Review: Live 09 Better than 2k9 !

[SublimeAnarky]

I understand Andrew intends to run a comparo between these games later on.. but i just had to point this out.

TeamXbox which gave Live 09 an 8.5 has reviewed 2k9 as an 8.

Live 09 http://games.teamxbox.com/xbox-360/2035/NBA-Live-09/

2k9 http://games.teamxbox.com/xbox-360/2026/NBA-2K9/

Now i'm not sure when the last time was (since live went next-gen) that we've been beaten 2k at any review..

IGN's 6.5 aside - every site seems to be giving Live props for a good overall showing this year.

Add to that the fact that i'm seeing a lot of hardcore 2k'ers on other sites bash this years 2k release for all sorts of reasons AND make the switch to Live (some say 'temporarily' - but they all do mention that they enjoy Live once they've played it - some have even called Live addictive since the 'switch'!) - my take is this IS the breakout year for Live.. Next year will/should be evolution - but Live 09 has been the release where the franchise has picked itself up and responded to the community - the results are clearly there to see..

[cj_miranda23]

I will agree that live 09 has better audio and innovation on 2k9 but for the gameplay: live 09=8.4/2k9=8.3, c'mon, even though its a very small margin, saying live has better gameplay than 2k9 is a BIG FAT LIAR.

I'm still waitingfor the review of gamespot on live 09, if they say live 09 is better than 2k9, now I will believed this SH'''''''t

NBA 2K9 Reviews
Official Xbox Magazine 8.5 / 10 Dec 1, 2008
Game Informer 8.5 / 10 Nov 1, 2008
1UP A- Oct 7, 2008
TeamXbox 8 / 10 Oct 7, 2008
GameDaily 8 / 10 Oct 7, 2008
IGN 8.5 / 10 Oct 6, 2008

NBA Live 09 Reviews
Official Xbox Magazine 8 / 10 Nov 1, 2008
Game Informer 7.8 / 10 Nov 1, 2008
GameZone 8 / 10 Oct 7, 2008
1UP B Oct 7, 2008
IGN 6.5 / 10 Oct 7, 2008
GameDaily 8 / 10 Oct 7, 2008
TeamXbox 8.5 / 10 Oct 3, 2008
X360 Magazine UK 8 / 10 Oct 1, 2008

[The X]

Live '95 was the revolution of the Live gaming....we haven't seen any jump so huge since....I'm happy with 2k....eventually I might give Live another go, after being loyal to them from Live '95 to Live '06....they just have to win my trust as a customer back....won't happen this year....who knows, perhaps next year....

[Andrew]

Live '95 was the revolution of the Live gaming....we haven't seen any jump so huge since....

That's a bit harsh, Live had its fair share of improvements from 95 through 2000 at the very least. 2004 was also a huge turnaround from 2003. I've seen a few people state that NBA Live hasn't improved since its first addition and while I'm sure some of that is hyperbole to emphasise disappointment in the series it's taking things a bit far in my opinion.

[The X]

my take was more in response to first post....my opinion is Showdown '94 to Live '95 is biggest jump I can recall in bball gaming....it wasn't meant as a slight against the Live series as a whole, as I've had many great moments, especially in Live '95, '98, '99, '04 & '05....whilst I believe Live '95 was the largest jump I recall in the bball sim genre (more so than anything 2k or anybody else put out), there were other very good improvements in the series like from Live '97 to '98 & from Live '03 to '04....although I will stand by the fact that Live '95 was the groundbreaker for the series, much like Tony Hawk Pro Skater 2 was for that series....obviously the Live series has come a tremendous way since its inception....I guess I should have worded my response a tad better....

[ThaLiveKing]

Live is a great game this year. But I feel there's issues with the controls. Maybe it's me. 2k9 has better gameplay IMO, Their physics are just better than Live's. But 2k is a better 1 player game. 2k Is a better 2 player game. That's just how I see it

[Andrew]

my take was more in response to first post....my opinion is Showdown '94 to Live '95 is biggest jump I can recall in bball gaming....it wasn't meant as a slight against the Live series as a whole, as I've had many great moments, especially in Live '95, '98, '99, '04 & '05....whilst I believe Live '95 was the largest jump I recall in the bball sim genre (more so than anything 2k or anybody else put out), there were other very good improvements in the series like from Live '97 to '98 & from Live '03 to '04....although I will stand by the fact that Live '95 was the groundbreaker for the series, much like Tony Hawk Pro Skater 2 was for that series....obviously the Live series has come a tremendous way since its inception....I guess I should have worded my response a tad better....

