Things Have To Change!

[Tuomas]

I'm very disappointed. With a bit over 6 months of Live 2005, I'm bored. Live 2005 was supposed to change everything: a dunk contest, complete dynasty mode, authentic arenas, real cyberfaces etc.
Ok, Ima get to the point: I don't like, or yet better, I HATE the way EA is making NBA Lives right now. Since Live 2000 it has been steadily crawling on the ground. Me and us as loyal EA fans have always standed this, praising the new Live, just because it's Live. Come on, live it Live whoa
But right now I'm fed up. I can't stand it no more.

NBA Live series is dead

Let me tell you why:
The PC versions suck. EA doesn't use enough time to convert it to pc. And you hear how terrible it sounds? CONVERT? EA should make the PC version completely different since the consoles use much less resources than computers.
But the game itself sucks. Not in so much in basketball games perspective, but in perspective of games generally. It's simply not so fun to play anymore. NBA Live used to be addictive, now it's simply plain boring. You don't get a thrill out of great plays anymore, if there are any.

NBA Live sucks compared to other EA Sports games and I think it's ridiculous. Look at FIFA, MVP Baseball and NHL! They are awesome, so lifelike, so not NBA Live-value, they're plain better! I'd rather play NHL 2005 than NBA Live even though I prefer basketball to ice hockey. MVP Baseball seems amazing and makes me want to watch baseball again and FIFA is a footballer's dream. NBA Live? Makes me want to change my sport.
Take a look and try to get what I'm saying:





look at the player models!!! stadiums!!! WTF, 3D crowd???
then take a look at this:


are they playing in the attic or something...

When compared to other EA Sports games, NBA Live looks like a cartoon or a puppet show. the animations look awkward, the player feel and controlling feels forced and horrible.

I want that EA Sports would put the same effort into NBA Live than into MVP Baseball for example. When comparing the pictures, NBA Live has lot to improve. I can imagine how much better the players, stadiums and textures could be. EA has that potential so why doesn't it do it? Is it that NBA Live is the only bball game for PC out there? Well, NHL is practically the only hockey game for PC and it rocks. I can't understand why EA holds back on NBA Live

The other thing is that NBA Live is not that innovative anymore. They should add something totally new (all-star mode my ass, that was the first addition since the three point shootout in 2000, which was taken away the next year) like ESPN NBA's 24 mode. NBA Live needs some more juice, more flavour. It is about NBA I know, but add something refreshing, olympic tournament, streetball tournaments, crunch events, jam vans or whatever. Add more game modes!!

Add more room for customization. The music should be replaced. Take NBA Street's customization mode to Live, custom teams etc. Everyone wants to do their own thing.

EA should listen people for once. The game sucks plain and simple. I'd rather play NHL 95 (in fact I did this week) just because it's MORE FUN. Yea, NBA Street is fun, but why shouldn't NBA Live be fun? It's supposed to be a NBA simulation but simulations could be fun...? Right now NBA Live is a boring simulation of the NBA.

NBA Live is stuck with the same stuff. Something needs to be done and soon. All the other games keep getting better and better while Live shows no signs, or minimal signs of improvement.

The bottom line:
EA has to make a new Live since Liv 2005 isn't really a base to build on in order to make a realistic simulation of NBA in every aspet. Live 2005 was ... well, not worth 50€. If they can't improve it enough, at least lower the price because the game isn't worth the normal price, anymore. EA is the biggest video company in the world so I think they can afford to do something.

If NBA Live doesn't improve enough, I am not going to buy it and I suggest you too saving your hard earned money and using it for something more higher quality thing.

[T-Comm55]

Well as hard as it is for me to admit, the NBA Live series has been getting a little sluggish in terms of improvement. But there aren't any NBA games out there, thats really better than NBA Live so I guess we just have to hope that Live series gets better starting with NBA Live 2006.



