Things Have To Change!

[beau_boy04]

I agree with you in an extend. 3d crowds who needs that? well to be honest with you when Im playing a game i don't even pay attention to the crowd unless someone is shooting free throws, and in all cases when there is not movement of the ball but other than that coaches, 3d crowds are pointless unless you like taking screenshots a lot, I believe the most important things are:

1. Gameplay
2. Graphics
3. Additional stuff

That is my order of priorities in a game.

Thanks.

Live has undeniable taken steps backwards maybe some steps forward in some areas but overall the game has not improved much from Live 2000.

I'm sooo SORRY to hear that the proyect team that made Live 2000 is no longer working in the Live series.

Only Live games I owned are 2000 and 2003. However I haven't stopped buying the Madden series I got 2003-2005 so far

[Rokas[LTU]]

<-> 3d crowds are pointless unless you like taking screenshots a lot..

Oh, i have made 671 NBA Live 2004 and 2005 screenshots till now..

[bomba90]

I don't mind the grafix, I bet most of you don't, if it was up to me (and it ain't) i wouldn't care staying with NBA Live 2003 grafix.
GAMEPLAY GAMEPLAY GAMEPLAY:
How come when I pump fake, the defender jumps for the fake, and when I shoot, he jumps back and block my shot, can't be!
Shooting % are way to high, it doesnwt make sense that I finish a game with 45%-50% from the 3 point line, or finish a game with above 60% from inside the arc.
And most important, players miss to many lay ups and dunks.

[c_cryder15]

You know I honestly think this is a great game.....ya the graphics mite not be perfect like you all want them to be but there not going to be.....Ive been playing since 2000 and it has gotten better every year and you all know that....

[Matt]

explain 2001 PC? explain 2003 PC? Both received a lot of negative feedback.

GAMEPLAY GAMEPLAY GAMEPLAY.....that's all we need.

[Metsis]

explain 2001 PC? explain 2003 PC? Both received a lot of negative feedback.

GAMEPLAY GAMEPLAY GAMEPLAY.....that's all we need.

Live 2001... The production team was changed during the production of Live 2001... It is quite a solid game, but they've f*cked up the franchise mode simulation production stuff... It was just bad that a 40 year old shaq with 55 overall would average 32 points per game and 15 boards to boot. And some guy with 95 overall would average 5 ppg and 2 apg... They had messed up the DSTATS for that one... And the game pace was created for 12 minute quarters, so the game was too slow for my taste and I don't have time to play 12 minute quarters...

Live 2003... The first Live for the PC totally from the new team... They just blew it on this one. The game was way too fast and it had nothing but fast breaks all the way... First inclusion of the freestyle controls was nice, but the gameplay was way too messed up to even remind of a real NBA game...

The new team got their stuff together for Live 2004 and improved on that in 2005... It will only get better until they run out of ideas... Tim Tschirer (or how ever you spell that last name) actually was the moderator for these message boards before he went to work on the NBA Live 2001... So the old moderator from these boards is actually on the NBA Live production team, so trust me we get our voices heard...

Andrew, do you have comments from TIM regarding this 2006 edition? I know he can't say much until there's some form of official details released, but he can always get us salivating for the game... Some Q&A session or something???

[Andrew]

Not yet. I anticipate I'll be able to do those things after E3.* Also, I'd just like to mention that Tim also founded the NLSC and was the webmaster of the main site as well as the forum admin.

Also Metsis, did you get a chance to read the feature I posted recently? (I'll shamelessly plug it again, too)

* For those who read the word "after" with an imaginary "immediately" preceeding it, I don't mean immediately after E3; just like I don't mean a post-draft roster update will be released the second the draft has finished.

[Metsis]

Not yet. I anticipate I'll be able to do those things after E3.* Also, I'd just like to mention that Tim also founded the NLSC and was the webmaster of the main site as well as the forum admin.

Also Metsis, did you get a chance to read the feature I posted recently? (I'll shamelessly plug it again, too)

* For those who read the word "after" with an imaginary "immediately" preceeding it, I don't mean immediately after E3; just like I don't mean a post-draft roster update will be released the second the draft has finished.

Oh you shameless plugger you...

Yeah, he was the guy who put this all up for us to use... I was a bit worried when he left that this site fall with him as this shady Andrew character came into play, but you've done a good job with it...

