NBA Live & 2K comparison

[skegeemann]

I have been a longtime NBA live gamer. When Live went on "BREAK" i thought I would give 2K a chance. It's a joke! I read blogs and various columns that rate the two games and it's amazing to me the stuff that I read. To me there is no comparison. I think NBA Live 09 is better than 2k11. The graphics within 2k are horible and the lack of player control is down right laughable. I compare it to Nintendo game play. I know that NBA live had a couple of glitches within the game play, but nothing so extreme that I would consider trashing the series. I think people have been way to critical of what to expect from EA. Considering the complexity of what they have been able to do with Live, you can not tell me that 2k offers the same realistic game play. I like the fact that it takes skill to learn to shoot within Live. In 2k it takes little to now effort to figure out player sweet spots. Sometimes I think some of these people writing this stuff are getting paid. Anyway just my thoughts. Keep it coming EA!!!

[benji]

I compare it to Nintendo game play.

Can you elaborate on this fine sir?

[Andrew]

I do think too much is being made of an early pre-alpha build, but that was a misstep by EA to show something that wasn't up to par when they need to be making a big impact following NBA Elite 11 and the two year layoff. I'm hoping that NBA Live 13 can deliver and it sounds like they've got some good ideas that will hopefully pan out.

As for NBA 2K, I'm not overly fond of Isomotion, it still feels cumbersome at times and I still prefer Live's approach with Freestyle (and its subsequent Quick Strike variants). However, the games have delivered a solid sim experience the last few years. They're not perfect, but they're still quality games.

[skegeemann]

Benji:
Well, when I compared the 2k experience to Nintendo game play I think of Nintendo as game play for younger, less capable gamers. By this I mean the complexity of the controls and animation and game flow are far basic in nature. My grandmother would have more appreciation for games on the level of those that are Nintendo games.

Andrew:
I share your thoughts exactly. Too much is being made on the demo release of the Elite. EA should have known the consequence of releasing something that would open the door to competitor backlash. None the less any version of Live with the feature of their last release before the talks of Elite is still more viable than that of the 2k franchise. I'm sorry I just have not been impressed what so ever with that product.

[koberulz]

Well, when I compared the 2k experience to Nintendo game play I think of Nintendo as game play for younger, less capable gamers.

It'd be truly hilarious if a term to describe the most difficult of video games were named after Nintendo, or I could easily dig up a review complaining about the complexity of the controls of 2k12.

It's pretty fucking obvious that you've never played an NBA 2k game - at least not recently - or a large number of Nintendo's hardcore-targeted games.

[[Q]]

I think NBA Live 09 is better than 2k11.

ehh Live 09 wasn't the greatest, Live 10 was much more solid

[JaoSming]

Live 09 was the most complete "Live" game on both the Xbox 360/PS3 and PS2. Live 10 changed too much by removing the shooting button split, the size up moves, and the changed trigger control schemes. On PS2, they fixed all the Live 08 glitches and added a basic physics system to prevent the ball ghosting through players, you know the dribble off defender and teammate stuff in 2k12? It was in Live 09 PS2.....it would have been insane if we got that on PC.

[Andrew]

The PS2 version of NBA Live 09 had a few too many of 08's game mode and AI glitches, including the sim engine bug that really grates for sim geeks like myself. Certainly would've been nice to get a PC version to see if we could've done anything with it, though. The 360/PS3 version was a pretty solid game with a couple of gameplay quirks. NBA Live 10 was an improvement from a gameplay standpoint, but was too light on the game modes with the All-Star Weekend removed and Dynasty suffering a few issues with simulated stats and training.

[Sauru]

I am really starting to wonder which game I should buy this year. I was always a nba live guy but the last 2 years I got nba2k. I enjoyed the gameplay in both though I would say nba live was a bit more fun for me however I really loved the create a player (or career or be a pro whatever the hell it was called) mode in the nba2k games. Got to a point where that is all I played, I never made a actual franchise. Looked around (briefly) to see the difference between the 2 and didn’t really find any info. I was talking to my wife about this and she just told me I will buy both anyway so why bother looking up info but I really would like to stick to just the one. hmmm back to live or stick with 2k? someone give me some info links

[JaoSming]

essentially it is Guitar Hero Dunk Contest vs Text Based info.....


there is nothing to make a decision on yet, especially with little to no concrete info out on either game.

