NBA Live 14 News Post

If NBA Live Has a Future, It Has to Look Radically Different

02:53 PM - December 6, 2013 by RaychelSnr

EA Sports had a clear opening opening with NBA Live 14, and they didn’t even realize it.

NBA 2K14 fumbled its launch about as much as 2K Sports could manage, which is to say — there are still some problems, a few of which are quite serious which consumers are facing, but the game is largely quite good.

Connectivity issues, save file issues with MyCAREER, crashes, and some old legacy gameplay issues are hampering the product at this point. A patch has fixed some issues, but many remain it appears.

In all reality, there is a lot you can find wrong with NBA 2K14 if you look hard enough.

And despite the wasted opportunity this year, it's now clear there have been key areas of mismanagement which plague the NBA Live series, and until each is fixed individually, this series has no future.

Read More - If NBA Live Has a Future, It Has to Look Radically Different

Game: NBA Live 14Reader Score: 4/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS4 / Xbox OneVotes for game: 17 - View All

NBA Live 14 Videos

Member Comments

# 201 King_B_Mack @ 12/12/13 11:01 AM

You're completely missing his overall point man. He's saying that another company has been squeezed out of the market by the other two titles at this point. What you seem to continue to ignore or fail to realize or something is that this is a business. Like has been mentioned before, these companies care about sales. While it might be all well and good to make games because people want to see them and play them, if the sales aren't there to justify the cost of making the damn things, companies aren't going to waste their time.

NBA 09 sold around 400 thousand copies and that's a number as it currently stands, not sure the numbers at the time. Compared to 2.16m for Live 09 and 2.28m for 2K9. They weren't making any headway in the market so they pulled out. The following year (again numbers are current standings) Live sold 1.16m and 2K did 2.80. The market now has been further dwindled for efforts after number one. Even now Live has sold about 70 thousand copies. Most of that (if not all) is from the established base of Live fans who will play this game no matter how bad it is and tell the world that it's not as bad as people think. It really is. Anyway, you're asking for another company to put up the money to get the rights to make an NBA game, to pay a team to put a quality effort together, commentators for the game and so on. That's also asked for on systems that are even more expensive to develop on. There's no incentive to footing that bill, sorry.

# 202 shutdown10 @ 12/12/13 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by El_Poopador


	two established companies? right now ea is anything but established in nba gaming. after elite 11 and live 13 they actually have more work to do to earn trust. what resources are taken up? 2k has three commentators and ea has espn. do you really believe that there is no one else out there they can use? espn is not the only station in town. do you remember apf 2k8? that game had nothing. no real life broadcast package no real life commentators not even the nfl license. the game was essentially a port of nfl 2k5. and that was on top of being very bare bones in the modes department. that game sold upwards of 400K copies. 400K without even real teams. nba 2k14 doesnt have a real life broadcast package either. they both use the 2k sports network. even nfl 2k5 didnt have real life broadcasters. so if a commentary team and broadcast package is your only argument then you dont have an argument. there are any number of local broadcast teams they could go after. even if they had a generic broadcast package and a fake commentary team it could still be good if they put the effort in. backbreaker didnt sell for a multitude of reasons. it didnt have actual nfl teams. it didnt have ANY commentary. the gameplay didnt receive a warm reception especially in terms of the camera angles. its modes werent fleshed out. there werent many plays to pick from. i could go on. and that game sold over 300K copies. imagine if they actually had great gameplay and ai with solid commentary and real nfl teams. either way that has no place in this conversation because no one holds an exclusive license to the nba. and if nba live is so bad (as you say it is) then why would that prevent someone else from making a game? if anything that should encourage another team to step up. even if they dont beat 2k they can still produce a game and say hey we beat ea. so that argument still doesnt hold water. by your logic if both nba live and nba 2k were horrible games no other company should even try since there are already two games out there by two different companies. makes perfect sense.

If you want to continue to play this game of keep responding to my post, then I can as well. You still don't understand what I'm trying to say. Whether Nba Live is failing or thriving, EA is still an established company because they have other titles that sell well on a every year basis. Back-breaker sold 300K copies, but could not really break the mold they wanted to because their game could not have authentic licenses because of EA Madden football. Yes the Nba does not give out exclusive licenses to gaming companies, but if you want to make an Nba game you have to pay the NBA to make a game, which is not cheap. Companies that are looking at the situation between NBA 2k and EA are not going to be the third option in that situation because 2k is thriving and EA is failing, but EA does not want to remove themselves from the situation. Imagine that scenario entering into this market first having to to pay the NBA to publish a game, then having to compete with two other basketball games. Next what if Live were to get their act together and finally make a legit sim basketball game. The third company would have alot of difficulty surviving in that market with two brand loyal basketball games that have been out for a while. Everyone knows that football is more popular then basketball in the U.S, so companies will be able to take the risk on football rather basketball. A generic basketball game is not going to sell, unless it is a game that resembles NBA street, which was a fun and whacky game. The basketball video game market is much different than the football video market. Look at all the sports games in video gaming right now, and you will see that there is either 1 or 2 video games being made yearly for the MLB, Soccer, Football, Basketball, Hockey, Tennis, Bowling, and etc. Three games cannot exist in video sport games anymore. A company can try college, but they would have to face all those legal issues which is going to stop them from even trying. Pay attention to the economy and market right now, and not just what you believe can happen.