Fair enough, wasn't sure where you were coming from on that one. As I said, there are people who suggest the series hasn't improved since NBA Live 95 which I think is hyperbole as there were significant enough improvements at least within the first six games to say that NBA Live 95 was surpassed. I still have very fond memories of NBA Live 95 though.

[xKrNMBoYx]

I understand Andrew intends to run a comparo between these games later on.. but i just had to point this out.

TeamXbox which gave Live 09 an 8.5 has reviewed 2k9 as an 8.

Live 09 http://games.teamxbox.com/xbox-360/2035/NBA-Live-09/

2k9 http://games.teamxbox.com/xbox-360/2026/NBA-2K9/

Now i'm not sure when the last time was (since live went next-gen) that we've been beaten 2k at any review..

IGN's 6.5 aside - every site seems to be giving Live props for a good overall showing this year.

Add to that the fact that i'm seeing a lot of hardcore 2k'ers on other sites bash this years 2k release for all sorts of reasons AND make the switch to Live (some say 'temporarily' - but they all do mention that they enjoy Live once they've played it - some have even called Live addictive since the 'switch'!) - my take is this IS the breakout year for Live.. Next year will/should be evolution - but Live 09 has been the release where the franchise has picked itself up and responded to the community - the results are clearly there to see..

I dont know how live 09 got a better rating..but then after I realised this.

Gameplay: Live 8.4 2K 8.3 - How does 2K9 have a 9.3 and Live 09 have a 9.5 on gameplay. As far as framerate 2K9 has a better one, and a more of a sim Gameplay

Graphics: Live 8.5 2K 8.5For graphics 2K9 improved a lot. The crowd looks amazing. The player models and skin has improved greatly. The Faces..phew they basically are better in atleast 50%..especially the rookies..."float" i dont know what they meant

Audio: Live 7.8 2K 8.7 - Now audio yes live has a better one I have to admit that as a guy who played live also from 1998

Longetivity: Live 9.0 2K 7.7 - We both have a update thing. Live = DNA, 2K = Living Roster. Yea 2k has less playmodes cause live took FIBA all by themselves, and espn, but 2k has more mods now.

Innovation: Live 9.0 2K 7.7 - DNA..just cause NBA Live is partnered with synergy and their daily/weekly/monthly updates name is better "DNA" why do they get a higher score. Living roster is the same. They will update the ratings, looks, signature moves, stats, gameplay..its the same. We even have the same practice type things..sheesh

The ratings should be the same or 2k a little bit more..no less

[Andrew]

Innovation: Live 9.0 2K 7.7 - DNA..just cause NBA Live is partnered with synergy and their daily/weekly/monthly updates name is better "DNA" why do they get a higher score. Living roster is the same. They will update the ratings, looks, signature moves, stats, gameplay..its the same. We even have the same practice type things..sheesh

Well, daily updates are more innovative as it's never been done before in a game like NBA Live or 2K. They might also be scoring NBA Live's system higher given the source of the data; I'm sure the 2K Insider is hardly clueless when it comes to basketball or the NBA but someone updating the ratings and releasing periodic official updates isn't anything we haven't seen before in some form. Very similar concepts, certainly the Synergy deal probably has a lot to do with it but I think it's the daily updates, NBA Rewind and so forth that have resulted in Live getting the higher scorer there.

[sdot_thadon]

Innovation: Live 9.0 2K 7.7 - DNA..just cause NBA Live is partnered with synergy and their daily/weekly/monthly updates name is better "DNA" why do they get a higher score. Living roster is the same. They will update the ratings, looks, signature moves, stats, gameplay..its the same. We even have the same practice type things..sheesh

Well, daily updates are more innovative as it's never been done before in a game like NBA Live or 2K. They might also be scoring NBA Live's system higher given the source of the data; I'm sure the 2K Insider is hardly clueless when it comes to basketball or the NBA but someone updating the ratings and releasing periodic official updates isn't anything we haven't seen before in some form. Very similar concepts, certainly the Synergy deal probably has a lot to do with it but I think it's the daily updates, NBA Rewind and so forth that have resulted in Live getting the higher scorer there.

People don't seem to understand the aimed scope of dna, it's not the same. Dna is supposed to update stats as well as tendencies. Living rosters will update stats and update animations from my understanding. The tendencies data is the killer app for this years live imho.
And concerning dna vs living rosters:

living rosters: One person updating rosters and ratings according to stats/his opinion during big changes throughout the season. It has been said that players will recieve additional animations if they outplay their current set.

Dna: A statistic company used by the nba to scout players and teams updates ratings and tendencies for teams on a daily basis for the entire season.

