yungflo]

Quote: Originally Posted by MrBlackThumbz

**** ea and nba live all they do is lie lie lie they said they would drop somthing today....NADA!!! Just like they said about the info later last summer so now I cant belive anything they say ill buy the game when its at gamestop for 20 bucks next year somtime since they drop no info they just want us to wait and try the game but those bastards wont get 65 dollars from me. Im officially crossing over to the 2k side

they never said today.