# 203 El_Poopador @ 12/12/13 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King_B_Mack


	You're completely missing his overall point man. He's saying that another company has been squeezed out of the market by the other two titles at this point. What you seem to continue to ignore or fail to realize or something is that this is a business. Like has been mentioned before, these companies care about sales. While it might be all well and good to make games because people want to see them and play them, if the sales aren't there to justify the cost of making the damn things, companies aren't going to waste their time. NBA 09 sold around 400 thousand copies and that's a number as it currently stands, not sure the numbers at the time. Compared to 2.16m for Live 09 and 2.28m for 2K9. They weren't making any headway in the market so they pulled out. The following year (again numbers are current standings) Live sold 1.16m and 2K did 2.80. The market now has been further dwindled for efforts after number one. Even now Live has sold about 70 thousand copies. Most of that (if not all) is from the established base of Live fans who will play this game no matter how bad it is and tell the world that it's not as bad as people think. It really is. Anyway, you're asking for another company to put up the money to get the rights to make an NBA game, to pay a team to put a quality effort together, commentators for the game and so on. That's also asked for on systems that are even more expensive to develop on. There's no incentive to footing that bill, sorry.

youre not even arguing against my initial point. my point is that ea is not preventing anyone else from trying. i never said other companies should try right now. the post i originally replied to said that ea needs to stop making nba games so someone else can. someone else certainly can make an nba game whether ea is doing it or not. whether its financially feasible or a good idea is a completely different argument.

# 204 El_Poopador @ 12/12/13 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shutdown10


	The basketball video game market is much different than the football video market

im going to start here. you were the one who brought up backbreaker. i was simply responding to that and im the one who said its not relevant.

Quote:


	If you want to continue to play this game of keep responding to my post, then I can as well. You still don't understand what I'm trying to say. Whether Nba Live is failing or thriving, EA is still an established company because they have other titles that sell well on a every year basis. Back-breaker sold 300K copies, but could not really break the mold they wanted to because their game could not have authentic licenses because of EA Madden football. Yes the Nba does not give out exclusive licenses to gaming companies, but if you want to make an Nba game you have to pay the NBA to make a game, which is not cheap. Companies that are looking at the situation between NBA 2k and EA are not going to be the third option in that situation because 2k is thriving and EA is failing, but EA does not want to remove themselves from the situation. Imagine that scenario entering into this market first having to to pay the NBA to publish a game, then having to compete with two other basketball games. Next what if Live were to get their act together and finally make a legit sim basketball game. The third company would have alot of difficulty surviving in that market with two brand loyal basketball games that have been out for a while. Everyone knows that football is more popular then basketball in the U.S, so companies will be able to take the risk on football rather basketball. A generic basketball game is not going to sell, unless it is a game that resembles NBA street, which was a fun and whacky game. The basketball video game market is much different than the football video market. Look at all the sports games in video gaming right now, and you will see that there is either 1 or 2 video games being made yearly for the MLB, Soccer, Football, Basketball, Hockey, Tennis, Bowling, and etc. Three games cannot exist in video sport games anymore. A company can try college, but they would have to face all those legal issues which is going to stop them from even trying. Pay attention to the economy and market right now, and not just what you believe can happen.

again you are not hitting on the only point i was trying to make. ea is in no way shape or form stopping anyone from making an nba game. whether it is a good idea for another company to try is not the argument. your original post said ea needs to stop making nba games so someone else can. even if they stop that will not change anything for another company who might be interested.

then you say if live gets their act together and makes a good game. well that just defeats the purpose of your original statement since the whole point was that you dont like their game. so introducing that hypothetical (in your case. personally i think live 14 is ok and can lead to a great game in the future) completely goes against what you originally wanted.

you also brought up other sports which i dont really understand. the mlb license has been in 2ks hands for the last however many years so no one else can make a third party mlb game. the nfl license is in eas hands so no one can make another nfl game. hockey only has one game out so why isnt there two? 2k stopped making their hockey game so why didnt someone else step in? thats the same scenario as this just with hockey. sure its not as popular but if they make a better game then why not? tennis and bowling you dont even need a license. look at the wii. they included those games together with their system and they are two of the funnest games to play. even better than some of the licensed games.

any company can try. that is my point. i am not arguing that it is a good idea. but you make it sound like because company a is trying company b is not allowed to. if company a has a horrible product (as you claim it does) then company b can make a much better product and step in if they chose to do so. if no one ever did that we would be stuck in the dark ages.