I'll only comment on the dynasty stuff as that is first and foremost the most important part...

The calendar based off-season is too rigid... You have to know though that you cannot talk to other teams free agents before July 1st, so that is another deadline. You could offer your guys extension before, but some of them might want to wait around a couple days into the free agency to see if they get any better offers... But otherwise the ability to do something else with the time that is given is a great idea... Free agency period is usually simulated in my dynasties in 5 seconds. I never have cap to sign anyone... Draft day trades would be nice...

Older guys telling you that they're retiring at the end of the season would be great. Especially guys that you've had on your team for a couple of seasons or so. They would be more at peace coming to you with these kinds of decisions.

Saving during the off-season, well, this gives you alot of moving space and a possiblity for cheating is quite extensive. Maybe you could save on certain days during the off-season. Like say after rookie scouting and the day when free agency starts... So it wouldn't be so easy to get things done.

Bringing back the DSTATS!?!?!??!?!??? Man are you crazy. The system flawed to such extent that I never want to see it again... Remember Live 2001 starting fives averaging 115 points, 55 boards, 30 assists and too many blocks and steals to remember. You want to bring these back??? The main problem with the DSTATS was that it does not react to CHANGE! You trade a player, and give one of your bench guys a shot at the starting job etc. etc. The DSTATS would disable all of that. In no shape or form would the dstats be welcome back into this Live franchise, ever... The system we currently have is flawed too... I just finished a season with Marion averaging 23 points, 12 boards with him being easily the brightest star on my team and the next season he's getting only 18 points and 11 boards and he's getting too many touches sometimes only shoots like 8 times in a game or something and my average guard duo sometimes going for 50 shots combined... And BTW, I did not change my starting five one bit during the summer. The primacy system is better, but needs work. Marion is the star and should be reflected in the game. He is more of a all-around player, but he shouldn't go from 18 shot average to 10 shot average in one season... Especially with increasing Overall... If the scoring goes down that much, that should mean more boards and assists as the man takes another role in the team. More of a supporting cast.

Players should have roles. (like NHL series has for example playmakers, scorers, workers as attackers) NBA could have like scorer, all-around player, defensive specialist... A couple of examples: Ben Wallace an obvious defensive specialist. Ray Allen a scorer like Michael Redd. Marion is an all-around player like LeBron James for example. Carmelo Anthony is more of a pure-scorer compared to LeBron. These could reflect that a scorer would take more shots in simulation and less assists. All-around player would get boards, assists as well as shots. Defensive guy would be racking up more boards and steals and blocks and wouldn't take as many shots in a game as the other guys. So a team filled with Defensive specialists or scorers or all-around players. Wouldn't be playing too good together... But a team with a defensive guy, two all-around players and two scorers would play alot better. This could be the source of the chemistry rating for the team on the floor... And this too would dictate what you want for your team. If you are desperately looking to strengthen your team via chemistry, you could trade one of your scorers for an all-around player and get a boost that way... This way players that create opportunities for others might get their say in there somewhere... This is too similar to the DSTATS system, but it wouldn't have to effect anything game wise except the chemistry. It would just be a sign of what he does on the court... Like the dunking sign, three point shooting sign etc. Just one idea I've got for the future and it's straight from another EA title.

NO DSTATS ever again... Nothing as rigid as that...

Team chemistry and morale should be deciding factors... Maybe chemistry could be decided by playing styles... Morale could be decided by winning and losing mostly and for example trading a lot of guys would just kill morale as they wouldn't know who's next or is it going to end. Personal relationships would increase morale over time. So if you had a Malone-Stockton-like duo, they'd have high morale no matter how bad the team was doing.

Extension negotiations during season would be nice... It would be nice to discuss the future with your players so the maybe with a nice new contract under their belt would play a bit more relaxed and would get a boost of morale from that. Players demanding trades would be great... Another tough call situation for the player to decide what to do... Do the management job and get a trade done.

Trading block is a must... You should be able to shop a player around and see what offers would he collect. The player is on the trading block might have a lowered morale for the time he's on the block as what the hell is he going to do for a team that wants him out. And switching players back and forth the trading block would lower overall team morale too...

