NBA 2K10: Draft Combine News Post

NBA 2K10 Draft Combine: 2K's DLC Gamble (Gamespot)

08:57 PM - August 3, 2009 by Steve_OS

Check out the NBA 2K10 Draft Combine: 2K's DLC Gamble article, over at Gamespot.

Quote:


	"There's several different ways of looking at 2K Sports' upcoming download-only game, NBA 2K10 Draft Combine. On one hand, it can be seen as 2K Sports' answer to the "Be a Pro" modes that have recently popped up in EA Sports' games. On another, it's an easy way for 2K to grab a few extra dollars from the NBA 2K faithful who are desperate to get their hands on the game. Alternately, Draft Combine can also be seen as a natural extension of the success of the long-running NBA 2K series (which is celebrating its ten-year anniversary with this year's game), as well as a preview of what to expect from the full version of NBA 2K10 coming this fall. However you look at it, it's clear that 2K Sports is taking a chance with Draft Combine. The game is limited both in scope and duration, and that limited span ties directly into features that will be a part of the full version of NBA 2K10. The game is centered entirely around your created player, as you take him through the drills, games, and shoot-arounds that make up the activities at the NBA Draft Combine."

Game: NBA 2K10: Draft CombineReader Score: 7.5/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Xbox 360Votes for game: 2 - View All

NBA 2K10: Draft Combine Videos

Member Comments

# 41 DC @ 08/04/09 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elev8rmuzik


	I don't understand the difference between some scouting tool or some joe. Ultimately, the same data has to be accounted for no matter who or what is processing it ... right?

No it is NOT the same thing. One is opinion based, the other is mathematically based.

# 42 elev8rmuzik @ 08/04/09 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican


	No it is NOT the same thing. One is opinion based, the other is mathematically based.

Maybe I'm assuming that it has to be derived from the same data.

Both systems have to be set up to achieve a specific result, or else there'd be no reason to have a system. It can't be, "Well I'm just going to rate this guy a 75 because I like his shoes". There's got to be a method to it.

# 43 NINJAK2 @ 08/04/09 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stumbleweed


	What do you mean? Proven that DNA gets real information, or proven that the 2K Insider just kinda analyzes the players as he sees fit and then assigns them ratings? DNA is 100% legit (execution and implementation into the game is one thing, but the data is rock-solid)... As far as the 2K Insider goes, I think there's team input on the ratings as well, but it's basically his domain and all goes back to his take on things. NINJAK2 -- yeah, I only mentioned it because other people had specifically mentioned how nice the CAF models looked. I know it's an unfair comparison to look at some random CAP vs that Melo screenshot Live put out, but I was just saying that the skin textures looked really weak and it looks exactly like 2K9 minus the improved facial hair. It's far too early to judge visuals and I know that, it was just an observation since I was surprised that others were fans of the graphics. I agree that graphics need not be 2K10's focus either... they've got plenty of more important things to work on... like making sure people can actually y'know, play Team Up without having to try 15 different times next year, for example.

Ok I got you now Stumble. I still like the facial look of the CAPS I've seen so far as they atleast look like human beings or someone you might see on the street compared to 2k9's. I'll leave the skin texture argument in your capable hands.

# 44 DC @ 08/04/09 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elev8rmuzik


	Maybe I'm assuming that it has to be derived from the same data. Both systems have to be set up to achieve a specific result, or else there'd be no reason to have a system. It can't be, "Well I'm just going to rate this guy a 75 because I like his shoes". There's got to be a method to it.

Forget it man. You aren't meant to understand

# 45 jmood88 @ 08/04/09 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stumbleweed


	NINJAK2 -- yeah, I only mentioned it because other people had specifically mentioned how nice the CAF models looked. I know it's an unfair comparison to look at some random CAP vs that Melo screenshot Live put out, but I was just saying that the skin textures looked really weak and it looks exactly like 2K9 minus the improved facial hair. It's far too early to judge visuals and I know that, it was just an observation since I was surprised that others were fans of the graphics. I agree that graphics need not be 2K10's focus either... they've got plenty of more important things to work on... like making sure people can actually y'know, play Team Up without having to try 15 different times next year, for example.

That player did not look like 2k9 at all, it looked like a guy from College Hoops.

# 46 elev8rmuzik @ 08/04/09 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican


	Forget it man. You aren't meant to understand

Damn. Like that?

Maybe you just don't know how to describe what you think you understand.

# 47 Stumbleweed @ 08/04/09 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmood88


	That player did not look like 2k9 at all, it looked like a guy from College Hoops.