PS: Good Post The Answer

[blair710]

They should have like 2 on 2s and 3 on 3s and stuff like that. Tournaments and stuff.

[jhunjhunjhunjhun]

if you ask me, Gamplay is the things to change and improve, I agree to you that the graphics of NBL is poor but for me if the graphics is good but the gameplay is poor it is also a crap,

[Carlo.29]

yeah, the graphics in other ea games are so nice, but i NBA Live, its not.. seriously, i dont like the graphics in NBA live... so, Please EA, make nba live 2006 the best NBA Live at all.. i think in NBA live 2005, they focused in the all star weekend.. the dynasty is not that good... GAMEPLAY AND THE GRAPHICS IS THE FIRST THING TO IMPROVE!

[GAME_ZONE]

The_Answer send this letter to EA maiby they hear u
P.S i agrre with u

[Jae]

I doubt EA listens to anything fans say, I thought everyone was being harsh on them about the gameplay before I played ESPN 2K5. It has its flaws aswell but nothing that can't be easily fixed and it's a billion times better than Live, so no people aren't being harsh Live is just one of the worst EA games. The graphics are horrendous, why is it they can make David Beckham look exactly like David Beckham but they can't make Jahidi White look any different to Darius Miles? This "fast paced, high energy" thing they're going for sounds very very ominous. We're going to get another arcadey type cartoon game with a different cover.

[AlwaysWhat,NeverWhy]

NBA Live is a good game. It's just not as good as most of the other EA Sports products. Simple.

The question you should ask yourselves is: Do I like playing NBA Live? Yes ... or ... No.

Yes it could be better, and unless something is perfect and it could always have been better. If you like it, if you enjoy it, then by all means play the friggin' game.

Another issue. EA has a projext team in charge of the NBA Live series, and an established one at that. Have you any idea what it would cost to change that team to produce a better product? MUCH! And there's no way that the game code will change dramatically unless the projest team changes, and starts from scratch. Ar you willing to wait 2 or 3 years for the next Live? Because that's how long it will take to make a new, thoroughly tested game from ground zero.

All in all, if you like the game, play it. If not, don't buy it. Simple.

[Jae]

If it meant the game being as good as it should be, I'd be happy to wait 2-3 years for another Live game. Lets face it, the next 2-3 Live games will be virtually the same thing, just in a different package. I buy it because I feel some sort of weird sense of loyalty towards the series, but complacency within the people buying the game won't bring improvements.

[Bang]

I liked NBA Live 2005 a lot. As for graphics, well it is lacking, but whatever, see the graphics of nba live 2006 right now, I think it is much better. I've never cared about graphics. The only thing I care about is the gameplay. What is the big deal about 3D crowds? I don't even look at the crowds, nor would I even care if they were paper.
And FIFA is complete crap compared to PES/Winning Eleven. I think this is a prime example of when graphics are put on focus a bit too much and then the developers do NOTHING to change the game. In FIFA 2004, which is a DECENT game, they just ripped off Winning Eleven 6, but still arcadey. It is the same thing with FIFA that they are going through. It's so damn successful I don't think they'd change much. They've changed it a little now since there is some competition, but sadly not a lot of people don't even know about winning eleven, so they basically just ripped off their system. Hopefully with the non-exclusivity contract of the NBA they'll change their mindset and release better games. But still NBA Live sells more than 2k series and why should they start from the ground up if the series is so successful? Starting from scratch is really difficult and annoying. Also, probably a lot of people don't know the 2k series, not as much as people not knowing winning eleven, but still that factor is present. Now with EA Sports having the ESPN license, they have the potential of putting ESPN in all their games and it will of course cause confusion to all gamers that don't pay attention to the gaming world. They'd go to EB games and go "this has ESPN in it, it's probably the sequel to the game I played last year." I don't think NBA Live 2006 will be too different, but I'll probably still buy it since I need to play a new basketball game every year. Hopefully they'll look past just laziness and profits and release a completely new live, but I doubt it...

