4 Critical OS Threads to Read

[shadowgrin]

Face it Q, you're a homer for azns.

Mike Wang
Jeremy Lin

Need I say more?

[[Q]]

and Filipinos too!!
Shadowgrin <3 <3

[Patr1ck]

I had some good moments in Live 10, I just wouldn't call it a great game, but a highly improved one that had some core issues decreasing the fun factor. Glad you find enjoyment playing it. I think Elite 11 will be able to address the issues that a lot of people including me didn't like about Live for the past 3 years.

[fjccommish]

Here's a quote from one of those threads:

"What's to stop a guy from having handles like AI if this whole system is based on the users skills with the sticks? What seperates the Lakers from the Wolves in this game?"

"The problem people have is this game currently isn't looking like basketball and we're being asked to buy it this year on the merits that it's going to look more like basketball next year and the year after that and as WTF has pointed out, EA has yet to actually deliever on the promise of things being better 'next year.'"

If you want a basketball game that is really basketball amongst those behind the sticks, then results must be based on the skills of the players behind the sticks, not on ratings or on any representation of a real life player in the game.

I created the Madden Challenge for EA. One of the most frustrating things for me was hearing games described with what Favre was doing or what Manning was doing, rather than what the gamer holding the controller was doing. Competition in a game, in that case Madden, was between the gamers. But it was always described as if between the characters depicted in the game. And partially it was, because Madden like many sports games was and is driven by animations and ratings designed to make in-game counterparts perform like their real life inspirations.

In a basketball game you're playing with your friends, Kobe isn't playing. You are. Sure if it's you controlling a whole team, or the CPU controlled team, then there is variety needed in what the other players on the court do, and if that's based on real life then it's a fun experience.

But ultimately, if it comes down to 5 on 5, 5 gamers vs 5 gamers, then if they're all in control of generic in-game players who reflect the gamers' skills with the sticks, that's the better choice. If a gamer times the shot right, and if the defender isn't bothering him, then the shot goes into the basket. What sets apart an inside scorer from an outside scorer? That gamer has the timing down, the control down, better for the inside shots than an outside shooter does.

My belief is that sports games went awry when they focused so much on real life names. Instead of designing games which played like basketball, developers designed games that played like the guys you see on TV playing basketball. It isn't important that a Center can rebound better if the gamer, holding the controller, knows the right things to do. It's important that Shaq dunks like real life Shaq, and thus animations are triggered which take control away from the gamer. So much time has to be spent on getting LeBron's headband logo in the right place, Carmello's jump shot looking right, someone's arm band the right color, that less time is spent on the actual game play.

In addition, because there are real names that should play like in real life, gamers spend half their time trying to figure out if the in game players are playing true to life. Shifting the focus to accuracy in control, that 5 on 5 experience when every one of the 5 players is another gamer whose skill on the sticks matters, is valid.

[Andrew]

I'm inclined to disagree there. I see where that post is coming from and I agree it's essential the user has control and that user skill has an appropriate impact on what happens in the game. Hopefully, the changes to the controls and moving away from the "dice roll" approach will show improvement in that area. However, the game is intended to be an NBA sim. It uses the NBA license and thus the likeness of real players and is, in theory, representing NBA basketball. Therefore real player abilities, playing styles and the like should be taken into account and included in the game. So yes, ratings are still important.

I don't want Shaq draining a bunch of threes because a human opponent has sufficient stick skills or the difficulty level/sliders allow the CPU to do it. I think the game should allow skilled users to replicate the performance of the NBA players that are represented in the game and if you're particularly skilled, you might be able to get some players to overachieve with their ratings. If you take out ratings and all focus on the real life names then you might as well ditch the NBA license and have a bunch of generic players. That game could still be fun, but I'd still want my NBA "experience".

It's a great point about stick skills and user impact and I would agree there, but I'd disagree with the need to overlook real life names/abilities/etc. and downplay the importance of ratings. There's still a need for all that stuff if you're trying to represent NBA basketball, whether it's Elite/Live or 2K, so I think both developers are right in making that a point of emphasis.

[fjccommish]

"I don't want Shaq draining a bunch of threes because a human opponent has sufficient stick skills or the difficulty level/sliders allow the CPU to do it."

I wasn't clear and was just coming back in to edit when I read Andrew's reply.

I agree regarding different players having different abilities. Even a great player behind the sticks shouldn't be able to drain 3's all day with Shaq. But if two players each shoot with Kobe, then one who is better at outside shooting has a better chance at draining the shot. And overall if one player is just better on the sticks, then that player should be able to deliver a much better performance with Kobe.

In EA's current system this would mean Shaq has a very small sweet spot from long distance, and Tim Duncan would have a large sweet spot at the post.

On the AI side if the AI executes well with the players, and plays to their tendencies, then you'd see Duncan scoring from the paint rather than from the 3 pt line. In a lot of recent basketball games the post guys score in the post only because that's where the plays place them. In real life a guy like Tim Duncan isn't spotting up from the 3 because he isn't good there, he's good in the post - the players and their strengths determine the plays the team runs. In basketball games up until now the plays are run regardless of the players on the floor (CPU wise). So the Cavs (last year) might keep driving in with Williams rather than give the ball to LeBron.

As for the issue of mimicking real teams and players, that's the problem. In a game that wasn't NBA licensed a gamer wouldn't be upset when Bobby Dukes dominated a league instead of Bubba Smalls, because there is no real life Bubba scoring 30 points a game and leading his team to a championship. Ultimately if five real people play against five real people, I don't want to see whoever controls Kobe automatically the best player on the court. Whoever is best behind the sticks should dominate.

[Andrew]

Gotcha. I guess we're after the same thing then, user actions having an impact and unskilled players not just being bailed out by the ratings. However, the ratings would still determine the limitations of a player and the extent of the strengths and weaknesses, so you'd be playing to your players' strengths to the best of your abilities with the most skilled users getting the best (and probably most realistic) performances.

As for the issue of mimicking real teams and players, that's the problem. In a game that wasn't NBA licensed a gamer wouldn't be upset when Bobby Dukes dominated a league instead of Bubba Smalls, because there is no real life Bubba scoring 30 points a game and leading his team to a championship.

I have to admit I'm intrigued by the idea of a game like that and I guess that's the potential that the college games had. If it plays a great game of basketball and you're not tied down by real life parallels, would that still be a fun game? I think it certainly could be, but wouldn't have the appeal of a licensed product.

[fjccommish]

I had pushed in the Madden Challenge for gamers to all play the same team, rather than choose different teams, because then it would be a matter of skill vs skill rather than ratings leaking into the equation.

If two gamers play, one the Lakers while the other is the Clippers, the person controlling the Lakers has an in-built advantage. To really test their skills play Lakers vs Lakers or Clippers vs Clippers.

That's why I liked My Player in 2K10 and its potential for gamer vs gamer play. Each team would be five people who created their character to their liking. Then it would be skill vs skill with the element of who built their player up better involved (just as in real life guys practice to improve their skills).

[Andrew]

That's true but a lot of people want to play with their favourite team or test their skills will a lower rated team. If user skills are more important this year with moving away from the dice roll then hopefully there'll be more fairness that way.