Heh, good call... wasn't 2K9 real player quality. More like 2K9's CAPs with better facial hair or CH2K8's normal models.

elev8rmuzik: Even if the 2K Insider sat down and looked at some box score stats, detailed shot charts, 82games.com data, etc. and then said based on that data "Rose is an average-to-good off-hand scorer for a PG" and then assigns him a 75, that doesn't mean that it is corresponding to other player's ratings within the global system.

Something like DNA where literally every single play of the NBA season is cataloged, analyzed, and placed in categories that are automatically converted into ratings for those specific skills is something entirely different. The key is that the global rankings are based on the same criteria and everything is purely data-driven. It's totally out of the hands of a human, which means that it's bias-free and based entirely on logic/math/data.

To me, that's a far superior system for rating players in a videogame... but some people like the "human touch" and the ability to make changes not based solely on the data... I'm not one of those.

Anyway, hope that clarified things... don't want this to turn into yet another "2k does this and EA does that" thread... I'm excited about both games but I do really hope that 2K gets something better worked up in regards to ratings, especially since they added these other ratings that are more complex and even more subjective.

# 48 Fiasco West @ 08/04/09 03:58 PM

This is interesting.

Why is 2k limiting what you can upload? To me it seems like Career mode has something to do with online, otherwise why do they care if you abuse the system?

I thought when this was announced we'd be able to create how many we'd like, save it on the HDD, then load them up on our game. Thought it would be purely solo, but it makes me think they have another idea for this when they talk about uploading your player to their servers.

Excited to find out more about this game in general.

# 49 HiTEqMETHOD @ 08/04/09 04:06 PM

While I love NBA2k and am very happy to see the CAP improved I'm not spending money on a feature that should be in the game for free. That's one of my biggest gripes with EA is they recently starting charging for stuff that used to be or should be free. TeamBuilder is basically create-a-team and even though you technically don't have to pay for it the only way to use it is by buying the game new, or if you get it used or rent it you have to purchase the content through DLC. EA does this kind of stuff with pretty much all of their sports games now and don't want to see 2k start either. Stuff like that is not right.

What has me worried though is, has anyone seen the features list yet? I know 2k is being tight lipped but I just want to make sure that this new DLC isn't taking CAP's space. I still want my create-a-player option in game for free since I payed $63 for the game already, or atleast the option to edit incoming draft prospects like usual but with this beefed up system.

# 50 elev8rmuzik @ 08/04/09 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stumbleweed


	Heh, good call... wasn't 2K9 real player quality. More like 2K9's CAPs with better facial hair or CH2K8's normal models. elev8rmuzik: Even if the 2K Insider sat down and looked at some box score stats, detailed shot charts, 82games.com data, etc. and then said based on that data "Rose is an average-to-good off-hand scorer for a PG" and then assigns him a 75, that doesn't mean that it is corresponding to other player's ratings within the global system. Something like DNA where literally every single play of the NBA season is cataloged, analyzed, and placed in categories that are automatically converted into ratings for those specific skills is something entirely different. The key is that the global rankings are based on the same criteria and everything is purely data-driven. It's totally out of the hands of a human, which means that it's bias-free and based entirely on logic/math/data. To me, that's a far superior system for rating players in a videogame... but some people like the "human touch" and the ability to make changes not based solely on the data... I'm not one of those.

Right on for the explaination Stumbleweed. Good to see everybody doesn't talk out of their *** around here.

So it's not so much the actual application of the data that people agree/disagree with (depending on which game we're speaking of), it's the method in which the actual data is collected and I guess the data itself that's the jump off point for most people.

I mean regardless of the system, the devs could apply the data in a way that would make a 0 rated guy = God Mode if they wanted to.

# 51 Stumbleweed @ 08/04/09 04:40 PM

Yeah exactly, which is why I said that DNA isn't automatically a better system in practice, simply because the developers could implement the data all wrong and then you're left with a game that plays nothing like the real NBA even though all the stats and data are 100% legit..

It's still ultimately in the devs hands to make the ratings play out the way they ideally should, but I think that DNA in general is a much more solid base for a ratings system because it's so number-heavy and there's just SO MUCH data, all of which is handled by computers before it even gets into human hands... If 2K really elaborated on how and why their ratings are what they are, what data they use as source material, etc. it would help clarify things... I can't recall in my years on this forum as a 2K b-ball fiend ever seeing a dev sit here and explain all of the ratings and where the numbers actually come from. The 2K Insider's ham-handed and often incorrect explanations were the closest thing we've had on that front, and clearly the ratings heads here weren't much of a fan of him haha... just seems like he's ball-parking ratings based off recent play, which was sort of the idea... but that's simply not enough for the realistic NBA heads who want answers and data to back it up.

# 52 HeavenlyTouch @ 08/04/09 04:58 PM

Synergy gives Live a huge advantage.