Actually I think the problem with NBA Live is how different it is from the real game of the NBA, maybe the FUN aspect of it. Who the hell does 300 tricks to get through the defender? Why the hell are there so many damn dunks? Why are there so many blocks? Why are there so many steals? Because some people think dunking in every single possesion is so fun and that blocks should be the only form of defense.

As for making the PC version different...why would you invest extra time in the department that produces the least amount of money? It doesn't make any sense.

[Andrew]

I doubt EA listens to anything fans say

It might seem that way at times, but considering the amount of features suggested on previous Wishlists that are now in the game, I think it's safe to say they give some consideration to our input.

[Metsis]

Boy you boys don't know your history on NBA Live games...

The team that made the Live 2000 is no longer working on the project... The Live games have gone through the growing pains from Live 2001 to 2003... Live 2004 was already a way better game and Live 2005 is even better... The graphics might not be that good, but when you have to deal with consoles, the graphics don't have to be that good...

EA is low balling us in one situation... They are making the game first for the devices (consoles) that don't have the resources and then porting it to the device (PC) that has all the resources in the world. How much better game we would have if they made the game for the PC first and took advantage of all the resources in that and then just strip it down for the console users... PC users would definitely get a better game and I believe the console gamers would get a better game too as they probably notice that this we could do and I never even realised that etc. etc. with the console resources...

Live 2005 is a good game... The new basis is there and now it's finally time to start building on it... Live 2006 will be better and 2007 will be better too... There are stuff in the databases that already hint at the future and all that, but the fact of it is that there is only a single year to come up with something revolutionary new stuff that will rock the world of the bball fans and you can't expect that to happen to every year...

One more thing... About the all-star stuff etc. The EA marketing people have to sell the game year in year out... They cannot sell the game with "This game has a better gameplay AI and the menu's have been made clearer and give out more information". You just can't sell that... You can sell "This game has a all new fabulous all-star weekend feature with a dunk competition with 30 million dunk combinations"... Now that you can sell... It is a bit sad, but it is a bussiness... The game will evolve again another step... We'll just have to see if it's a small baby-step or a huge leap accross grand canyon...

I'm buying Live 2006 for PC... There is nothing else...

I have to agree with you boys on one thing... The game needs a new injection of life into it... The game is still too much similar to Live 2000 and nothing really big has changed since that... Give us more options for managing our team... If we are the GM than why our only options for managing the team are roster related??? We need live players and players egos etc. There are clashes between players like Kobe and Shaq soap opera we've had for the last couple of years... There are guys that just are trouble like Danny Fortson... One of the greatest rebounders of all time, but he's got an attitude that made him sit on the Denver bench for a long time... We need the option of firing and hiring new head coaches and possibly even the assistants and make the coaches have attributes too that will effect the game... Some are better offensively and some defensively... Some coaches clash with their players and some go to extreme lengths to keep their stars happy...

We need something new... The game is good, but it's about time to get some real improvement into it... NO GRAPHICS UPDATES PLEASE... The graphics are good enough. The guys who play this game for the graphics should just get NBATV and watch all them real games and the graphics are right on the money on the television broadcasts. We want more depth... Living breathing personal players and other people... NBA Live SIMS would be nice...

[MaD_hAND1e]

if the game is gonna play like 05 or 04... i'm giving buying it..... i'm might even just dl it

[Rokas[LTU]]

If NBA Live doesn't improve enough, I am not going to buy it

So what ? We don't care...

[Mavericks]

I agree with you, last year i ditched NBA live 2004 for ESPN's game which was alot better IMO. I have played NBA live 2005 and thought it was ok but i agree with everything you said. Apart from one thing, FIFA sucks! FIFA really really really sucks! Pro Evo is 100x better than FIFA

[PiksS]

damn this is so true....nice post The_Answer

[Rokas[LTU]]

FIFA really really really sucks! Pro Evo is 100x better than FIFA

[tsherkin]

While I very much enjoy the Live series, there are definitely some things I'd like to get changed:

I'd like them to take away that goddamned code that makes the computer players infinitely capable of halting your fast break. If I steal the ball from you, especially with Wade or someone, I'm friggin' gone. YOu can't catch up, physics prevents it from happening, so don't do it.

