How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Talk about any and all other basketball video games including NBA Jam, NBA Street, college basketball games, and more. General basketball video game discussion and comparison topics are also welcome here.

How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby Beavis_5000 on Wed Dec 03, 2014 2:26 pm

Don't get me wrong, 2K15 is a solid basketball game. But Live blows it out of the water. Live has always blown 2K out of the water especially in in years like 04-09.

How did 2K stay competitive with Live in years like 08 and 09?

The only way I can think to describe what I mean is, in years like 08 or 09, 2K felt like it limited you on the court. Where as Live has always felt like it truly brings basketball to a video game. Like your really playing basketball. 2K15 is now much better in this regard, however Live is better.

Also, when and why did people start saying Live sucks? Not sure how the over whelming majority came to this conclusion.

In my opinion, people started going to 2K because people got sick of being smashed online by the truly good Live'ers in years like 08 and 09. 2K had a smaller skill gap. There are some players in Live who are just going to smash most other people. Same goes for 2K but an average player has a better chance at hanging with an awesome player on 2K. In Live the average player just cant keep up especially in those past years.

Live 10,14 and 15 are more like 2K in this regard. In 09, for example, the skill gap was much larger. In 10 and 15, its smaller and the more average players have a chance of keeping up. It's more like 2K but Live's smoother gameplay still makes it the better game.

I think 2K is [/i]almost [i] as good as live now but how in lords name how did it compete in years like 09?
Beavis_5000
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 3:26 am

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby [Q] on Wed Dec 03, 2014 6:20 pm

To me the turning point was the release of the Xbox 360. It was released a year earlier than the PS3 and EA was not prepared to make the jump. They had put out a fantastic Live 06 game for PS2(& PC!!) but their offering for 360 fell short. They had an uphill battle for the whole lifecycle of that generation of consoles and were never able to make it up as evidenced by the whole Elite/Live 13 fiasco. Personally, I felt that getting Mike Wang was a big deal and Live 10 was a really fun game to play, but most players had already soured on the Live franchise without even giving it a shot.

At the time, I got 2k7 for PS3 and it was a fun game despite my preference of NBA Live style gameplay over 2k's gameplay.
I don't know why you think Live 08 & 09 were great games. Live 08 (which I tried on PC) seemed like an update of the 06 PC version built for the previous generation of consoles and 08 & 09 on PS3 weren't really that fun.
Image
User avatar
[Q]
NBA Live 18 Optimist
NLSC Team Member
 
Posts: 11814
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2002 8:20 am
Location: Westside, the best side

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby Andrew on Wed Dec 03, 2014 7:15 pm

Qballer wrote:To me the turning point was the release of the Xbox 360. It was released a year earlier than the PS3 and EA was not prepared to make the jump. They had put out a fantastic Live 06 game for PS2(& PC!!) but their offering for 360 fell short. They had an uphill battle for the whole lifecycle of that generation of consoles and were never able to make it up as evidenced by the whole Elite/Live 13 fiasco. Personally, I felt that getting Mike Wang was a big deal and Live 10 was a really fun game to play, but most players had already soured on the Live franchise without even giving it a shot.


Agreed. A couple of missteps over the next couple of games then allowed 2K to overtake Live in sales for the 2K9/09 iterations.

One of the major factors is that 2K has been able to stay the course while also innovating on a strong foundation, whereas Live has had too many changes in direction and attempts to rebuild. Happily for them, it seems as though Sean O'Brien and a lot of the current team are in it for the long haul; as such, NBA Live 15 was able to build upon NBA Live 14, addressing issues with the previous game and making better use of the tech that was in place, instead of changing direction once again.
NLSC Webmaster/Administrator
Image
Contact: Email | Twitter
Release Threads: NBA Live 08 | NBA Live 07 | NBA Live 06 | NBA Live 2005 | NBA Live 2004
Story Threads: NBA 2K13 | NBA Live 06 (Part 2) | NBA Live 06 (HOF) | NBA Live 2004 (HOF)
NLSC: Podcast | The Friday Five | Monday Tip-Off | Wayback Wednesday | 20th Anniversary of NBA Live | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube


Support The NLSC Hosting Fund: Patreon | GoFundMe

Image
Like my work? Want to help out with the NLSC Hosting Fund? Please consider leaving a tip!
User avatar
Andrew
No context necessary.
Administrator
 
Posts: 101016
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2002 8:51 pm
Location: Australia

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby Pdub on Wed Dec 03, 2014 9:29 pm

2k kept improving on what they had. Qballer hit the ball on the head with the release of the 360 most likely being the new culprit.