Dna sounds better overall, but we can't truly see the impact until th season is well underway.

[benji]

Tendencies have been part of the 2K ratings for years.

living rosters: One person updating rosters and ratings according to stats

Dna: A statistic company used by the nba to scout players and teams updates ratings and tendencies

If the models are correct, there won't be a difference.

I don't think Live's model is correct though. The DNA tendencies don't make any empirical sense. And 2K understands things like eFG%, turnover ratio, etc.

[xKrNMBoYx]

yea i agree...synergy is a higher and more knowing/smart company to do the updates so yea..

and they yea 2k doesnt have tendencies...even if that matters much..but for sim yea it does matter

[benji]

2K does have tendencies. And has for years.

Synergy isn't doing the updates, they're updating statistics from their database, and they're being automatically entered into EA's model.

[arden_05]

Innovation: Live 9.0 2K 7.7 - DNA..just cause NBA Live is partnered with synergy and their daily/weekly/monthly updates name is better "DNA" why do they get a higher score. Living roster is the same. They will update the ratings, looks, signature moves, stats, gameplay..its the same. We even have the same practice type things..sheesh

Well, daily updates are more innovative as it's never been done before in a game like NBA Live or 2K. They might also be scoring NBA Live's system higher given the source of the data; I'm sure the 2K Insider is hardly clueless when it comes to basketball or the NBA but someone updating the ratings and releasing periodic official updates isn't anything we haven't seen before in some form. Very similar concepts, certainly the Synergy deal probably has a lot to do with it but I think it's the daily updates, NBA Rewind and so forth that have resulted in Live getting the higher scorer there.

Andrew,

I respect your opinion as a mod and an NBA Live Veteran, but I must say there is no justifying any video game review rating NBA Live 09 higher than NBA 2k9...its absurd. In these cases its clear was going on, and its a blatant misrepresentation of the truth.

NBA Rewind, and synergy are innovative and nice touches but not ground breaking enough to give NBA Live a higher score. What's really makes a video game a superior product? The answer is gameplay. And for the past (I would say) 5 years NBA 2k9's gameplay has been unmatched. There is no other basketball game on the market that delivers the type of realism 2k does year after year.

No game is without its flaws, but 2k9 is a more accurate representation of actual basketball. It seems for the past few years EA cloaks Live with little gimmicks or features that try to conceal its shortcomings in the gameplay department. Live has improved, I'll be fair, but its no where near on the same level of "detailed gameplay" that NBA 2k9 delivers.

Again, I respect your opinion and your position here at the forum so I get it

[huddy187]

From my experience with live 09 and 2k9 i would say i had more fun with live
but i think 2k9 has the best franchise mode. I think 2k was just to lazy with the
new isomotion control it was perfect last year i dont understand why 2k tweaked it. The only thing i dont like about live is the rebounding and franchise mode they should have a huge dynasty mode update i mean just redo it its just awful

[Andrew]

And for the past (I would say) 5 years NBA 2k9's gameplay has been unmatched. There is no other basketball game on the market that delivers the type of realism 2k does year after year.

I wouldn't entirely agree with that. That's what everyone claims, that 2K is an excellent game right out of the box but in my experience I've been confronted with the CPU shooting 80% and hitting everything it tosses up from three point range no matter how closely guarded, and that was on one of the easier difficulty settings. I'm not saying 2K isn't capable of realistic gameplay but my experiences with the game vastly differ from the praise that's often heaped upon it, specifically that it gives you what you want straight out of the box.

That said, 2K9 is different for me in that regard. I've only played the demo thus far but without any kind of tweaking, I was much more impressed with it than previous games in the series. I'm still not a fan of Isomotion though, I find it extremely awkward. I won't deny Live's cons or 2K's pros, but it's still not a very appealing alternative to me because I dislike the Isomotion approach.

However, my original point was simply about the score for innovation rather than the overall and in that regard, I think Dynamic DNA and NBA Live 365 are more innovative than Living Rosters because of everything they entail and the approach of daily updates alone is groundbreaking because that specifically has never been done before. Living Rosters sounds nice but for all the extra things they'll be doing with it, it remains a similar concept to official roster updates which we've seen for both games in the past.

In any event, I think "misrepresentation of the truth" is going a bit far with such a subjective topic; if someone enjoys NBA Live more based on their expectations and criteria, they're entitled to that opinion and it's no less truthful than someone praising 2K (assuming of course, the reviewer in question is giving their honest opinion).There really doesn't need to be any more justification than that, that it's one person's experience and view of both games. Since there's no single standard for what makes a fun/enjoyable sports game, there can't really be an undisputable right and wrong.