# 205 shutdown10 @ 12/12/13 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by El_Poopador


	youre not even arguing against my initial point. my point is that ea is not preventing anyone else from trying. i never said other companies should try right now. the post i originally replied to said that ea needs to stop making nba games so someone else can. someone else certainly can make an nba game whether ea is doing it or not. whether its financially feasible or a good idea is a completely different argument.

There you go again, but I said that and firmly stand by it. By EA dropping the ball for three straight years and not relinquishing their position on the basketball market, it allowed no one else to enter the market because two companies were still controlling the market economic wise. EA was MIA, but other companies saw that they were not giving up, so they were not going to take the risk going head on with 2K and having to face EA as well when they decided to come back. Only two games max can survive in the video sports game market.

# 206 King_B_Mack @ 12/12/13 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by El_Poopador


	youre not even arguing against my initial point. my point is that ea is not preventing anyone else from trying. i never said other companies should try right now. the post i originally replied to said that ea needs to stop making nba games so someone else can. someone else certainly can make an nba game whether ea is doing it or not. whether its financially feasible or a good idea is a completely different argument.

You're right, if another company wants to take the risk, there is nothing stopping them. However, to say EA is "in no way shape or form" preventing another company from making a game is simply not totally accurate. They continue to put out signs that they're making a game and then canceling at the last minute, or putting out efforts like what they did this year just to keep from eating another year of NBA license money.

Just because another company COULD go ahead and take on all that risk doesn't absolve EA of muddying up the market. This is like trying to pass off blame of the exclusivity to the NFL to absolve EA when they lobbied for that license for YEARS and it was put to auction knowing EA was the only company with the money to pay what they were looking for.

# 207 shutdown10 @ 12/12/13 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by El_Poopador


	im going to start here. you were the one who brought up backbreaker. i was simply responding to that and im the one who said its not relevant. again you are not hitting on the only point i was trying to make. ea is in no way shape or form stopping anyone from making an nba game. whether it is a good idea for another company to try is not the argument. your original post said ea needs to stop making nba games so someone else can. even if they stop that will not change anything for another company who might be interested. then you say if live gets their act together and makes a good game. well that just defeats the purpose of your original statement since the whole point was that you dont like their game. so introducing that hypothetical (in your case. personally i think live 14 is ok and can lead to a great game in the future) completely goes against what you originally wanted. you also brought up other sports which i dont really understand. the mlb license has been in 2ks hands for the last however many years so no one else can make a third party mlb game. the nfl license is in eas hands so no one can make another nfl game. hockey only has one game out so why isnt there two? 2k stopped making their hockey game so why didnt someone else step in? thats the same scenario as this just with hockey. sure its not as popular but if they make a better game then why not? tennis and bowling you dont even need a license. look at the wii. they included those games together with their system and they are two of the funnest games to play. even better than some of the licensed games. any company can try. that is my point. i am not arguing that it is a good idea. but you make it sound like because company a is trying company b is not allowed to. if company a has a horrible product (as you claim it does) then company b can make a much better product and step in if they chose to do so. if no one ever did that we would be stuck in the dark ages.

Not trying to be disrespectful, but if you don't understand how business works then please delete this post. The football market is different than the basketball market because one company has their hands on all the licenses. Back breaker would have continued if they were allowed to get their share of those resources. Their sales would have dwindled throughout the years because of the lack of NFL appeal in the game belonging to EA, so they were not going to continue in the market whether you want to believe it or not. Are you saying that any company can make a generic NBA game just out of your imagination? EA needs to to give up that number two slot and allow another company to compete with 2k if they cannot get their game going properly. You can try to defend EA or Nba Live in this situation, but business is business!

# 208 shutdown10 @ 12/12/13 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King_B_Mack


	You're right, if another company wants to take the risk, there is nothing stopping them. However, to say EA is "in no way shape or form" preventing another company from making a game is simply not totally accurate. They continue to put out signs that they're making a game and then canceling at the last minute, or putting out efforts like what they did this year just to keep from eating another year of NBA license money. Just because another company COULD go ahead and take on all that risk doesn't absolve EA of muddying up the market. This is like trying to pass off blame of the exclusivity to the NFL to absolve EA when they lobbied for that license for YEARS and it was put to auction knowing EA was the only company with the money to pay what they were looking for.

I don't think he realizes the point here. No other company is going to get involved with this ugly situation. You have a basketball company in 2k that has been thriving in the market for 3 years and you have EA that has failed to put out a game for three years, but is still paying for their share in this market as well. Another company is not going to put themselves in that situation because of the pressures of having to pay to publish with NBA and still compete with sales against 2k and when EA when finally decides to come out. If EA gave up their rights, then I guarantee we all would have seen another company emerge by now. The situation is too risky for a third company to get into basketball right now.

# 209 El_Poopador @ 12/12/13 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shutdown10


	I don't think he realizes the point here. No other company is going to get involved with this ugly situation. You have a basketball company in 2k that has been thriving in the market for 3 years and you have EA that has failed to put out a game for three years, but is still paying for their share in this market as well. Another company is not going to put themselves in that situation because of the pressures of having to pay to publish with NBA and still compete with sales against 2k and when EA when finally decides to come out. If EA gave up their rights, then I guarantee we all would have seen another company emerge by now. The situation is too risky for a third company to get into basketball right now.

ok lets say hypothetically that both nba live and nba 2k are horrible games and have been horrible games for the last say six years. are you honestly telling me that no other company would think to try and make a game because there are already two games on the market?

or lets say that ea does decide to step out. does that mean the first company that steps in is the only one thats going to succeed? if i release an nba game after ea leaves no one else will try since i took that second spot regardless of how bad my game is? and the only reason they will not try is because there are two games on the market?

# 210 El_Poopador @ 12/12/13 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shutdown10


	Not trying to be disrespectful, but if you don't understand how business works then please delete this post. The football market is different than the basketball market because one company has their hands on all the licenses. Back breaker would have continued if they were allowed to get their share of those resources. Their sales would have dwindled throughout the years because of the lack of NFL appeal in the game belonging to EA, so they were not going to continue in the market whether you want to believe it or not.

i understand how businesses work perfectly well. i honestly dont understand why you keep bringing up backbreaker as if it is relevant to this conversation. but if you honestly believe that if backbreaker was a better game that it wouldnt have continued then you are dead wrong. the nfl license only goes so far. the amount of customization in the game made it possible to make the teams look like nfl teams. but it was lacking everywhere else. gameplay was not well received. presentation was practically nonexistent. commentary WAS nonexistent. modes were barebones at best. there was no replay value. that is why the game flopped. it wasnt just because it didnt have espn and nfl licensing.

Quote:


	Are you saying that any company can make a generic NBA game just out of your imagination? EA needs to to give up that number two slot and allow another company to compete with 2k if they cannot get their game going properly. You can try to defend EA or Nba Live in this situation, but business is business!

i dont know why you say generic nba game. any company can buy rights to use the nba license whether ea is around or not. ea has the number two slot because there is no other game not the other way around. if its so bad then another company should be able to easily come in and make a better game and take over that number two spot. not having the espn license isnt preventing that. 2k has generic presentation. it still took over the nba gaming market. whats to stop another company from taking over second place?

no company comes out of the gate and becomes top dog. remember when 2k was the little guy and ea was amazing? slowly but surely 2k has overtaken a few sports games and ea was voted the worst company in america. now imagine if 2k had taken your approach and just said "well ea is already there so we cant do anything. if they decide to step out of the market then we will start trying." does that sound like a good idea?

# 211 blackceasar @ 12/12/13 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slater James


	What I mean is this, this game should be dead and its not (in terms of gamers giving a damn about its existence). And for reasons that are mostly born of the competition's varied incompetence. I'll hedge my next few statements and keep them as general as possible to avoid confusion. In the end, if EA puts out a product (and by that I'm talking the game itself to go along with support) that is deemed "good" they will have a lot less trouble than they should getting back in people's consoles. Considering where this franchise has been and where it could have potentially wound up I think thats amazing. Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk

I still disagree on the "amazing" thing. You see, when you look at the bigger picture and ALL people that buy video games (including sports titles), its really a very small sliver of us that are into sports video games enough to have these kinds of talks, debates, pick the game apart for what it really is (A major disappointment considering the resources they have, the time they had, and the sheer power that is the 800lb gorilla that is EA/EA Sports..and lets not forget the speech they gave for Elite 11).

The reason why the game and franchise is still alive is because of the other 95% of purchasers out there that do NOT look at sports titles like we do. The 14 year olds who want Live becuase they know "Live" and Their favorite plays is on the box. The moms and dads buying "a basketball game for their kid"... Im just saying, people like us wether we love the game or hate the game are a drop in the bucket as far as revenue and sales go for Live or any EA sports title for that matter.

There's nothing amazing about casual video game consumers keeping a franchise alive. They are keeping it alive and don't even realize they are doing so. So it's not even about the game being deemed "good" by people like us (if it ever gets there).. when EA does something with a game like Live or Madden than makes guys like US here HAPPY, it's usually not because of US (sometimes it is but not always)..it's more just coincidence. If they put out a great sports title that WE deem great, again, its more coincidence than "US".

# 212 shutdown10 @ 12/12/13 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by El_Poopador


	ok lets say hypothetically that both nba live and nba 2k are horrible games and have been horrible games for the last say six years. are you honestly telling me that no other company would think to try and make a game because there are already two games on the market?

If both games are horrible then maybe a company comes out if they feel they can sway fans and are able to make a profit, but that would still be risky because they would be looking into long-term goals. The situation that exists now is far more risky with 2k being a winner right now, and EA being the loser not giving up their spot. Companies that probably wanted to come in probably thought that EA would finally compete with 2k this time around having time, so they were not going to invest into basketball with that situation looming. With the reception Nba Live 14 is receiving, then maybe EA finally gives up their spot so another company comes in that second slot to show what they can do. I want EA to survive and make a respectable game, but they string along their fan base with their games.

# 213 Slater James @ 12/12/13 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boilerbuzz


	You mean dead like it is now? Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

There have been a number of discussions about whether not Live has a future. I'm saying they could easily be in a situation where no one even cares. When was the last time somebody said,"Damn, Inside Drive might be a viable option if their devs could get it together."? That's where Live could be right now. The relic in the museum. The bottom line right now is that gamers are more inclined toward competition than would be case under different circumstances.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk

# 214 Slater James @ 12/12/13 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackceasar


	I still disagree on the "amazing" thing. You see, when you look at the bigger picture and ALL people that buy video games (including sports titles), its really a very small sliver of us that are into sports video games enough to have these kinds of talks, debates, pick the game apart for what it really is (A major disappointment considering the resources they have, the time they had, and the sheer power that is the 800lb gorilla that is EA/EA Sports..and lets not forget the speech they gave for Elite 11). The reason why the game and franchise is still alive is because of the other 95% of purchasers out there that do NOT look at sports titles like we do. The 14 year olds who want Live becuase they know "Live" and Their favorite plays is on the box. The moms and dads buying "a basketball game for their kid"... Im just saying, people like us wether we love the game or hate the game are a drop in the bucket as far as revenue and sales go for Live or any EA sports title for that matter. There's nothing amazing about casual video game consumers keeping a franchise alive. They are keeping it alive and don't even realize they are doing so. So it's not even about the game being deemed "good" by people like us (if it ever gets there).. when EA does something with a game like Live or Madden than makes guys like US here HAPPY, it's usually not because of US (sometimes it is but not always)..it's more just coincidence. If they put out a great sports title that WE deem great, again, its more coincidence than "US".

I would be willing to wager that most casual gamers (of the age you've described) don't even remember when Live was a premier game (I think Live 2005 was the best of its generation). In their gaming lives 2k has always had the superior product. I don't think casuals have kept this series afloat. They typically don't have any brand loyalty.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk

# 215 El_Poopador @ 12/12/13 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shutdown10


	If both games are horrible then maybe a company comes out if they feel they can sway fans and are able to make a profit, but that would still be risky because they would be looking into long-term goals. The situation that exists now is far more risky with 2k being a winner right now, and EA being the loser not giving up their spot. Companies that probably wanted to come in probably thought that EA would finally compete with 2k this time around having time, so they were not going to invest into basketball with that situation looming. With the reception Nba Live 14 is receiving, then maybe EA finally gives up their spot so another company comes in that second slot to show what they can do. I want EA to survive and make a respectable game, but they string along their fan base with their games.

i would like to preface this by saying that i could care less who makes the basketball game(s) i buy. im not a fan of one company or an antifan of another. i like video games. i like sports. i like sports video games. thats it

key words in bold. if a company can make a good game then there is no reason not to release it other than another company making a better one. but by your argument ea is making a poor game so that should not prevent another company from making something better. even if ea ducks out why would another company hop in since 2k has the majority of the market?

# 216 blackceasar @ 12/12/13 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shutdown10


	There you go again, but I said that and firmly stand by it. By EA dropping the ball for three straight years and not relinquishing their position on the basketball market, it allowed no one else to enter the market because two companies were still controlling the market economic wise. EA was MIA, but other companies saw that they were not giving up, so they were not going to take the risk going head on with 2K and having to face EA as well when they decided to come back. Only two games max can survive in the video sports game market.

This is maybe one of the funniest posts I've seen in this thread. At least we know you didn't receive a Harvard MBA lol

Look man, what is up with this "they didn't allow for other publishers to make an NBA game". It's not as if EA bought the NBA license. So what you're saying is that EA should stop making their game so other publishers feel like they have a shot and then are willing to potentially invest resources into making their own NBA game?

You do know we live in America right? If OS was a game publishing company, they could start development on their own NBA basketball game if they wanted to. They would have to pony up the same cash to use the license as EA and 2k does but I don't see how that's "not fair".

Why should EA Sports (as much as I'm not a fan of Live) have to stop putting out an NBA basketball game just so someone else can? That's like me telling Jay Z, "man... it's no fair you have become an empire and because of that I never tried to ask Beyonce out when she was single because I felt I didnt have shot with you being the empire you are! NO FAIR! Step aside and let someone else ask her out!". Do you see how stupid and silly I would have sounded? Its the same argument for EA "giving up their spot" so another company can make a game. Why is EA's success have to be brought into question or "review" or "busted up"? A company can choose to or choose NOT TO pay for the NBA license usage and try and put out a 3rd NBA branded title. ITS A FREAKING FREE MARKET WHERE NBA IS CONCERNED. This isnt EA and Madden and the NFL.. that's a whole other discussion.

And when in the heck made you the business authority on how many games of a certain genre can survive?

Let me get "fantastical" on you... what if a company showed their NBA game at the Next E3..and what if the game looked EXACTLY like real tv.. not a super close representation but looked like true live television? And what if it played better than both 2k and Live.. and what if it had every single thing we have ever asked of in our Live and 2k wishlist threads? I know this isnt going to happen, but humor me.. what if one company that didn't have the "defeated" mindset you have and said "f-it.. we are putting this out"... what you would have is.... *drumroll*......

A THIRD NBA TITLE IN MARKET THAT'S BETTER THAN 2k AND LIVE! WOW. AMAZING!

EA and 2k should not be punished because 1 has a ton of money (but dont own the license) and the other puts out a really great basketball game. No one is forcing people to buy one game or the other. People have CHOICES.. if really good 3rd NBA game was published, that's just another choice consumers have.

So should the government step in and "regulate" this now? Tell EA Sports "if you aren't going to put out a basketball game we like, then stop making them because you're scaring other companies away from making one"... hahaha.. do you see how silly that sounds? Seriously... but pretty much you're saying EA should "let" someone else in, when in truth the door is WIDE OPEN... rather than taking the stance you have on this.. maybe you should spend your energy lobbying another game publisher to put out a third title. I can be done.. and the two publishers that have a game in market right now is NOT stopping anyone... its boilds down to how bad does that third company want it. Are the willing to invest the time, money and resources to put a better game out? If not.. then dont do it.. if so then do it.. most of us here could care lesss WHO'S making the best basketball game. Paris Hilton could make the best basketball game ever, and we would buy it... and not look at Live or 2k.

# 217 shutdown10 @ 12/12/13 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackceasar


	This is maybe one of the funniest posts I've seen in this thread. At least we know you didn't receive a Harvard MBA lol Look man, what is up with this "they didn't allow for other publishers to make an NBA game". It's not as if EA bought the NBA license. So what you're saying is that EA should stop making their game so other publishers feel like they have a shot and then are willing to potentially invest resources into making their own NBA game? You do know we live in America right? If OS was a game publishing company, they could start development on their own NBA basketball game if they wanted to. They would have to pony up the same cash to use the license as EA and 2k does but I don't see how that's "not fair". Why should EA Sports (as much as I'm not a fan of Live) have to stop putting out an NBA basketball game just so someone else can? That's like me telling Jay Z, "man... it's no fair you have become an empire and because of that I never tried to ask Beyonce out when she was single because I felt I didnt have shot with you being the empire you are! NO FAIR! Step aside and let someone else ask her out!". Do you see how stupid and silly I would have sounded? Its the same argument for EA "giving up their spot" so another company can make a game. Why is EA's success have to be brought into question or "review" or "busted up"? A company can choose to or choose NOT TO pay for the NBA license usage and try and put out a 3rd NBA branded title. ITS A FREAKING FREE MARKET WHERE NBA IS CONCERNED. This isnt EA and Madden and the NFL.. that's a whole other discussion. And when in the heck made you the business authority on how many games of a certain genre can survive? Let me get "fantastical" on you... what if a company showed their NBA game at the Next E3..and what if the game looked EXACTLY like real tv.. not a super close representation but looked like true live television? And what if it played better than both 2k and Live.. and what if it had every single thing we have ever asked of in our Live and 2k wishlist threads? I know this isnt going to happen, but humor me.. what if one company that didn't have the "defeated" mindset you have and said "f-it.. we are putting this out"... what you would have is.... drumroll...... A THIRD NBA TITLE IN MARKET THAT'S BETTER THAN 2k AND LIVE! WOW. AMAZING! EA and 2k should not be punished because 1 has a ton of money (but dont own the license) and the other puts out a really great basketball game. No one is forcing people to buy one game or the other. People have CHOICES.. if really good 3rd NBA game was published, that's just another choice consumers have. So should the government step in and "regulate" this now? Tell EA Sports "if you aren't going to put out a basketball game we like, then stop making them because you're scaring other companies away from making one"... hahaha.. do you see how silly that sounds? Seriously... but pretty much you're saying EA should "let" someone else in, when in truth the door is WIDE OPEN... rather than taking the stance you have on this.. maybe you should spend your energy lobbying another game publisher to put out a third title. I can be done.. and the two publishers that have a game in market right now is NOT stopping anyone... its boilds down to how bad does that third company want it. Are the willing to invest the time, money and resources to put a better game out? If not.. then dont do it.. if so then do it.. most of us here could care lesss WHO'S making the best basketball game. Paris Hilton could make the best basketball game ever, and we would buy it... and not look at Live or 2k.

No I don't have an MBA in Harvard, but I understand that although 2k And EA don't own the NBA license they still take up the market share in that niche. I did not say that EA is willfully blocking another company from making a basketball game. I'm saying that EA is stopping another company from making a basketball game financial wise. They are looking at the investment and drive they will have to put in by purchasing their portion of the NBA license to publish their game. Next they will have to compete with the 2k and EA who have loyal fan-bases. Did I say that EA is setting up traps for other companies to stay away? Please read my post carefully before you respond carelessly. EA was forced to make NBA Live 14 because they were contacted by the NBA last year who told them that they needed to make a game this year or they were going to face legal issues because they were breaching their contract with the NBA. If a third company could have just made a basketball game in this ugly situation, then why has one not stepped in through that three year void with 2k being the only game coming out? I'm waiting!

# 218 shutdown10 @ 12/12/13 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by El_Poopador


	i would like to preface this by saying that i could care less who makes the basketball game(s) i buy. im not a fan of one company or an antifan of another. i like video games. i like sports. i like sports video games. thats it key words in bold. if a company can make a good game then there is no reason not to release it other than another company making a better one. but by your argument ea is making a poor game so that should not prevent another company from making something better. even if ea ducks out why would another company hop in since 2k has the majority of the market?

If another company comes in that situation, then they will not have the adequate resources to compete with either of the two. It would take a sizable investment to compete with either of the two. This is not a COD or BF shoot em up games situation, because those two games do not have to pay the Military to take in their likenesses in their game. If you want to make an NBA game then you will have to foot a big budget. Maybe a company has the funding to foot the bill, but do they want to take the risk with those two already in the market for awhile? If it was so easy, then why has no other company come in with EA being gone for three years but still having their license contract with the NBA? I'm waiting!

# 219 El_Poopador @ 12/12/13 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shutdown10


	If another company comes in that situation, then they will not have the adequate resources to compete with either of the two. It would take a sizable investment to compete with either of the two. This is not a COD or BF shoot em up games situation, because those two games do not have to pay the Military to take in their likenesses in their game. If you want to make an NBA game then you will have to foot a big budget. Maybe a company has the funding to foot the bill, but do they want to take the risk with those two already in the market for awhile? If it was so easy, then why has no other company come in with EA being gone for three years but still having their license contract with the NBA? I'm waiting!

thats the question that you need to answer. if ea not being in the game would open the door then why hasnt anyone come in while ea was out of it?

ea not being there wouldnt change the cost of the nba license. ea not being there wouldnt change the investment the other company would need to make with 2k being in the position its in. and eas current share in the nba gaming market isnt exactly substantial especially not to the point that youre talking about. according to vgchartz live 14 has sold 70K units so far. so even if live wasnt there do you think that 70K units would really have that big of an impact on a different game?

# 220 King_B_Mack @ 12/12/13 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackceasar


	This is maybe one of the funniest posts I've seen in this thread. At least we know you didn't receive a Harvard MBA lol Look man, what is up with this "they didn't allow for other publishers to make an NBA game". It's not as if EA bought the NBA license. So what you're saying is that EA should stop making their game so other publishers feel like they have a shot and then are willing to potentially invest resources into making their own NBA game? You do know we live in America right? If OS was a game publishing company, they could start development on their own NBA basketball game if they wanted to. They would have to pony up the same cash to use the license as EA and 2k does but I don't see how that's "not fair". Why should EA Sports (as much as I'm not a fan of Live) have to stop putting out an NBA basketball game just so someone else can? That's like me telling Jay Z, "man... it's no fair you have become an empire and because of that I never tried to ask Beyonce out when she was single because I felt I didnt have shot with you being the empire you are! NO FAIR! Step aside and let someone else ask her out!". Do you see how stupid and silly I would have sounded? Its the same argument for EA "giving up their spot" so another company can make a game. Why is EA's success have to be brought into question or "review" or "busted up"? A company can choose to or choose NOT TO pay for the NBA license usage and try and put out a 3rd NBA branded title. ITS A FREAKING FREE MARKET WHERE NBA IS CONCERNED. This isnt EA and Madden and the NFL.. that's a whole other discussion. And when in the heck made you the business authority on how many games of a certain genre can survive? Let me get "fantastical" on you... what if a company showed their NBA game at the Next E3..and what if the game looked EXACTLY like real tv.. not a super close representation but looked like true live television? And what if it played better than both 2k and Live.. and what if it had every single thing we have ever asked of in our Live and 2k wishlist threads? I know this isnt going to happen, but humor me.. what if one company that didn't have the "defeated" mindset you have and said "f-it.. we are putting this out"... what you would have is.... drumroll...... A THIRD NBA TITLE IN MARKET THAT'S BETTER THAN 2k AND LIVE! WOW. AMAZING! EA and 2k should not be punished because 1 has a ton of money (but dont own the license) and the other puts out a really great basketball game. No one is forcing people to buy one game or the other. People have CHOICES.. if really good 3rd NBA game was published, that's just another choice consumers have. So should the government step in and "regulate" this now? Tell EA Sports "if you aren't going to put out a basketball game we like, then stop making them because you're scaring other companies away from making one"... hahaha.. do you see how silly that sounds? Seriously... but pretty much you're saying EA should "let" someone else in, when in truth the door is WIDE OPEN... rather than taking the stance you have on this.. maybe you should spend your energy lobbying another game publisher to put out a third title. I can be done.. and the two publishers that have a game in market right now is NOT stopping anyone... its boilds down to how bad does that third company want it. Are the willing to invest the time, money and resources to put a better game out? If not.. then dont do it.. if so then do it.. most of us here could care lesss WHO'S making the best basketball game. Paris Hilton could make the best basketball game ever, and we would buy it... and not look at Live or 2k.

My man, your Beyoncé, Jay-Z comparison has to be the worst in the history of OS comparisons. It's not the same argument because you run absolutely zero financial risk asking Beyoncé out. Hell, if I got the opportunity I'd do it. It's actually easier than anything, because I know I don't have a shot in hell with her and when she does say no, I walk away with no hurt ego cause I just asked out ****ing Beyoncé son!

Anyway, his point makes perfect business sense. Companies think from dollar sign perspectives, the dollars simply don't add up to take the gamble at this time. For example, do you recall last year or maybe two years ago when Microsoft pulled Xbox 360 out of the European market? They released they couldn't compete with Sony in those overseas markets so they said **** it and backed out. Companies pay attention to dollars man. Always have, always will.

Quote:

Originally Posted by shutdown10


	No I don't have an MBA in Harvard, but I understand that although 2k And EA don't own the NBA license they still take up the market share in that niche. I did not say that EA is willfully blocking another company from making a basketball game. I'm saying that EA is stopping another company from making a basketball game financial wise. They are looking at the investment and drive they will have to put in by purchasing their portion of the NBA license to publish their game. Next they will have to compete with the 2k and EA who have loyal fan-bases. Did I say that EA is setting up traps for other companies to stay away? Please read my post carefully before you respond carelessly. EA was forced to make NBA Live 14 because they were contacted by the NBA last year who told them that they needed to make a game this year or they were going to face legal issues because they were breaching their contract with the NBA. If a third company could have just made a basketball game in this ugly situation, then why has one not stepped in through that three year void with 2k being the only game coming out? I'm waiting!

Can't get behind you on saying stuff that's not true or not confirmed somewhere man. When and where did you hear anything about the NBA contacting EA and threatening legal action if they didn't release a game?

« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112 Next »

More Links

If NBA Live Has a Future, It Has to Look Radically Different