Check out Andrew's interview with Tim Tschirner in the podcast section of the main site. Tim offers some insight to how the transition to the next gen consoles went as he was on the development team back then. Basically Live went with great graphics and building a game from scratch on new technology, while 2k updated their graphics but had mostly the same gameplay.

While 2k continued to improve on their gameplay, added an incredible amount of signature and unique animations, Live started over in 08, then again in 11, and 13/14, which set them behind in most aspects. During this time 2k gained a huge following, setting sales records when they brought back Michael Jordan and historic players and teams.
Pdub
Administrator
Administrator
 
Posts: 13182
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Pasadena, California, US

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby Andrew on Wed Dec 03, 2014 9:48 pm

You can also listen to that here:

phpBB [video]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9d7JH167co
NLSC Webmaster/Administrator
Image
Contact: Email | Twitter
Release Threads: NBA Live 08 | NBA Live 07 | NBA Live 06 | NBA Live 2005 | NBA Live 2004
Story Threads: NBA 2K13 | NBA Live 06 (Part 2) | NBA Live 06 (HOF) | NBA Live 2004 (HOF)
NLSC: Podcast | The Friday Five | Monday Tip-Off | Wayback Wednesday | 20th Anniversary of NBA Live | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube


Support The NLSC Hosting Fund: Patreon | GoFundMe

Image
Like my work? Want to help out with the NLSC Hosting Fund? Please consider leaving a tip!
User avatar
Andrew
No context necessary.
Administrator
 
Posts: 101016
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2002 8:51 pm
Location: Australia

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby Pdub on Thu Dec 04, 2014 12:02 am

Thanks, it would have been a little hassle to link that from my phone.
Pdub
Administrator
Administrator
 
Posts: 13182
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Pasadena, California, US

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby Beavis_5000 on Thu Dec 04, 2014 4:42 pm

Great reply's and thanks for all the info. I had no idea about all the behind the scenes activity. Nonetheless, I would say that NBA Live 95 literally played smoother than any 2K under 2010.

I can see why 2K can compete with Live in 14 and 15 especially with the excellent Career Mode and MyPlayer mode. It really is a good game. But gameplay wise Live is still much better.




@ Qballer, about 04-09 are the best Live's imo. 08 and 09 being at the top of the list as the two best basketball games ever made. Once again thats just my opinion.
Beavis_5000
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 3:26 am

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby TBM on Wed Dec 17, 2014 3:34 pm

Beavis_5000 wrote:Don't get me wrong, 2K15 is a solid basketball game. But Live blows it out of the water. Live has always blown 2K out of the water especially in in years like 04-09.


I mean, that's completely an opinion, and I would very much disagree with it. Every single 2K in recent years has been a far superior product. If you're really going to say, for example, that NBA Live '14 was better than 2K14, then you're being silly. Are there elements of Live that are better than 2K? Sure. But as a whole game, in recent years, it's not even close.
Image
User avatar
TBM
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 3617
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2013 7:33 am

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby Beavis_5000 on Thu Dec 18, 2014 2:33 am

TBM wrote:
Beavis_5000 wrote:Don't get me wrong, 2K15 is a solid basketball game. But Live blows it out of the water. Live has always blown 2K out of the water especially in in years like 04-09.


I mean, that's completely an opinion, and I would very much disagree with it. Every single 2K in recent years has been a far superior product. If you're really going to say, for example, that NBA Live '14 was better than 2K14, then you're being silly. Are there elements of Live that are better than 2K? Sure. But as a whole game, in recent years, it's not even close.





I'm not saying Live 14 was better than 2K14 (although imo gameplay was still better). And of course 2K is better than Live in recent years because these are the first Live's since 2010 so 2K had no competition for a few years. Nba Live 2010, 09 and 08 all play smoother than any 2K, including 2K15. Of course 2K15 has a tad better graphics and of course better games modes so I understand if someone is in for graphics and game modes. Like I said before, I am just surprised more people did not choose Live over 2K back in those days because of the more real basketball experience.

