A basketball stadium does not have thousands of blades of grass to render or 60,000+ fans, or any weather or atmosphere lighting to worry about (day/night,etc).
That's why they chose to do PGA Golf first, then Soccer, then Football. The bigger and more outdoors the environment is, the more Frostbite makes sense.
This is why NHL and NBA Live are the last ones to get Frostbite, they have the least to gain.
Whenever Frostbite does come to NBA Live, it's not going to improve the graphics much, if at all, and will probably set the gameplay and animations back a bit. So, you should probably be grateful that they decided to focus on gameplay and animations instead of some fancy pants engine.
Live skin textures have always been excellent. This year seems to be no exception.
I would like to think that the fact you can tell it is Avery Bradley, just by the slouch, is a good sign. But I have been lead astray before.
In regards to LeBron's muscularity, it is a welcome sight. Given the fact that 2k17 looks like a bunch of stretched out Gumby's trotting around. That said, I think his arm size looks a bit off because he is dribbling (only speculation based upon his hand position and that Bradley is on his right side).
Crowd looks active. I know it is blurred but it has a strangely realistic quality and lighting to it that is pleasant to look at. Curious to how it looks in game.
All that said, you can't play a screenshot. Still skeptical until I see more.
2K has been my game for I don't even know how long. But I just may try Live this time. I don't know what 2K did from 2K16 to 2K17. But its a different game. And NOT in a good way.
I love 2K but I have a bit of 2K fatigue, im more open to Live this year especially since it had a two year development cycle. Looking forward to seeing it in action, if they can't get the gameplay and animations right their year, then they probably never will.
I remember way back when, when Live was so much fun. Live would make you talk trash when you were crushing somebody. When the players actually played like themselves in the game. It used to feel so authentic. Now graphically NBA Live 16 was good. Courts, arenas, crowd were good. Most player likenesses were good. A few needed some extra work, but not a deal breaker. Animations really set the game back a bit. Fluid animations and signature dribbling are really,needed.Sounds were good. Crowd noise good. Commentary needed some work. Was not fluid enough. Sliders helped out to find a good balance to the gameplay. Post up game still needs some work. Pro-am and summer circuit were good. I believe the game as a whole is not far off. Animations, and authenticity can really go a long way with this. Hoping to have a good experience at EA play. Not looking to be blown away (but hey, if it happens, it happens). But rather hoping for those realistic improvements. Hoping for authenticity.
Looking good in stills has never been Live's problem. It's problem has always been looking good in motion. Due to my love/hate relationship with 2k17, I will be giving this title a serious look..
I haven't owned a NBA Live game since 07 and that was the PS2 version but I'm not happy with the direction of 2k so I am willing to give Live a shot. The pic looks good always loved Lives lighting and color accuracy.
Graphics don't mean **** when the players still animate worse than 2k8.
I honestly wouldn't care if NBA Live 18 had ps2 graphics. but the gameplay would have to be A1.
Show me a quick vid of a random player model driving to the hoop, that actually looks fluid and realistic...then I'll be impressed and get a little hyped.
But untill then, a screenshot ain't **** but false hope.
Well, a few of the youtubers who went to the event are allowed to post videos on what happened sometime on Wednesday in the afternoon (American time). No idea what they'll be allowed to say but I guess we'll find out pretty soon