Kotaku • Why no Barkley + 10 guys who should make the game

http://kotaku.com/5833796/why-charles-barkley-isnt-appearing-in-nba-2k12

2K Sports attempted to include basketball great Charles Barkley in NBA 2K12's "NBA's Greatest" mode, showcasing dozens of superstars spanning the game's history, but the two sides were unable to reach an agreement bringing the hall-of-famer to the video game. He will not appear in NBA 2K12.

"There's no doubt in our minds that Charles is and should always be a key part of the conversation as it relates to who are the NBA's Greatest players of all time," a 2K Sports spokesperson told Kotaku. "We have a very positive relationship with Sir Charles and while we were unable to include him in-game this year for a variety of reasons, we share everyone's hope that he may one day appear in our game."

NBA 2K12 last week announced a lineup of 15 NBA legends—and scores of great players playing with and against them—in the game's "NBA's Greatest" mode, somewhat similar to last year's "Jordan Challenge." Barkley's absence, and a hoped-for last-minute inclusion, became an issue Friday when it was noticed that the team showcasing Julius Erving, the 1984-85 Philadelphia 76ers, lacked its starting power forward: Barkley.

http://kotaku.com/5832465/pistol-pete-chocolate-thunder-and-super-sid-crack-nba-2k12s-legendary-lineup-too

NBA 2K12 yesterday revealed its roster of 15 all-time greats appearing in the game, a constellation of the top performers spanning the professional game's history. But as these players will appear with their teammates and face rivals from that era, there is an even longer list of great names, some making a rare appearance in a video game.

Thanks to last year's "Jordan Challenge", NBA 2K11 was able to sneak in George "The Iceman" Gervin, one of the ABA's all-time greatest gunslingers and, at the end of his career, a teammate of Jordan's on the 1986 Chicago Bulls. The same spirit pervades the selection of this year's supporting cast, offering a chance to play as some of the game's most electrifying performers, renowned specialists, and fan favorites.

So I've added another list of 10 hidden gems who should make the game worth picking up, especially for diehard fans.

The stipulations for inclusion here are that the players cannot be one of the 15 legends getting top billing in the "NBA's Greatest" mode, of course, and cannot have appeared in NBA 2K11. That means guys like Dominique Wilkins, John Starks and Shawn Kemp, while entertaining performers, don't make the list here, as we already saw them last year.

This isn't aimed at you but, why can't people get that Barkley himself wouldn't give 2k permission to use him? Everyone who follows basketball knows Barkley doesn't like video games, he didn't let 2k use him last year or the year before that, it's not gonna change now. They can't just put in anyone they want they have to get permission. Again this isn't aimed at you just the people who write these articles.

Thankfully I play on the PC. So I do not care. There is already a boatload of excellent Chuck custom CFs around here now, and there will be again with 2k12.

Baylor is no one's idea of an overlooked player, but a first glance suggests this may be the first video game appearance ever

Silly writer.

Weren't Kotaku the same morons claiming last year was the first time a commissioner appeared in a sports game?

I love that they don't even realize that Baylor appeared for almost a decade in the same fucking series.

This isn't aimed at you but, why can't people get that Barkley himself wouldn't give 2k permission to use him? Everyone who follows basketball knows Barkley doesn't like video games, he didn't let 2k use him last year or the year before that, it's not gonna change now. They can't just put in anyone they want they have to get permission. Again this isn't aimed at you just the people who write these articles.

I agree, the issue of likeness rights isn't exactly a secret. I guess some people just aren't aware of them or don't think about the business/legal side of things when it comes to features like this. I'd say that's one of the reasons why Owen Good wrote this particular article though, to highlight a fact that a fair amount of sports gamers already know but so many more remain unaware of...or so it would seem. His speculation as to why the 1985 Sixers were included when Barkley would not be appearing in the game seems like a good guess too and since the subject was broached, it's fair to note the disappointment in the fact that a deal couldn't be worked out in time for it to happen.

But again I agree, a lot of people don't seem to get it and wrongly blame the developers.

Owen is obviously mistaken when he refers to it being Elgin Baylor's first video game appearance but I think the main point of that list still stands, it is cool that they've been able to include some extra legends/noteworthy players of their era by choosing an unexpected opponent; another top team of the time, though not necessarily a Playoff or Finals opponent that year. Details like a player's first video game appearance should probably be researched a little more because needless to say people like us are going to pick them apart when we read the article but pieces like that aren't intended to be anything more than "Hey, this is cool, have you thought about this?" musings.

What's Barkley's problem with video games, anyway?

Details like a player's first video game appearance should probably be researched a little more because needless to say people like us are going to pick them apart

I was disappoints when the NLSC Wiki doesn't have more info about Elgin Baylor being a regular in videogames, with the exception of his unlock codes in Live 96 and Live 2000.

What's Barkley's problem with video games, anyway?

Yeah, In my memory, i've nevr really seen Chuck talk about hating games, Anyhow, sorta stupid how they just noticed that the Sixer's team is missing a key part of it.

What's Barkley's problem with video games, anyway?

It could be dissatisfaction with Shut Up and Jam!, though I'm guessing it's just a case of he didn't grow up with them (the primitive games of the 70s aside), has no interest in them and doesn't think much of them. I seem to recall him making funny of Kenny Smith for doing voiceover work for both NBA Live and NBA 2K some years back, can't find any links though.