I agree that saying Live is better than 2K is now more of an opinion than ever in 2015. But I want to stress that I am more confused about how Live did not dominate 2K in 2010 and below. I still think Live is much better, even today, as far bringing basketball to a video game and I feel that is more of a fact. However, with all of 2K's game modes and etc., I can see why some people may think it is a better overall video game.
Beavis_5000
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 3:26 am

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby Pdub on Thu Dec 18, 2014 5:18 am

Not just game modes. 2K8 was almost a as big of a leap from 2K7 as 2K7 was from 2K6. Gameplay was just top notch and so much fun. They had blacktop mode which was some bread and butter for casuals as it was straight streetball. They also added the dunk contest and 3 point contest that year as well. Live 08 started over, fixing their core as they went along because the basic fundamentals from 07 were broken or didn't work very well and users were just not happy. They only thing redeeming from that game was the patch that brought online team play and for many international NBA fans, some national squads and the FIBA tournament..

Plus, 2K offered a more "open" basketball experience, imo. They went for sim/hardcore, but they also exaggerated it a bit which gave the users the ability to be more creative.

Live tried to make a basketball game like 2K(09-10 when Mike Wang joined) but users were not in as much control of the outcomes as they thought they were as shot success used a dice roll and other successes seemed to depend on whether you followed player or team synergy stats and tendencies. Control response was also an issue throughout 08-10 as the gameplay animations were so smooth but you had to wait for most of them to finish before attempting another, which led to on-court actions playing out much later than when the buttons were pressed. Although, people praised Live for it's control scheme, the input response was an issue. You could even see it in the menus. 2K was on a huge uprise in popularity at this point and had improved their graphics in 2K9, improved on their gameplay and it's cheese/flaws from 08 and added a deeper Association mode, Association 2.0.

Are you less confused? The failures that Live had hurt the series, because people who had not tried 2K must have checked it out and loved it, never looking back.

I thought Live improved well in those 3 years from 08-10. Right now, if we compare Live 14 to 08, and Live 15 to 09, I think Live 15 as a game is in much better shape than Live 09 was, and we can hopefully look forward to a competitive game in '16.

Nowadays it's just a preference. You can be a fan boy of a series or just pick the game you enjoy playing the most, as that is what is important. Enjoying the game that you like.
Pdub
Administrator
Administrator
 
Posts: 13182
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Pasadena, California, US

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby Beavis_5000 on Thu Dec 18, 2014 5:35 am

Pdub wrote:Not just game modes. 2K8 was almost a as big of a leap from 2K7 as 2K7 was from 2K6. Gameplay was just top notch and so much fun. They had blacktop mode which was some bread and butter for casuals as it was straight streetball. They also added the dunk contest and 3 point contest that year as well. Live 08 started over, fixing their core as they went along because the basic fundamentals from 07 were broken or didn't work very well and users were just not happy. They only thing redeeming from that game was the patch that brought online team play and for many international NBA fans, some national squads and the FIBA tournament..

Plus, 2K offered a more "open" basketball experience, imo. They went for sim/hardcore, but they also exaggerated it a bit which gave the users the ability to be more creative.

Live tried to make a basketball game like 2K(09-10 when Mike Wang joined) but users were not in as much control of the outcomes as they thought they were as shot success used a dice roll and other successes seemed to depend on whether you followed player or team synergy stats and tendencies. Control response was also an issue throughout 08-10 as the gameplay animations were so smooth but you had to wait for most of them to finish before attempting another, which led to on-court actions playing out much later than when the buttons were pressed. Although, people praised Live for it's control scheme, the input response was an issue. You could even see it in the menus. 2K was on a huge uprise in popularity at this point and had improved their graphics in 2K9, improved on their gameplay and it's cheese/flaws from 08 and added a deeper Association mode, Association 2.0.

Are you less confused? The failures that Live had hurt the series, because people who had not tried 2K must have checked it out and loved it, never looking back.

I thought Live improved well in those 3 years from 08-10. Right now, if we compare Live 14 to 08, and Live 15 to 09, I think Live 15 as a game is in much better shape than Live 09 was, and we can hopefully look forward to a competitive game in '16.

Nowadays it's just a preference. You can be a fan boy of a series or just pick the game you enjoy playing the most, as that is what is important. Enjoying the game that you like.





First of all, thank you for this very well written and detailed response.

If I remember correctly, Live had a dunk and three point contests for a few years. It also had 1 on 1, 2 on 2 and 3 on 3. I don't remember which years. The 1 on 1 and etc was similar to 2k's playground mode but it was only half court.