The players that are good but unsigned after off-season or at the late stages of the free agency should sign with teams that have a shot at the title... And what is better than mid-level exception to get this done. I know this will make good teams better while the bad teams are left licking their fingers, but that's just the way it works. Free agenst are just more attracted to signing with the top-10 teams rather than the worst 10 teams. Mid-level exception is a MUST... It will bring so much more enjoyment to the off-season free agency stuff...

Trading... I like the fact that it takes a couple of days to complete a deal. The guys are busy and it takes a while to asses these things in real life. Maybe the other team could through a counter offer sometimes if they are atleast somewhat intrested in the deal... What trading really needs is a salary meter, you know a meter when you are adding players to the trade a scale or something that would point out that the salaries are close enough for the trade to go through the NBA head office. So there wouldn't be so much time wasted on offers that will be denied because of the NBA rule book... This would be one thing. Another would be to get the years remaining on the contract shown once again on the trading screen. Right now, you gotta plan your trades through Manager's statement screen and it's so frustrating to work out the numbers and the other team just says no to it... It's realistic, but it's very non-user friendly.

Hiring/firing coahces would be nice... Some work better with offensive sets, some work better with defensive sets, some are better developing young talent... Even with these three attributes you could have any number of coaches that would you could hire and fire to try to make your team better.

Extend the roster to 20 for the off-season, but at the last day of the off-season if there's more than 15 guys with a contract, you should cut some into free agency... It's tough when you got 15 guys you like and you want to get those rookies too... You should have the off-season time to unload a couple of players off or just dumb them into the open market... One option would be that you could release players at any point of the off-season. Even during the NBA draft... So you could get a rookie you like even when you have 15 players on your roster, if you forgot to release a player before hand... But making the roster 20 big for the off-season would be very nice...

There is alot of nice things in the feature, but it still needs some work in my mind... Keep it up and keep buggin Tim about these...

[Metsis]

Just for the record...

For Live 2005, we pushed for the calendar based schedule and off-season and we got it... And we got the box scores too... So it ain't like they are not listening to us at all...

[Andrew]

I think you misunderstand my point about Dstats. I don't want them back as they were, I was just tossing out ways that some of the stats could be fixed so we don't see T-Mac or Vince averaging around 9 rpg, AI scoring only 22 ppg etc. But there are ways to fix this with the way the current simulation engine works, so a return to Dstats isn't necessary, especially the rigid way it used to be - but that's not what I was suggesting as I didn't care for that any more than you. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough on that point.

I agree that having trades go through after a couple of days is realistic, but having to advance to the next day to see if a trade goes through eats up your schedule very quickly, and forces you to wait if you've got a game scheduled before the other team can respond. You should be able to try to negotiate a trade without advancing to the next day, especially around the trade deadline. That way, you can furiously shop someone around as some teams do.

[Null17]

what's a dstat? never got that much into Live before 2003

[Metsis]

what's a dstat? never got that much into Live before 2003

It was still in Live 2003... You know when you got a great offensive rookie who could man-handle anyone on the offensive end and score at will and he averaged 10 points in simulation... That's what I'm talking about...

DSTATS were the deciding factor what a player would score when you simulated a game. Of course there were some variables, but you could easily tell if someone was a scorer and if someone was a defensive specialist... Bad terms as the system I proposed in the huge post has these terms, but I'll use them due to lack of better ones. So the game was all predetermined and the DSTATS were very rigid so players like Jason Kidd didn't make anyone else better in simulation, but the DSTATS showed him making that many assists on average... But it actually didn't have any effect on how your team played the game... There were really crazy starting lineups when a team would bolster guys like Shaq, Duncan, Jamison, Jason Richardson and Jason Terry... The starting five would score 100+ points, get 50 or so boards, this combo not too many assists, and the bench pushed in their regular numbers as well. Real ball just don't play like that... Someone might score way above his average, but that means usually that he takes more shots and the more shots he takes, the less there is to distribute among other players... This is the way the real game works.

I wonder what kind of a system does it have now...