I was disappoints when the NLSC Wiki doesn't have more info about Elgin Baylor being a regular in videogames, with the exception of his unlock codes in Live 96 and Live 2000.

Well, it is a Wiki. Anyone could insert that information into the relevant pages.

Ha, they didn't approve my comment about Baylor.

Did you call them morons at the same time? They might've taken exception to that if so.

All I said was that Baylor was in at least half of the NBA Live and NBA 2K games of this last decade. Wasn't even snarky or anything.

To Cr0ss0v3rK1ng, Andrew and anyone else that still aren't getting the point:

There are two related but separate issues that are being discussed with regard to the 1984-85 76er's being featured in NBA 2K12. Barkley not being in the game is one issue. 2K using a sub-par team that is missing two starters for Dr. J.'s legends challenge, while related somewhat to the first issue, is a different issue altogether.

If i may quote from another article from Kotaku, that I think sums up what several people are saying:

"In fact, the 76ers and the Bucks and their principal stars—Erving and Milwaukee's Sidney Moncrief—had met in the Eastern Conference Finals of the 1983 playoffs. And both superstars, Erving and Moncrief, had better years in 1983 than in 1985. Absent Barkley, not only is there no plausible difference in the personnel of the two teams, 1985 to 1983, the 1983 matchup is in fact better and more historically relevant."

Get it?. We are not complaining about 2K12 not having Barkley, we are pointing out that chosing the 1984-85 76er's over the 1982-83 championship team was not a good idea. The fact that key players have to be omitted from the team that 2K chose to feature further compounds what a bad desicion that was.

Yes, I understand some people are bitching about Barkley not being in the game. The same is true for other players such as Reggie Miller, what is different though, is that 2K aren't using the 1999-2000 Indiana Pacers as the example of Chris Mullin's prime year. Hopefully y'all will understand the analogy I'm making here.

This is not even the biggest headscratching mistake in the Legends mode so far.
-Why did they bother with Darryl Dawkins on the 1988-89 Pistons. He played only 14 regular season games and none of the playoffs. He may be a big name, but he just wasn't a big part of that particular team.
-Both Mychal Thompson and Frank Brickowski are on the 1986-87 Lakers. As Thompson was aquired via a direct trade of Brickowski it should be one or the other, not both
-1986-87 was not in any way, shape or form Kareem Abdul-Jabbar "in his prime". As there is a team in this mode that better reflects Jabbar's prime, and there is another player who was in his prime on the 1986-87 Lakers, I can only surmise that the people at 2K didn't put too much thought into their main selling point this year.

While there is a lot to look forward to in this years game, and i do belive the other announced features are as good as advertised, there is a bit of FTW going on in this mode. And that FTW is not just the absence of one player.

All I said was that Baylor was in at least half of the NBA Live and NBA 2K games of this last decade. Wasn't even snarky or anything.

Looks like Owen Good isn't receptive to criticism. Owen bad.

To Cr0ss0v3rK1ng, Andrew and anyone else that still aren't getting the point:

I assure you, I do get the point. I would've thought that was clear when I said in the other thread that I absolutely agree that the 1983 Sixers would've been a better choice for Dr J and it's strange that they chose the 1985 Sixers instead. My post in this thread was referring to people who generally complain about this legend or that legend not being included without any consideration for the issue of likeness rights, not the specific (and certainly legitimate) complaints about the teams that were selected for NBA 2K12, that once again I agree with.

As I said before though, Owen Good's suggestion that they went with the 1985 Sixers because they thought they might be able to get a rookie Charles Barkley into the game but a deal fell through seems like a good guess. Of course, given that he was not a certainty to appear, they should've stuck with the 1983 Sixers which once again would've been more suitable for Dr J anyway.

Yes, I understand some people are bitching about Barkley not being in the game. The same is true for other players such as Reggie Miller, what is different though, is that 2K aren't using the 1999-2000 Indiana Pacers as the example of Chris Mullin's prime year. Hopefully y'all will understand the analogy I'm making here.

I absolutely do get it. It's the people who are simply bitching that I'm referring to in my previous post, not people like yourself who are actually making a valid point. A point, once again, that I agree with.

Andrew:

I appologise for my tone up there. I was under the impression that the remarks on this were directed at all of us that were taking the anti-1984-85 76er's stance.
Also I had mistakenly thought Owen Goode's previous article had been linked to in the OP, while he does a little bitching in it, he makes much the same points I try to. His second article seemed to me like he was trying to explain what a 2K publisist had told him.

Here be the first article:
http://kotaku.com/5832793/the-curious-c ... d-nba-2k12

No worries at all, I can see how my post might've come off as being directed at you so I'm happy to clarify that it wasn;t.

I suppose at the end of the day they had good intentions, trying to get a team that would have Dr J and Barkley...but then if they could get Barkley, he could've/should've been a featured legend and they could've thus doubled up by featuring Stockton and Malone in one game (as it is, the 1998 Jazz are in there twice anyway). In the end, it leaves us a bit disappointed they couldn't get Sir Charles and slightly puzzled by the choice of teams.

I do still think I'll enjoy having the teams in the game and unlocking them, but there are a few question marks there, no doubt.