Anyway, I just have to disagree about 2k's controls and game play being top notch in those days. I guess it could be opinion but i can not see how someone who wants to feel like they are playing basketball in a video game could have switched from Live to 2K in those days. Once again I suppose it is just my opinion and maybe I just didn't give 2K enough of a chance. But to be honest, I remember thinking I would rather play Pat Riley's basketball rather than 2K in those days.

I have always been able to control outcomes in games of any Live, whether it be Dynasty, Online or offline multiplayer. Live is the closest thing to playing basketball in a video game and I have always felt like I can control a game in Live just like I can control a game in real life.
Beavis_5000
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 3:26 am

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby Pdub on Thu Dec 18, 2014 7:26 am

Your welcome. I didn't say 2K's controls were better, though. I have always preferred freestyle control or right stick dribbling to 2K's isomotion, along with the rest of the button layout, except for pushing the stick to enter the post and most of the post controls. I really like the 2K shot stick in certain variations as well. Certain iterations allowed you to control the angle of a bank shot, the type and direction of a layup, the type of post shot, type of dunk you did, whether it was a basic dunk, flashy dunk, power dunk, or reverse dunk, and even a circle motion gave you a 360 dunk.

Yeah, Live had the dunk contest and 3 point shootout, and they were awesome and I had tons of fun doing alleyoop 720's and between the legs twice dunks, but iirc they didn't improve the modes over the years, so they didn't age well and the 360/PS3 versions didn't seem to give you that wow factor that they did when they were on the ps2/xbox and eventually they removed them. 2K's dunk contest was quite complicated when it came to the controls and positioning your player to set them up for the dunk, but the dunks were just plain sick, imo. I am not going to talk about the current dunk contest version from 2K.

A lot of people express similar opinions as yours about the way 2K plays. I didn't like it at first, but I adjusted and began to really enjoy it. It all boils down to preference. Live has usually been known for a better "pick up and play" experience than 2K, and I can understand why you might think you didn't give 2K enough of a chance, because I wasn't enjoying it at first due to all the long exaggerated animations. I learned it has a deeper learning curve as you have to learn animations timings and when and how they trigger. With the vast amount of animations that 2K uses, it can take a while to get the hang of them. All the shooting styles and bases and selection of dribbling, post moves, and dunks just to name a few, really helps them differentiate players and add visual depth and variety to the gameplay, and users have loved it. EA has usually gone the simpler approach of using the same animations for most players when it comes to dribbling, movement, and collisions, etc, while using signature shots, go-to moves, visual likeness, tendencies, and freethrow styles to differentiate the players. 2K has set a standard in this regard, and EA has yet to meet them in that visual customizability of their game.

There were many times in Live 08-10 where I didn't feel like I had proper control over what happened or was surprised that something went or didn't go in my favour. What I experienced was if I chose a poor team (09-10), I had a hard time of trying to compete, but choosing a better team and it started to feel like I was in control. It's great that you felt like you had control, as maybe I didn't give Live 08-10 enough of a chance, myself. That would be due to my gripes with the response of the controller input to on-court action.

I guess that what it boils down to is personal preference. A person is gong to play the game that they enjoy playing.
Pdub
Administrator
Administrator
 
Posts: 13182
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Pasadena, California, US

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby Andrew on Thu Dec 18, 2014 8:03 am

It took me a couple of attempts and iterations to get into NBA 2K as well, and I too still prefer NBA Live's approach to controls. I believe that's why there needs to be two different games on the market (or more, if other developers want to throw their hat into the ring), ultimately catering to the same crowd, but offering an alternative for gamers who prefer one approach over the other.