The big problem with Live 2001 was that you had your original rosters and original players was that the DSTATS weren't updated for the original players during the off-season so a rookie who went from 62 overall to 90 overall still scored the same as he was overall 62... The created rookies worked correctly though... But this was such a major turn off for me and anyone looking for any kind of realism. Live 2001 was the first game to have guys jumping different heights though and that was something cool. I think the jumping rating has way too little effect in the current Live game. TMac, Kobe and others are that tough to block because the jump so fast and so high that you have trouble keeping up even if you could jump that high too... And they shoot a lot of faders too...

In one of my dynasties I found this late first round pick that had really good shooting values and decent athleticism to boot and I could go for 30 with him in any game... I just shot the living daylights out my opposition... He was unstoppable much like MJ, TMac and Kobe etc.

But I digress... DSTATS is something you won't want back in any shape or form... The players need to have a more fluctuating game and sometimes some guys just play a lot better than you'd think they play... I thought the Spurs-Sonics series would be a total 4-0 sweep for Spurs, especially after Allen and Radmanovic went down in that first game, but tied they are... DSTATS could not reflect this...

In reality... Some players really find their place during a season and start putting up huge numbers for the rest of the season... And they don't even have to be young to do it... Remember Bobby Sura last year in Atlanta, he was simply on fire late in the season and was recording triple-doubles left and right... Where did that come from??? And better yet... How could the game reflect this??? Certainly not with DSTATS... And Wade exploding in the play-offs...

This is an important element in the real game. Some guys just "surprisingly" start to play better...

[Andrew]

Again Metsis, I must stress that I wasn't suggesting a return to Dstats as they were, but rather the possibility of a similar system to balance out some of the inaccuracies we still experience.

I've actually spoken to one of the producers about the current system and it's actually a better idea, it just needs a bit more tweaking. Hopefully they can iron out some of those problems (high rebounding numbers for guys like Kobe and T-Mac, AI scoring around 22 ppg, etc).

If Dstats had one advantage, it's that it was easy to control a player's averages. Unfortunately the system was too rigid.

[Metsis]

Again Metsis, I must stress that I wasn't suggesting a return to Dstats as they were, but rather the possibility of a similar system to balance out some of the inaccuracies we still experience.

I've actually spoken to one of the producers about the current system and it's actually a better idea, it just needs a bit more tweaking. Hopefully they can iron out some of those problems (high rebounding numbers for guys like Kobe and T-Mac, AI scoring around 22 ppg, etc).

If Dstats had one advantage, it's that it was easy to control a player's averages. Unfortunately the system was too rigid.

Have you Andrew really tested the limits of this engine we have? If you stick AI on a team with absolute no bodies, is he going to go for 50 a game or 22? The maximums are off on the current system, but if they were expanded to give more guys scores in the 25-27 point area and some lone gunmen points in the low thirties, that would be more realistic...

The problem is always with the TEAM... Hoops is a team game and guys who play well as a unit have better stats than a team filled with individuals... This is the problem. How do you calculate the effect of Jason Kidd coming in to fill the PG position over Stephon Marbury. They both get about the same averages in points 20+, assists around 8 and Kidd gets a couple of boards more, but how do you calculate that Stephon takes about 6 shots more per game than Kidd? That's the big deal. And how does all that passing brilliance come into play. How does the team come into play?

The chemistry system could be one... But it's effect could be rather superficial... As players like Kidd and Nash make shots easier... And maybe that is the key... A good point guard could increase everyones shooting percentage a bit... Especially one which is a scoring threat...

The game pretty much probably simulates shot for shot... It could go something like this...

1. Is this a passing play (if yes)
2. Who is the passer
3. Did the passer penetrate before passing
4. How high is his passing
5. How good is the defender at stealing and d.awereness
6. Shot is taken
7. If the passing skill of passer is above xx than add x.x accuracy
8. Calculate shot possiblity for attacker
9. Is the shot contested or not
10. Is the shot made or not

Example:
1. Passing play
2. Kidd passing
3. There was drive and dish play
4. Passer score 98
5. Defender stealing 45, awereness 55 -> steal percentage 5%
6. Short range jumper taken, shooter skill field goal 72
7. Passer skill 98, add 9.8% to hitting chance
8. Skill 72, chances of hitting close jumper 70 + 9.8% = 79.8%
9. Shot is well contested -20%
10. Total shot chance 79.8% - 20% = 59.8%

Or something like that... The math could be, but it probably is not... Something probably more complex.