[Sauru]

well i guess thats why i found none lol. i am all about a franchise or be a pro modes. never play online or any of the dunk contest type of stuff

[Patr1ck]

All I played this year was My Player, too. lol. I haven't heard anything about Live's dynasty mode. I would say it's a safe bet to go with 2K, hoping they fixed a few of the issues.

[Andrew]

Hopefully NBA Live's Dynasty Mode does at least see a few fixes and improvements this year and their My Player equivalent (Become Legendary, or whatever they end up branding it moving forward) makes it debut this year as well. I would not expect either to match the depth of Association and My Player, but hopefully they can at least be solid and enjoyable, ready to be expanded upon in future releases.

[Sauru]

Hopefully NBA Live's Dynasty Mode does at least see a few fixes and improvements this year and their My Player equivalent (Become Legendary, or whatever they end up branding it moving forward) makes it debut this year as well. I would not expect either to match the depth of Association and My Player, but hopefully they can at least be solid and enjoyable, ready to be expanded upon in future releases.

see i started leaning towards nba live then i read this and i remember how much the dynasty mode and my player modes mean to me. i never play quick matches or anything like that. with me every single game played from day 1 is in a dynasty or my player (last 2 years nothing but my player) so those need to be really good. cant wait for some real info and some demos would be nice

[_Steve_]

One question bothers me. When did the stats bug first occur in NBA2K games? I'm playing NBA2K games on pc since '10 and was bothered by the stats bug ever since. I really can't remember if it even occured in '07 (haven't played that for 4 years).

[The_Blueprint83]

You can't compare NBA Live to NBA 2K. NBA Live has always been a arcadish type game with really bad animations and bad gameplay on the other hand 2K has been the most SIM/Realistic basketball game since NBA 2K on Dreamcast. People that suck at NBA 2K tend to like NBA Live because it's so much easier to put the ball between your legs and dunk and 100 miles ans hour..NBA Live = Unrealistic.

[Andrew]

That's quite a generalisation.

[Sauru]

i was all about live til i heard jay-z had something to do with 2k. i had to go to the store and cancel my preorder for live and preorder 7 copies of 2k just to make sure i get one.

[Andrew]

Only seven copies? Such a Live fanboy.

[_Steve_]

One question bothers me. When did the stats bug first occur in NBA2K games? I'm playing NBA2K games on pc since '10 and was bothered by the stats bug ever since. I really can't remember if it even occured in '07 (haven't played that for 4 years).

I knew it wasn't the best place but anyone here to answer my question?

Btt: I wouldn'd say, that NBA Live games tend to be less realistic in general. Early NBA Live games had flaws concerning PGs blocking every shot and big men unable to rebound etc, but (most) were good sim games those days... (I've played the series from NBA Live '95 untill NBA Live '08, but left out '05).

[Andrew]

NBA Live 2005 was actually one of the better ones when it came to hitting on the sim elements (at least for its time). During the last generation, certain installments of NBA Live did succeed in providing a fairly decent sim experience and 2K isn't 100% perfect in that regard even to this day. That said, in recent years the 2K series has certainly had much more success in that area, from the gameplay to the depth of the game modes that simulate the NBA experience. I certainly wouldn't downplay the success and positive attributes of NBA 2K but I do think that NBA Live doesn't get enough credit at times, with the bad overshadowing some of its finer moments.

[The_Blueprint83]

I don't even want to bring up NBA Live 07 the year T-Mac was on the cover of and you could do all those crazy dunks when you got hot..smh NBA Jam type shit. We all know how good NBA 2K had been on the current gen consoles.

[Andrew]

Not quite NBA Jam in my opinion, but 07 did leave much to be desired in several areas. 06 is the last PC release that I feel hit the mark in enough areas to be very enjoyable and it remains one of my favourites in the series.

[dascoot]

I feel that 2K is the better series. I was big on NBA Live but i hated NBA Live 10 on XBOX 360. I love NBA Live 08 on PS2. I got up to 2024 on the dynasty with the 76ers and I have yet to get to the NBA Finals. I now play 2K since NBA Live doesn't have multiplayer dynasty mode and saving during the offseason. I always buy both though so i can do an eastern dynasty on one and a western on the other version. I have more fun on 2K with dynasty though.

[Andrew]

Really? I'd definitely rate NBA Live 10 on 360 as being far better than NBA Live on PS2 (or PC for that matter, since it's the same version).