I want fewer blocks out on the perimeter, because they're harder and a lot rarer. I want MUCH improved post play because it sucks in every version of every basketball game ever made. The moves are all stiff and too poorly controlled, and too hard to pull off.

I want the dribbling not to be so damned slow, because people dribble faster than that.

I want the players to move with a modicum of their actual speed. There's no one in the NBA as ponderous as some of the low-end players in Live, they're all at least reasonably athletic. I want the low-end dribblers just to be easier to pick, not so bad they lose the ball anytime they dribble or bust a move.

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

[Metsis]

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???

[[L3]1101]

i don't mind the graphics. I set the settings to high, and it's pretty good, so i wish they can concentrate on other things. It's been 6 to 7 month since the relase of 2005, and i still play as much as did back then. But, am i addicted to 2005? NO. I don't feel the urge to play it; i've seen all the moves, and plays after about a month. I only play it fo the Dynasty, and it' no way near perfect. The Dynasty has so much potentials, as people have discussed in the wishlists, but EA just fails to improve on it, or not much as we want them to. As a GM i don't think my only duties are to trade players and scout draft picks that i don't even want. There's gotta be more....
I mean, EA has made the Sims which simulates people's life/career.... i know i know, it's totally a differet team, but it just shows that EA is capable of doing more.

One of the reasons, IMO, EA makes LIVE for the console games first is because of the piracy. If the PC and console games are the same, it just makes sense that people would buy more console games more than PC games because of piracy. It is just easier to donwload PC games. As Metsis said, EA should make the PC version a little different than the console games just to attract more PC gamers. I could've downloaded 2005, but i bought it just for the loyalty.

Another thing, EA needs to improve the physics of the game. The players moves are pretty much the same as last year... but i'm not gonna talk too much on that, i think there's an another section for that discussion.

[BiGrEd819]

i think the ea canda team sux ass in makin games.... one of the best ea series like madden nd NHL r made in the U.S......if u take a look at the competiton level of ea's madden to sega's NFL games, ea's version sweeps its competitors in every category; basket ball is probably the only game dat sega can beat ea in.... not to critize the canadians but the candadian DEVELOPERS juss plainly sux ass..... long story short, they sould move the development project to the U.S.

[Matt]

the frustrating thing with EA is they move one step forward and one step back. They'll add freestyle mode and yet at the same time they'll all for crazy shot blocking.

Like Jae mentioned, this arcade thing isnt gonna do it for me. The only thing i want is some great gameplay, which i probably wont get.

Bottom line is, I want to have fun with this game....i dont wanna get frustrated. I wanna play simulation style. Till then, fuck graphics, fuck all-star mode and all other bullshit

[Alcoholic]

It's like what my teacher said about cars... If you make a car that lasts 20 years, then yea people will love it, but you won't be able to sell anything to them for 20 years! So you make crappy cars that breakdown all the time, requiring them to spend money to fix them or buy the next years model.

[T-Comm55]

Guys we have to accept the fact that there is no perfect game and a perfect game will never be created, becasue if they create a perfect game this year everyone will buy it and next year no one will buy the new game because THEY ALREADY HAVE THE PERFECT GAME. So we will just be getting closer and closer to playing a perfect game with perfect physics and perfect rating, but the reality is no such game will be produced. All we can do is buy the best one out of the competition and right now ( and for the past 10 yrs ) NBA Live series is the best basketball game. We "have" to play NBA Live game until a better one comes along.

[Jae]

I prefer ESPN 2K5.

I think this fast break rubbish might just be an advertising ploy, because we can adjust the speed of the game in the slider settings.

[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.