There is a lot of silliness with the fanboy posts, the idea that the other game shouldn't exist/"needs to go away". It comes back to the childish notion that something you don't like or don't have interest in shouldn't be allowed to exist, that it somehow ruins or devalues the medium. It's nonsense, of course. If you're not interested, don't buy it/watch it/listen to it/pay money to go see it. Again, that's the benefit of having two basketball games on the market. As long as you're happy with one of them, then stick to it and forget about the other one if you don't like what it's doing. Better to dedicate your time and energy to something you like, rather than something you dislike.
NLSC Webmaster/Administrator
Image
Contact: Email | Twitter
Release Threads: NBA Live 08 | NBA Live 07 | NBA Live 06 | NBA Live 2005 | NBA Live 2004
Story Threads: NBA 2K13 | NBA Live 06 (Part 2) | NBA Live 06 (HOF) | NBA Live 2004 (HOF)
NLSC: Podcast | The Friday Five | Monday Tip-Off | Wayback Wednesday | 20th Anniversary of NBA Live | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube


Support The NLSC Hosting Fund: Patreon | GoFundMe

Image
Like my work? Want to help out with the NLSC Hosting Fund? Please consider leaving a tip!
User avatar
Andrew
No context necessary.
Administrator
 
Posts: 101016
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2002 8:51 pm
Location: Australia

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby Beavis_5000 on Thu Dec 18, 2014 1:07 pm

Once again pdub and Andrew your responses are very informative.

When I first started this post I truly wanted to know how 2K became the more popular game and at the same time I did kind of have a chip on my shoulder because Live was literally my favorite game since 95 until 2010. I obviously knew they quit making Live but never looked into why.

Also, back in 06 (or one of those years) I started playing mostly online. Of course I had my Dynasty's but my main focus was on online play so I almost ignored all other parts of the game. So I never really sat back and looked at how Live was progressing as an over all game.

Since Live came back and I frequent the internet more these days, I learned that 2K had taken over and started taking over way back in the early to mid 2000's.

You guys have definitely informed me to has to how things went down and I can definitely see how 2K took over.

Thanks again for all the great info from everyone.
Beavis_5000
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 3:26 am

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby Beavis_5000 on Thu Dec 18, 2014 2:37 pm

And Pdub, I forgot to mention this in my last post. You said something about not feeling like you could control a game as much with a lesser ranked team. Isn't that the way it should be? I have felt the same way.

For example, if I want to play an exhibition game on Superstar level with a finals enviroment against the Spurs, I would much rather have the Bulls or Cavs rather than the Sixers. The Sixers will miss more shots, get dominated on the boards and etc. just because they don't have the players to keep up.

Another example. Back when Baron Davis played for the Warriors. I loved to play with them but they just did not have the muscle if I was up against an equally good player who took a better team and was on there game.

imo, if you take two equally skilled player and one takes a bad team and one takes a top notch team, the skill level of the team should make a difference.
Beavis_5000
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 3:26 am

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby Pdub on Fri Dec 19, 2014 4:19 am

I can understand that, as it gives the sense of separating the talents of each team. But, looking at that, I can see that some of it is predetermined. I could play poorly with the Spurs and win before I take the Clippers from Live 10 and execute greatly and still lose. What I am basically talking about is the user didn't have a lot of influence over the outcome of the game, imo. That's just how I felt when playing.
Pdub
Administrator
Administrator
 
Posts: 13182
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Pasadena, California, US

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby Beavis_5000 on Fri Dec 19, 2014 5:34 am

Pdub, you felt like that even with a good team in which you had a lot of experience with?

Say I play against the Spurs (online or offline in any year) and I take a bad team. I feel like no matter what I will still get the shots I want and execute my game plan, however I fully expect to make less of these shots (for example) using a player with a rating of 68 as opposed to a player with a rating of 88.

In other words, I have always felt like I control how I play. With a bad team I may not control the outcome of the game but I will definitely execute my game plan and if the Spurs (or whatever good team) give me opprotunities to win there is a good chance I can capitalize on them and win. If they are on point (few turn overs, taking good shots and etc) my chances are slim to none and there is a solid chance I will lose by 20 lol.

Any of this sound similar to your experience?

Playing with a bad team, executing the way you want but still losing is the chance you take when playing with a bad team. If you play with a bad team your AI also has a much higher chance of screwing you.

If you have a PF and Center rated in the upper 60's or lower 70's and you play the Bulls you will likely have problems in the paint especially when you get into All Star and Superstar levels.
Beavis_5000
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 3:26 am

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby Pdub on Fri Dec 19, 2014 11:53 am

Yes, that is the way the ratings work. Higher ratings are more likely to give you an outcome in your favour.

I don't remember who said it, but somebody in the NBA said that most players are equally talented, with only a few players head and shoulders better than everybody else and the differences come down to execution on the court. With years of being a Clippers fan, I know what bad execution looks like.