I guess at the end of the day, I was trying to explain why the reviewer might feel that way more than offer absolute justification for the score but my own opinions got caught up in that. When it all comes down to it, it's just one person's score and those of us who've played the games and/or demos know what each game offers and which one we ultimately prefer. I must admit when it comes to reviews, I'm more interested in the details they go into rather than the score itself.

[The X]

To each his own I guess....I have no problem with either game....whilst I prefer 2k9, I can understand different perspectives....I thought after a positive 2k6, 2k7 was flat & 2k8 whilst better, wasn't a tad boring....2k9 feels & plays better....but I've more or less got the game to play with custom teams (unfortunately Live doesn't have them) with a mix of current players & legends (Pistol Pete, Bill Russell, Scottie Pippen etc) against my older brother....I haven't got into Association yet....apparently it's deeper, although I still don't think it will match up to College Hoops 2k8 Legacy Mode, which was deep as....

but yep, I can understand people get tired of same formula of 2k & going back to Live, & vice versa going from Live to 2k....just for something fresh & different....when you've been playing bball games for like the best part of 20 years, fresh is good....

either way, from what I've played of demo of Live '09 & what I've read, I would compare it to EA's NHL '07....the game is starting to make the turn towards being a really good game....although I should say that I returned NHL '07 the day after I purchased it....that's because there was no defence in the game, & it just didn't "feel" right for me....that's kinda why I went with 2k9....but look at where NHL '08 & NHL '09 have gone, they have ripped passed the NHL 2k series....whilst I can't see the Live series ripping past the NBA 2k series, it wouldn't surprise to see them at least draw level next year & surpass after that....

either way, it's great for the consumer....

to each his own....for me, I think College Hoops 2k8 will get most playing time over next year....

[benji]

That's what everyone claims, that 2K is an excellent game right out of the box but in my experience I've been confronted with the CPU shooting 80% and hitting everything it tosses up from three point range no matter how closely guarded, and that was on one of the easier difficulty settings.

Oh, dear.

I think Dynamic DNA and NBA Live 365 are more innovative than Living Rosters because of everything they entail and the approach of daily updates alone is groundbreaking

Except it's completely stupid in the modern incarnation. It's based on a ten day/game sample, and the DNA choices are theoretically flawed.

It purports to be empirically based but is rejecting all common sense by shifting ratings only over a ten day/game sample, and tossing out the first entry of that sample everytime new data is brought in. Unless your entire desire is to replicate the previous ten games only, while continuing to (as with 2K) fail to advance the underlying theoretical basis of the simulation, it's hardly superior to 2K's "update when things need it" stance.

I haven't seen (not that I pay as much attention recently as I used to) any empirical evidence behind the "hot hand over multiple games" theory, especially for projecting future performance. (Which is our ideal goal for updating ratings.) Instead, barring overall evolution in the players skillset (which DNA would not see any better than Living Rosters) they would almost universally regress to their long-term norms.

Considering that we cannot acquire data from the future, the only logical method to employing DNA or any similar feature is to replicate on the fly, not a players individual tendencies (or sudden desire to drive for left sided layups for a couple days), but instead his role in the entire team unit.

It's *WARNING: HYPERBOLE* groundbreaking in the sense that jumping off buildings with your arms out was a groundbreaking in human flight.

[Nick]

I've been an NBA Live fan for years, and i can safely say that 2k's games have always been better than NBA Live's offerings. If you want realism and integrity from a basketball game, anyway. There's not even any argument about it. What are we all doing here?

[arden_05]

I've been an NBA Live fan for years, and i can safely say that 2k's games have always been better than NBA Live's offerings. If you want realism and integrity from a basketball game, anyway. There's not even any argument about it. What are we all doing here?

I agree, your absolutely right...leaving thread

[Andrew]

Well, I think arguments can be made in favour of both games and to suggest otherwise would be to subscribe to fanboyism no matter which side you're on. Based on my experiences with 2K, I think Take Two is given a pass on a lot of things EA is dragged over the coals for but I certainly wouldn't describe 2K as a bad game as it's far from that to say the very least. As I've said before, it doesn't appeal as much to me because I do prefer the Freestyle/Quick Strike approach to Isomotion. And as X already said, to each their own.

It's *WARNING: HYPERBOLE* groundbreaking in the sense that jumping off buildings with your arms out was a groundbreaking in human flight.

Fair enough call, groundbreaking certainly doesn't always equate to good. I'm hoping NBA Live 365 will prove to be worth the hype, guess I'll soon find out.