If you add fatigue effect, shooting range effect and shot difficulty (you know fadeaways etc.) And you add the block sequence it might be pretty close... Don't know though... It's probably something totally different.

Is the shot taken on the move or is it a spot-up shot. Also wide-open shot effect... Etc. etc. There's a lot more from where this came from...

I know, no one wants the rigid DSTATS back... Atleast the way they were...

[CERVANTES]

The only "serious" basketball game I had fun with it was NBA2K4, and I bought it only for test. But, I continued playing more with NBA live only because the freestyle control.

I really would like too see a new basketball game series: what about getting the NBA Coutside of GC and apply in it all that things of dynasty, better grafics and freestyle contol?. That was an addictive, fun and realistic basketball game, all toghether. I think that it would be a great one, but can't be posible.

I know that EA will do a great game next year, because live is always a good game, but has to add more game modes, like street tounaments in the Rucker (EA has the rights of that things), and I would like to be able to make decent fast breaks.

NBA2K Series is good, but I think EA should do the game so much better year after year like Sega does.

PS: I hate NBA2K series dunnohwhat-motion, it sucks, I have no freedom in that.

[Andrew]

Have you Andrew really tested the limits of this engine we have? If you stick AI on a team with absolute no bodies, is he going to go for 50 a game or 22? The maximums are off on the current system, but if they were expanded to give more guys scores in the 25-27 point area and some lone gunmen points in the low thirties, that would be more realistic...

Exactly right. The way the current system works, some of the maximums are too low or in the case of AI, not reached despite appropriate ratings. This is one of the things they're looking to improve.

[Matt]

Team chemistry and morale should be deciding factors... Maybe chemistry could be decided by playing styles... Morale could be decided by winning and losing mostly and for example trading a lot of guys would just kill morale as they wouldn't know who's next or is it going to end. Personal relationships would increase morale over time. So if you had a Malone-Stockton-like duo, they'd have high morale no matter how bad the team was doing.

ya'll can call me crazy, but 2002 PSX had chemistry in there or so it seemed at least. I'd play the EXACT same with different lineups and i'd get diff results, but the weaker lineups always did great...the scoring lineups weren't that great.

if i were to amend a few things as far as gameplay goes it's be

way less blocks.......95% of blocks w/in 8ft of the basket.

realistic shooting......sliders arent that effective

slower pace....yes u can use sliders but that just makes players run slower so it doesnt really solve the problem.

some other stuff too, but basically more fluent bball.

[And 1]

Agree with you, i got something>

Gameplay need to be improved alot, DUNKS,DUNKS,DUNKS, i hate slam dunk contest!why? -cuz its for little children-Ea crew spend lot more time to create slam dunk contest and they faild in lot of gameplay elements.That childish dunks from the"screen or camera" is poor, my little 8 year brother like it! The game became bored after playing for few months,We can dunk many many different dunks in SD contest but in real game we can slam maybe 8 or few little more so thats frustrating for me!If we look closely:Ray Allen, Kobe Bryant, Vince Carter and many many other do tha same dunks in the game, I want difference,we need more and more dunks in the game.Please Ea fix that ugly things like player fly trought the board or ball goes trought the board,also that poor shoots with contact, thats realy need to be fixed.
I could write lot more but thats enough for now.

[tsherkin]

And I very much want them to change their rating system so athleticism isn't given the same weight as basketball skills.

Athleticism is very important for a basketball player... Why aren't there any fat guys in there if it isn't that important... You need the athleticism to be good at the game...

Athletics are on the same level as other skills. They are just as important if not even more important. This is why people like DWade, LeBron, Vinsanity, Kobe and TMac are so hard to control. I don't think they are any better shooters than say Reggie Miller, Tony Delk, Bob Sura or Keith Van Horn. Those guys are super athletic and that makes them fast and strong and provides great hops to get clearer shots over guys and thus making them better scorers... Scorers, not shooters...

I mean how do you defend TMac... If you give him space and take away his penetration to the hoop, he'll just kill you with his jumper and when you move closer to defend the jumper, he'll just blow right by you with his quickness... And even if you are close and protecting the jumper, he can probably still get it off as a fade away with his length and jumping ability... Not as easy though, but still too easy for any coach to like it...

TMac is the man... I have never seen a guy making the game look so easy... His eyes are so slumber looking that you might question if the guy is awake or not half the time and he does exceptional things with the ball in his hands... He is probably the most un-guardable guard in the league. I love his game... He makes it look so easy... And alot of it is his athleticism...

Do you think MJ would have been as effective had he not been that fast and able to jump like he did???

You're missing the point: Gerald Wallace is balls-useless as anything but a third stringer if he's not on Charlotte. Harold Miner?

Athleticism is important but not NEARLY as important as your actual basketball skills.

The point is, there's a minimum athletic level in the NBA and it is NOT represented at all by the rating system in Live. There are guards in the game with a ponderous lack of speed and that just isn't the case/.

Take Dorell Wright, for example, or even JR Smith. In Live 05, these guys are rookies, so the Live programmers $hit all over them and made them slow, ponderous, possessed of no dribbling skills and essentially useless as anything but catch-and-shoot players (and, since they're idiots with no scouting reports or even basic knowledge of the players they are programming for, made JR Smith a really weak shooter).

JR Smith and Dorell Wright are two of the best athletes in the entire league. Clearly, something needs to change so that appropriate athleticism can be added without as significant an impact to rating.

Also, I'd like the game to actually have a fastbreak. I'm f'g sick of the computer catching up to me when it's impossible for them to do so, especially with big men catching up to guards. These are the moments when I wish I could turn Live into a fighting game and just slaughter the opposition mercilessly for so boldly ignoring the laws of physics.

And again, blocks need to be toned down in a BIG way.

Also, 3pt shooting needs to be fixed.

I routinely use players with the highest rating available in the game (either the players with their given ratings or a custom player with a 99 rating) and even on CPU shot control, I have a miserable accuracy percentage even on wide open shots. That needs to be fixed, desperately.

[beau_boy04]

A few suggestions:

-Gameplay gameplay gameplay!
-The excessive amount of blocks and steals have got to stop
-3 way trading is a nice add-on
-Signing, and firing of coaches and GM
-Hall of Fame
-1 vs 1, 2 vs 2 and 3 vs 3 modes
-More in-depth scouting reports for rookies.
-Add more juice to the off-season.
-Bring back all the legends left out of the game - Michael Jordan, Jerry West, etc etc
-Players tendencies: scoring machine, defensive specialist, 6th man, 3 pts shooter, etc
-More players ratings such as morale, chemistry, ego, etc
-Coaches rating: balanced, defensive minded, offensive minded, etc (coaches should have some impact on their respective teams)

[Metsis]

You're missing the point: Gerald Wallace is balls-useless as anything but a third stringer if he's not on Charlotte. Harold Miner?

Athleticism is important but not NEARLY as important as your actual basketball skills.

The point is, there's a minimum athletic level in the NBA and it is NOT represented at all by the rating system in Live. There are guards in the game with a ponderous lack of speed and that just isn't the case/.

Take Dorell Wright, for example, or even JR Smith. In Live 05, these guys are rookies, so the Live programmers $hit all over them and made them slow, ponderous, possessed of no dribbling skills and essentially useless as anything but catch-and-shoot players (and, since they're idiots with no scouting reports or even basic knowledge of the players they are programming for, made JR Smith a really weak shooter).

JR Smith and Dorell Wright are two of the best athletes in the entire league. Clearly, something needs to change so that appropriate athleticism can be added without as significant an impact to rating.

Also, I'd like the game to actually have a fastbreak. I'm f'g sick of the computer catching up to me when it's impossible for them to do so, especially with big men catching up to guards. These are the moments when I wish I could turn Live into a fighting game and just slaughter the opposition mercilessly for so boldly ignoring the laws of physics.

And again, blocks need to be toned down in a BIG way.

Also, 3pt shooting needs to be fixed.

I routinely use players with the highest rating available in the game (either the players with their given ratings or a custom player with a 99 rating) and even on CPU shot control, I have a miserable accuracy percentage even on wide open shots. That needs to be fixed, desperately.

Athleticism is a big part of anyones game... Some players use cunning and basket ball smarts to play the game. Some do the same with just speed and quickness so that the defense can't follow up... Gerald Wallace is not totally useless, he was a solid back up in SacTown before moving to Charlotte. But the fact is that when a young guy comes into the league, you can teach him everything he needs to know about basket ball skills and he might become the best in the world, but you can't teach speed or quickness. It's more of a "you either got it or don't" kind of thing. Basketball skills develop faster than athletic skills... So a young athletic guy has more of an upside than a player with great skills, but a mediocre athleticism.

And you forget, that there is a certainl level of basket ball skills that the NBA has too... Not just for athleticism... Not anyone can play the game on that level or even close to that level. When you are drafted into the NBA you got skills... You got skills to play with anyone and everyone in the world. That doesn't mean that you can match up anyone or everyone or that you can't get any better, it just means you've got game...

And about rookies... The EA crystal ball isn't too accurate, but whos is? Predicting how good rookies will be and how well they will play is just like looking for a needle in hay-stack. You could find it right off or search for days... It's a guessing game.

There are fast breaks in the game... And tons of them. If you build your team right, you will see a lot of fast break points... Fast break isn't always one guy going for a crazy dunk in the end with everyone else getting left behind. Breaks are 2-on-1's, 3-on-2's etc. Those are normal fast break opportunities... If you see a big guy looming over your player, you should pass the ball off just like in real life... And the fact is that a guy with the ball will never move as fast as he does without the ball. But yes, the catch up sometimes bugs me, but the break doesn't always pan out... This is in 2005 acceptably reasonable... You usually get away with the dunk... And passing on the break is a great way to free up players.

There are too many blocks, but anyone who's ever seen a game of basketball knows that majority of those situations end up with a foul call in real life... Either more fouls or less blocks... But there are too many blocks at the present... Especially on the jumpers...

Shooting is all about release... You probably got players that don't shoot the way you'd want them to shoot... There are different styles for shooting now and different styles require different releases. So you have to adjust your release for different guys. For example some of the guys say the Korver is a three ball god, but I can't hit a shot with him. I can hit threes with Arenas for example just fine. And Korver probably has higher skill than Arenas. And having a 99 rating for threes to shoot... That's just lame, if you can't hit them at all with anyone, you should raise the three point shooting slide a couple of points and try again... It is the best way to do it... Not cheating and creating an all-mighty basketball god and then complain about how you can't hit a shot with him... The release is everything! Three point shooting is just fine...

[Matt]

One thing i dont think anyones mention thus far, but is mentioned every year is the lack of a playbook.

Sure, EA adds a playbook (that changes every year) but the plays lack variety and they are impossible to execute. You'll always find yourself with the play being completed with 2,3 secs on the clock and your forced to rush a shot which usually gets blocked. This annoys me so much that i scrap the plays and play free ball.

[Matt]

i also forgot to add: we need higher difficulty levels. Dont know about anyone else but i win the championship every year which is fun but i need a bigger road. I've never played a Game 7, I've never lost a series and even teams that give me trouble in the reg season i have little trouble of disposing of.

The fastbreak aspect of the game also makes it way too easy to blow teams out.

[Metsis]

You don't need higher difficulty levels... Adjust your sliders... If you've got AI shooting and defensive sliders all set to 99 and all your sliders set to zero, then you need higher difficulty levels... I doubt your sliders are set that way, so start adjusting.

I have adjusted mine and it's still a great challenge... I sometimes lose and sometimes have a close game and sometimes I just get the blowout victory...

[tsherkin]

Athleticism is a big part of anyones game... Some players use cunning and basket ball smarts to play the game. Some do the same with just speed and quickness so that the defense can't follow up... Gerald Wallace is not totally useless, he was a solid back up in SacTown before moving to Charlotte. But the fact is that when a young guy comes into the league, you can teach him everything he needs to know about basket ball skills and he might become the best in the world, but you can't teach speed or quickness. It's more of a "you either got it or don't" kind of thing. Basketball skills develop faster than athletic skills... So a young athletic guy has more of an upside than a player with great skills, but a mediocre athleticism.

You're missing what I'm saying; there's a baseline level of athleticism in the NBA that the game should reflect without unduly pumping up a player's rating.

Of course a player's athleticism can elevate their game (no pun intended) but in the NBA, athleticism can be secondary to game skills. Like Dorell Wright is a phenomenal athlete in real life, but in the game he's slow as molasses and can't dribble.