I did not enjoy Live 10 very much. I knew it was the most solid Live game of that generation and at the time I was hoping for an amazing Live 11 before the Elite debacle. The input response issues and feeling like the game was deciding the outcomes for me using the dice rolls, rather than my execution, and even the company admitted that. Hell, I think Live 09 didn't even give you control over the release point of shots.

I'm through talking about Live back then. It's clear that you enjoyed it, and I did not.

With that said, the main reason NBA2K took over was because they kept improving on what they had while NBA Live fumbled out of the gates for the 360/PS3 and more people tried 2K and found a way to enjoy it. More sales equals more money to improve the game for 2K. Less sales for Live and they kept starting over. More positive exposure for 2K, more negative exposure for EA, and consumers responded.
Pdub
Administrator
Administrator
 
Posts: 13182
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Pasadena, California, US

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby Beavis_5000 on Fri Dec 19, 2014 3:06 pm

I still enjoyed Live 10 but imo it was the lesser of the Live's from that time.

The reason why imo is because they narrowed the skill gap. For example, they took away the ability to really exploit button spammers (switch players and steal button). Not that you still cant exploit them but you can't do it with the flash you could from 09 and below. What I mean is baskets that should be dunks turn into (for example) jump off one foot, fade away jumpers instead (similar to Live 15).

In 2010 they really nerfed the ability to take it to the basket. Against someone who really knows how to play D, getting to the basket was tough as it should be. But if someone played bad D and you drive into a wide open lane you would not dunk but instead do something stupid like a fade away floater.

2010 they really narrowed the skill gap by toning down the ability to finish hard. I would say they did it to the point it is unrealistic (same with 2015).

In real life if you see someone playing D the way a lot of people try to do in Live these days, then the person in real life would get dunked on a lot.
Beavis_5000
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 3:26 am

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby [Q] on Sun Dec 21, 2014 5:54 am

Pdub wrote:favour.

Australian in training?
Image
User avatar
[Q]
NBA Live 18 Optimist
NLSC Team Member
 
Posts: 11814
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2002 8:20 am
Location: Westside, the best side

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby mp3 on Mon Jan 19, 2015 5:30 pm

Imo 2k was able to take over nba live because they built a core game that was ok and they built on that core and improved it each year while live for a while brought out almost a completely different game for a while by changing so many things that I feel made it lose its identify.

I really hope nba live can pull it back and make people think hard about which game they want to buy first.
User avatar
mp3
 
Posts: 4478
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2003 12:45 am

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby benji on Mon Jan 19, 2015 6:18 pm

The jump to last gen and EA's problems* were the nail in the coffin. 2K had slowly been pounding down Live from 2K1. Much like 2K had been pounding down Madden.

*EA had problems with the PS2 transition too. VC accomplished more with 2K2 and 2K3 first porting from just the DC onto three new platforms in under six months AND then piling new junk on top than EA did with Live 2002 and 2003.
User avatar
benji
 
Posts: 14391
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 9:09 am

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby mp3 on Mon Jan 19, 2015 8:02 pm

Also I think nba live dropped the ball and allowed 2k a foot in the door in 06 then they relished a game where the cpu never subbed unless a player was in foul trouble.

How that crap made it through beta testing I will never know.

It was that year myself that I bought nba 2k for the first time and it kinda felt like I was cheating on my wife lol
User avatar
mp3
 
Posts: 4478
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2003 12:45 am

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby Andrew on Mon Jan 19, 2015 9:17 pm

mp3 wrote:Also I think nba live dropped the ball and allowed 2k a foot in the door in 06 then they relished a game where the cpu never subbed unless a player was in foul trouble.


That would be NBA Live 07 on PC/PS2. NBA Live 06, like NBA Live 2005, was a very solid game, one of the better releases in the series. Not without its problems, especially as Freestyle Superstars didn't necessarily achieve what it was meant to, but a very good game nevertheless.

