Uh oh, NBA Live 10 is not that bad, now what? - jestep123's Blog

jestep123's Blog

Uh oh, NBA Live 10 is not that bad, now what?

Posted on October 21, 2010 at 01:17 PM.

(47)

What a strange world I liive in. I spent the $60 for NBA 2k11 and yet last night I found myself playing the NBA Live 10 demo. We aren't talking about the game, we are talking about the Demo..and I LIKED IT!

I have been on the 2k bandwagon for years and 2k11 is a candidate for GOY so I am not, and will not disperage it for fear of being electronically stoned to death. However, one could argue that NBA Live 10 is more fun to play.

Maybe that's because its a little easier to pull off moves but the fact is that when you do string moves together and take it to the rack, it is very satisfying.

You know what else I noticed about Live 10? All the movement that you see in Czar's 2k11 videos (and remember the lack of movement from 2k10), all that movement and bumping and screening is in Live 10. Does it look as smooth, no maybe not but the game was released a full year earlier. I have a PS3 so I can come out and say that the arenas look better in Live 10 and the commentary, while not better than 2k11, is at least very good in Live 10.

In the interest of full disclosure, I must admit that I owned this game last year and I seem to remember that the main reason I gave it up was because I felt like there were too many drives to the basket and not enough jump shooting. If you know anything about this game can that be confirmed?

The point of this blog is two fold. First to EA, what were you guys thinking? Give us the shot stick portion of the Elite controls, the new broadcast team and SOME upgrades to Franchise mode and you have yourself a $60 game. I am just saying.

Second, I am thinking about picking this game up as a cheaper alternative and then selling my 2k11 so I can get some cash for another game.

Has anyone else considered that?

Feel free to comment on everything and anything I wrote or any thoughts you have on the two games.

Comments

# 1 russwg1970 @ Oct 21

I did the same thing, kind of... I bought 2k11 based on the hoopla surrounding this game, and it's great or at least it was. I played 5 or 6 hours of 2k11, then I got Medal of Honor - and haven't played it since. Is Medal of Honor a better game? The "scores" would certainly say no, but I can't quite playing it. So, I sold 2k11 back to Amazon to get the new EA MMA game. I had a hard time pulling of "moves" in 2k11, and honestly - I just don't have the gaming time (an hour or two) to put into it to become descent. Anymore, due to limited time, I prefer games I can just pick up and play at a moments notice.

# 2 jestep123 @ Oct 21

@dr logic- You may be right but I dont think I am as far off the rocker as you think given how cheap you can get Live.

@russwg - You nailed it. I wouldnt call myself a causual player but being any good seems like a very large investment of time that I dont have, or time that I want to spend playing other games that I paid $60 for. What I am really saying is that, given the roster update and the price, you could sell NBA 2k11, buy another game, perhaps that doesnt have that much replay value and still have a decent alternative for your NBA fix.

# 3 Dazraz @ Oct 21

The trouble is with Live 10 is that although it does have a straight forward pick up & play feel the lack of depth will soon find the game spending increasing amounts of time on the shelf. If you are really serious about your basketball games then 2K11 is a keeper.

# 4 HarveyCamper @ Oct 21

After buying any sports game I want to play it for at least 90 days or longer. After playing Live 10 it's fun but has almost no long term playability. Take the time to learn Nba2k's controls and you will be rewarded with very close to real and very fun gameplay. Getting Live for say ten dollars would be cool cause it costs so little. Play a sports title longterm means learning the controls and 2k's gameplay will reward you longterm if you do. NBA2k11 might be the first sports title worth $60 ! Don't short-change your gaming fun by giving up there's a huge reward for playing the title short and long term.

# 5 malachijohn666 @ Oct 21

I actually agree with this article. I too like NBA2k11 alot, but for some reason I find Live more "fun."

On the issue of commentary, the one thing that I don't like about 2k is that even though the comments are deep they do repeat and those repetitions are even more annoying.

For instance, I was playing a franchise with the Bulls. And every game the announcer would relate the childhood of Carlos Boozer. That was so annoying so I changed teams. I actually find commentary nice when it is minimal. I love The Show 10's commentary for that reason. Anyways I think I am gonna play Live 10 again this weekend because of this article.

# 6 bigsmallwood @ Oct 21

Although I will say that NBA Live 10 was a very very good game....NBA 2K11 is much more fun for me personally. You can't go wrong either way, but NBA 2K11 is probably the greatest Sports game in history as it stands right now.

# 7 malachijohn666 @ Oct 21

Wait a sec, to get the roster updates.. do you have to by the code for online? I bought my copy used.

# 8 jestep123 @ Oct 21

I could have sworn they said the Dynamic DNA was free. I thought I saw the words "totally free" in Peter Moore's blog.

bigsmallwood - You are exactly right, you cant go wrong either way and that is a good thing. When the idea first came about to give NBA Live 10 a roster update, I thought there was no way in the world it would matter because NBA 2k11 was far superior. Then I played Live last night and it was just "fun".

I can hear the simheads now. "You just arent good at 2k11". "You need to work on your game" That is all fine and good but I think the "fun" factor kind of gets lost in all this talk about making games as "sim" as possible.

Everybody bashes EA for being pick up and play almost to the point where they are willing to overlook the fact that they do contain elements of simulation.

My feeling on Live is that it replicates the sport of basketball just fine. The animation isnt as polished as the 2k series but its easier to learn and fun to play while still providing a challenge.

# 9 jestep123 @ Oct 21

I just went back and reread. On needing a code for online, last year you needed a code to access dynamic season but not for online play. You should not need a code to get online for Live 10. EA didnt start that garbage (dont get me started, that's a whole different blog) until the '11 season of games.

# 10 DoubleJMix965 @ Oct 21

Great blog. I never played Live 10, but I had heard from many people that it was a fun game. I ended up not getting any basketball game last year as a matter of fact. I think my biggest knock with NBA 2k11 has to be the controls and I say that due to the fact that I still don't feel comfortable with them, not that they are broken. I just can't get comfortable stringing moves together, or pulling off moves decently.

# 11 Wiffyjustus @ Oct 21

This is why I don't know why EA made such a dramatic change in direction.

Live 10 was good and most of all fun.

The bball genre is the opposite to what it was ten years ago. Live was king and 2k was the gifted rookie. 2k gained a cult following and it just grew from there.

Now 2K is King, Live 10 a gifted rookie (and Elite the court Jester.) A strong fan base could have been built off Live 10s principles.
-Fun
-Accessible and intuitive controls. Easy to pick up and play.
-They allowed you to think about the basketball rather than which way to twirl your sticks.
-Improved slick presentation
-On court played a sweet game of basketball that rewarded intelligent basketball play.

If Live had kept going in this vein they would be steadily building their fanbase right now rather than going into damage control.

# 12 AMYO @ Oct 21

practice playin with your sticks pullin off moves in 2k11 is exteremly easy........

# 13 Indiedog @ Oct 21

EA made the changes because the people running the day to day operations of the NBA franchise don't really know what to make. NBA Elite was an exercise in over-reacting to the feedback that exists in the market. If you don't have a clear idea of what you want to create, all of the internet chatter will just serve to confuse. In EA's case, there was so much conflicting feedback about Live that they thought they should just do something new (in this case, it was making NBA Live a hockey game).

I agree with the general sentiment that had EA stayed on their path with Live 10, it would have been a different experience than 2K's game. If they try to match 2K feature for feature and also try to create a sim-heavy game, they will lose. Live's best years were the ones in which they did their own thing and let the fans decide which they preferred. These versions are NBA Live 2003-2005. The best Lives of the entire decade. Go check out the scores of those compared to 2K on Metacritic.

# 14 jestep123 @ Oct 21

Like I said, if they would have just kept going where they were going, given us an updated shooting mechanic, and the standard fair of yearly updates that you get with annual sports titles, they would be selling a good deal of copies. I probably would have picked up both.

Wiff said it perfectly. Live is a game that allowed you to play basketball and not worry so much about your "stick skills" and like I said before, the folks that sumarely dismiss live in favor of 2k make it sound like the game isnt even basketball or isnt difficult and that is just false.