The lower dribble ratings shouldn't slow down a player's dribbling, it should just make it easier to poke the ball away. I've always found that the ponderously slow guards were irritating as hell, the same deal with the dribbling.

EA needs to rework its rating system to more accurately reflect the nature of the game and the players therein.

And you forget, that there is a certainl level of basket ball skills that the NBA has too... Not just for athleticism... Not anyone can play the game on that level or even close to that level. When you are drafted into the NBA you got skills... You got skills to play with anyone and everyone in the world. That doesn't mean that you can match up anyone or everyone or that you can't get any better, it just means you've got game...

I disagree, especially with bigs.

And even with guards. Especially in the modern era, lots of players are drafted for pure athleticism, only to be found clueless as to how to play a zone defense or unable to make a free throw, or unlearned in the way of the pick-and-roll, etc. Lots of players lack basic basketball skills. Only a very few players (mostly extraordinarily tall or possessed of some other noticeable skill, usually shooting) are what you'd call unathletic or uncoordinated.

And about rookies... The EA crystal ball isn't too accurate, but whos is? Predicting how good rookies will be and how well they will play is just like looking for a needle in hay-stack. You could find it right off or search for days... It's a guessing game.

Yeah but they could stand to read a scouting report instead of pulling numbers out of their behinds, you know what I'm saying? Overall talent is a crap-shoot, to be sure, that's what patches and updates are for.

But if all you hear about a player before the draft is that he's an athletic monster, he should be one when you get the game, not one of the most unathletic players in the game because the rating system is shyte.

There are fast breaks in the game... And tons of them. If you build your team right, you will see a lot of fast break points... Fast break isn't always one guy going for a crazy dunk in the end with everyone else getting left behind. Breaks are 2-on-1's, 3-on-2's etc.

I agree with the second part, I DISAGREE with the first part.

I am routinely stopped by players with no chance of catching up to me in the real world because my player is suddenly moving as if underwater and their player is moving at the speed of lightning. If I poke the ball away from you and get a three-step headstart as an athletic player, you aren't going to catch me, especially if you go in any direction but straight. Curving takes time and the computer players do it all the time. The computer actually cheats to stop my fastbreak, no matter what speed setting I have the game on.

Those are normal fast break opportunities... If you see a big guy looming over your player, you should pass the ball off just like in real life... And the fact is that a guy with the ball will never move as fast as he does without the ball. But yes, the catch up sometimes bugs me, but the break doesn't always pan out... This is in 2005 acceptably reasonable... You usually get away with the dunk... And passing on the break is a great way to free up players.

I can't, actually. The passing I get but it's the players who come from behind, stick in front of me and then won't let me geta round them that are the problem; and these are players who didn't have a prayer of actually catching me.

For example, Shawn Bradley doesn't have a prayer of stopping an AI fastbreak, especially when Bradley's squatting on the baseline and AI just picked someone's pocket out by the 3pt line, but lo and behold he's magically got winged feet and catches me almost everytime. That's what Im' talking about.

There are too many blocks, but anyone who's ever seen a game of basketball knows that majority of those situations end up with a foul call in real life... Either more fouls or less blocks... But there are too many blocks at the present... Especially on the jumpers...

Or, no calls on those plays when the defender goes straight up and the game should be programmed to realize that it's much harder to block a jumpshot on the perimeter than a layup. We seem to agree here, though. The game calls dumb fouls a lot but then, so do real refs.

Shooting is all about release... You probably got players that don't shoot the way you'd want them to shoot... There are different styles for shooting now and different styles require different releases. So you have to adjust your release for different guys.

If my player has a 99 3pt rating and I'm shooting 27%, something's wrong.

For example some of the guys say the Korver is a three ball god, but I can't hit a shot with him. I can hit threes with Arenas for example just fine. And Korver probably has higher skill than Arenas. And having a 99 rating for threes to shoot... That's just lame, if you can't hit them at all with anyone, you should raise the three point shooting slide a couple of points and try again... It is the best way to do it... Not cheating and creating an all-mighty basketball god and then complain about how you can't hit a shot with him... The release is everything! Three point shooting is just fine...

I plain disagree here.

And no, it's not lame, really. He's the best player on my team and he's ponderously slow outside, he's a pure catch-and-shoot player who gets abused on defense. I ran him through one short season as an experiment.