NBA Live 06 on Xbox 360 however was problematic because it lacked Dynasty Mode. The gameplay and graphics were fine for the time (though the animations are very dated to look at now), but it lacked depth.
NLSC Webmaster/Administrator
Image
Contact: Email | Twitter
Release Threads: NBA Live 08 | NBA Live 07 | NBA Live 06 | NBA Live 2005 | NBA Live 2004
Story Threads: NBA 2K13 | NBA Live 06 (Part 2) | NBA Live 06 (HOF) | NBA Live 2004 (HOF)
NLSC: Podcast | The Friday Five | Monday Tip-Off | Wayback Wednesday | 20th Anniversary of NBA Live | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube


Support The NLSC Hosting Fund: Patreon | GoFundMe

Image
Like my work? Want to help out with the NLSC Hosting Fund? Please consider leaving a tip!
User avatar
Andrew
No context necessary.
Administrator
 
Posts: 101016
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2002 8:51 pm
Location: Australia

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby benji on Mon Jan 19, 2015 9:54 pm

Live 99 released with no fatigue too!
User avatar
benji
 
Posts: 14391
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 9:09 am

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby mp3 on Mon Jan 19, 2015 10:08 pm

Yeah sorry that would be live 07 I just remembered he year was 06 when I bought it.

Even with some of the latest 2k releases I don't think I enjoyed them as much as nba live 04 & 05

I think both of them kept you interested in still playing them well into the summer right upto the release of the new version.

If nba live could get back to that I'd be happy to give EA my money again.
User avatar
mp3
 
Posts: 4478
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2003 12:45 am

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby [Q] on Tue Jan 20, 2015 2:21 am

benji wrote:Live 99 released with no fatigue too!

And nba live 10. For online play, you'd just pick the team with the best starting 5 since they would not get tired.
Image
User avatar
[Q]
NBA Live 18 Optimist
NLSC Team Member
 
Posts: 11814
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2002 8:20 am
Location: Westside, the best side

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby Andrew on Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:44 am

benji wrote:Live 99 released with no fatigue too!


That's right, it did too. From memory, it was patched a little better than 07 was.
NLSC Webmaster/Administrator
Image
Contact: Email | Twitter
Release Threads: NBA Live 08 | NBA Live 07 | NBA Live 06 | NBA Live 2005 | NBA Live 2004
Story Threads: NBA 2K13 | NBA Live 06 (Part 2) | NBA Live 06 (HOF) | NBA Live 2004 (HOF)
NLSC: Podcast | The Friday Five | Monday Tip-Off | Wayback Wednesday | 20th Anniversary of NBA Live | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube


Support The NLSC Hosting Fund: Patreon | GoFundMe

Image
Like my work? Want to help out with the NLSC Hosting Fund? Please consider leaving a tip!
User avatar
Andrew
No context necessary.
Administrator
 
Posts: 101016
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2002 8:51 pm
Location: Australia

Re: How did 2K ever compete with NBA Live?

Postby AlienDunker on Tue Mar 03, 2015 10:17 am

So nice to see this discussion. I hope both EA & VizCon ( 2ksports ) are listening close.

... I'm an insider & i got to share with you guys that 2K mostly led in creative, technologically and business strategy since the beginning and continues to drive the breed into for almost a score ( years ) now.

The initial reason for may surprise some of you. 2K was super open-minded when at 2k's inception; hiring a cadre of African American animators, coders and game designers. Each one contributed significantly to the base culture you witness today. When 2K first burst on the market, EA had to go back to the drawing, or shall we say in this case, the blackboard. They struggled always keeping an eye affixed on their unexpected competition. Trying to anticipate their next move, trying to get with the latest step.

BUT, it was impossible.

When 2k came with design innovations like 24 / 7 Mode ---- EA didn't know which way was up.

They had to battle by trying to exploit shelf superiority ( ALL YOUR GAMESTOP SHELVES BELONG TO US ) and license provisioning. They succeeded with NFL but fortunately, the NBA didn't fall for it & didn't go exclusive.

This wasn't a race thing. It was a cultural thing. It wasn't that black people were the main thing it was a more creatively competent form of making good games.

With every force comes some friction and NBA Street was that. Sicker, doper but then some of those guys joined 2k.

As someone said before, EA is constantly adapting to a market defined by their enemy. Over time EA has learned though as they will. They can be good and at times they are known to be the best. We will need to watch them. But my forecast is that there will be new blood that takes our hearts & minds. Both of these games are sunken in the quest for reality and ludological spreadsheet wielding design vampires. The next might just come from Activision or Ubisoft. They are quite formidable. The Ubisoft/Nintendo trained Canadians are the reason EA can even compete today.

Anyway, guys this is my experience and overall take on the situation... The details from year to year must have been great to see - 2 companies fighting it out fiercely like getthoysburg haha.
AlienDunker
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2015 5:30 am



Return to Other Basketball Games

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests