NBA Live 16 News Post

NBA Live 16 Hands-On Preview

08:53 PM - June 25, 2015 by ChaseB

When a game starts from the bottom like NBA Live did two years ago, it's easy to say it's improving year over year because it's hard to really fall any further. At the same time, on some level it might be fair to say "it's easier to go from bad to average than average to great." Still, right now as I take a step back and look at what NBA Live 16 is trying to pull off this year, it finally brings about a level of excitement that has not existed with the franchise in many years.

However, this is not me saying "LIVE IS BACK!" or "WATCH OUT NBA 2K!" This is not a hype piece, but rather me saying it feels like Live is finally moving forward. The development team is adding and improving NBA Live now rather than just simply trying to create a functioning basketball game.

So with that in mind, after the jump I'll share my thoughts after playing six full games of NBA Live 16.

Read More - NBA Live 16 Hands-On Preview

Game: NBA Live 16Reader Score: 5.5/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS4 / Xbox OneVotes for game: 4 - View All

NBA Live 16 Videos

Member Comments

# 21 sarlndr @ 06/27/15 06:36 AM

I got the digital copy of Live last year day one. I'll put off getting the game this year until it's been out for at least a month. We've all heard this talk from EA before and I'm not saying that I don't believe what they say but i take it with a grain of salt. I actually hope that Live 16 shows a marked improvement over last years game. If not I'll give 2k a shot. I haven't played a 2k game in 4 years.

@chisportsfan23: I have to agree with 2k's color palate being off. It was that way in their MLB games as well. Especially with blues and reds. EA has has a problem with their darker colors looking washed out.

# 22 CaseIH @ 06/27/15 07:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chisportsfan23


	Truthfully, and I'm looking at this without any bias, Live is in some ways better than 2k. Let's break it down Facial Scans/ Overall accuracy of player appearance Live 15: It seems to me that live has more accurate facial scans than 2k. Yes some obvious ones aren't present or look off. But imo, just playing games back to back i feel 2k focuses on big name players more and Live covers a wider range of players. Player's that come to mind here are Deandre Jordan, Jamal Crawford, Jared Dudley, Nerlens Noel to name a few that Live has done better than 2k. Skin tones here are another advantage in Live than 2k. Best example here is Lebron James. James in a lot of ways looks better in Live 15 than 2k15. James is far too light in 2k15 and they widened his jaw a bit too much in 15, i felt James looked far better in 2k14 than 15. 2k15: 2k struggles in this category for one simple reason, they tend to over do it in the detail. Players that come to mind are Kemba Walker, Embiid, they have this weird discoloration in their face as a way to look detailed and accurate, but imo it just looks off. Also, 2k doesn't face scan everyone. And when they don't it's obvious. Players that don't get faced scanned tend to look flat faced. Good example here is Deron Williams, Crawford, and Dudley. In this category it's closer than people act like it is. Overall Jersey color and accuracy Live 15: This area is a strength of Live and more so in Live 16. Yes, the jerseys are loose in 15. But let's talk about two things here. Fluidity with player movement and colors. Let's look a few examples here, Cavs alternate blue AND yellow. Bucks, alternate red. Come to mind, that actually look more accurate on Live 15 than 2k15. If you look particularly at the Cavs blue alts. on both games. While yes, 2k is much more vivid, it's not particularly accurate. Live 15 presents a darker deep blue that's more real life than 2k. 2k15: As i mentioned, 2k presents more vivid colors. But not always entirely accurate. Sometimes colors need to be darker, and 2k's lighting doesn't allow for a realistic representation of some jerseys. A clear advantage in both 2015 games is the jersey fit in 2k, but that appears to be disappearing as it looks like Live 16 fixes this. Obviously as it stands 2k is still superior than Live, but the advantages are dwindling down at a terrific pace. As far as gameplay is concerned 2k wins. Animations, 2k wins. But imo 2k can easily suffer from TOO MANY animations. What's interesting here is that 2k appears to be taking it easy on internal things with every new release, focusing more on getting MJ on a cover, or getting a big name to help widen their reach with publicity. While Live and the team behind it comes across as a team with a chip on their shoulder after so many awful basketball games. It's a great time to be a nba video game fan that's for sure.

Personally graphics is the last thing I worry about when it comes to games, now days all sports games are solid in that area. I want gameplay and a realistic simulation of the sport Im playing, and that's the area where EA has always lacked by a large margin with basketball. I have no reason at all to favor either 1 of these companies, they both have been shady and untruthful over the years, so I will gladly buy the best game made.

# 23 P-Dub @ 06/27/15 12:27 PM

Quote:


	..And I don’t mean to say the pace of the game does not feel fast enough, because if anything the pace of the game maybe feels a pinch too fast, but rather it feels like the player with the ball is still struggling to get moving at points.

This is what kills gameplay for me. Those delays and lag cause opportunities that you see on the court to get closed off where if the controls were responsive, a play could have been made. It's been prevalent since NBA Live 08 and in every game since.

# 24 jaychitown312 @ 06/28/15 11:11 AM

How many of you guys really played Live 15 for enough games to say what is good or bad? I played Live 15 the entire year and I just traded it in a week ago. I trade all 15 games so I can not bring bad habits into a new game. Live was solid, all they ave to do is open the game up game play wise. There were to many I could have taken advantage of that but it was too slow in response. I enjoyed Live 15 it got better with each update and Live 16 should carry on the momentum. I can tell most people who talk about the game has no playing experience with Live 15.

# 25 mrclutch @ 06/30/15 11:14 PM

Good read. thanks Chase!

# 26 Playmakers @ 07/01/15 04:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaychitown312


	How many of you guys really played Live 15 for enough games to say what is good or bad? I played Live 15 the entire year and I just traded it in a week ago. I trade all 15 games so I can not bring bad habits into a new game. Live was solid, all they ave to do is open the game up game play wise. There were to many I could have taken advantage of that but it was too slow in response. I enjoyed Live 15 it got better with each update and Live 16 should carry on the momentum. I can tell most people who talk about the game has no playing experience with Live 15.

# 27 Playmakers @ 07/01/15 04:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vic Viper


	I love this insight. It's definitely what I want to hear, but I also want to see this in action for myself. Can't wait to get my hands on the sticks and I hope LIVE is Back for good.

I'm hoping they come really close this year to what the series used to be like....

I'm hyped that they finally included sliders again now I have to wait and see what improvement is made with animations and CPU AI on the court.

Everything else looks solid right now just have to see it in motion with final build

« Previous 12Next »

More Links

NBA Live 16 Hands-On Preview