The ratings will be right on since every single piece of data is categorized. All Live has to do is make the animations and make the player follow suit to what they are good at. The DNA system can make AI that much better than a guy deciding "ok Artest shot x amount of 3's and made x amount of 3's, and based on watching him, he's a pretty good 3 point shooter, so I'm going to give him an 89" that is completely flawed, since our opinions are all different, subjective, and biased.

# 53 NINJAK2 @ 08/04/09 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeavenlyTouch


	Synergy gives Live a huge advantage. The ratings will be right on since every single piece of data is categorized. All Live has to do is make the animations and make the player follow suit to what they are good at. The DNA system can make AI that much better than a guy deciding "ok Artest shot x amount of 3's and made x amount of 3's, and based on watching him, he's a pretty good 3 point shooter, so I'm going to give him an 89" that is completely flawed, since our opinions are all different, subjective, and biased.

I agree. I think that if they looked at your 3pt analogy and applied a rating based on % (ex: 45%= 90) and not just some random "I think he is a great shooter" rating, people may be a little more accepting of the ratings in 2k.

I personally think these games need to go the APF route and stop using a number ratings system. There is nothing funnier to me than hearing people argue that so in so should be a 86 overall, not a 89..Do you think players really evaluate themselves like that. Lebron on Kobe: "Man kobe is one of the toughest to defend in the game. With his 91 handle, 73 pass, 97 midrange, and 92 dunk he is a threat from everywhere on the floor."

Outside of shooting percentages and tendencies, no numbers should exist. Break all the other categories down into labels such as horrible,below average, average, above average, superior or something along those lines.

# 54 franzis @ 08/04/09 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NINJAK2


	Outside of shooting percentages and tendencies, no numbers should exist. Break all the other categories down into labels such as horrible,below average, average, above average, superior or something along those lines.

Actually you already got something like this in 2k9
I mean the secondary rating system (A+, A, B, etc.)

# 55 Stumbleweed @ 08/04/09 05:49 PM

Except that's just there for association mode to make scouting have a point... otherwise it's just correlated to the number ratings underneath those ratings, which are actually driving the game...

# 56 blacksun @ 08/04/09 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NINJAK2


	Outside of shooting percentages and tendencies, no numbers should exist. Break all the other categories down into labels such as horrible,below average, average, above average, superior or something along those lines.

Choosing from a set of labels is no different than using a number, except you have dramatically reduced the number of possible values, which would make it harder to differentiate players. I don't see how that would be an improvement.

# 57 NINJAK2 @ 08/04/09 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blacksun


	Choosing from a set of labels is no different than using a number, except you have dramatically reduced the number of possible values, which would make it harder to differentiate players. I don't see how that would be an improvement.

Is there really a difference between a guy with a 73 handle and a guy with a 71? The only real difference you see between players is when you start dealing with 10-20+ point differentials anyway. I just hate the whole whining over ratings that starts once they are finally released in any sports game. APF simple approach did a great job imo of seperating players without a massive scale imo. When you see experts or scouts breaking down skill sets of players in hoop or football they use terms like great hands or below average post game anyway not numbers. I don't hate the numbers system I just dislike the issues they can raise with people in the forums.

I'm getting off topic in this thread so please respond with a pm if you need to. peace.

# 58 rgp913 @ 08/04/09 07:04 PM

I just hope all the screenshots reflect the new CAP system and not just this DLC...Maybe I'm

but I've been waiting so many years for a decent CAP and finally think we might have one...

# 59 Mo_Magic @ 08/04/09 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NINJAK2


	Is there really a difference between a guy with a 73 handle and a guy with a 71? The only real difference you see between players is when you start dealing with 10-20+ point differentials anyway. I just hate the whole whining over ratings that starts once they are finally released in any sports game. APF simple approach did a great job imo of seperating players without a massive scale imo. When you see experts or scouts breaking down skill sets of players in hoop or football they use terms like great hands or below average post game anyway not numbers. I don't hate the numbers system I just dislike the issues they can raise with people in the forums. I'm getting off topic in this thread so please respond with a pm if you need to. peace.

APF had a numerical rating system, it was just hardcoded into the game so you couldn't see it.

As far as numerical ratings, they DO have a huge effect, but the range for which these ratings could play out was just too small. 50-99 is a 49 point scale, so it's hard to differentiate an average guards ballhandling(like in the example you posted; around a 74) from a good guard ballhandling(anywhere from 80-85). The differential in points was just too small for it to matter and translate onto the court.

Thankfully, this year we are working with a 74 point scale(25-99), that will allow us roster makers to make even more of a difference between the players.

There should literally be no need of tiers and classes and abilities if the players attributes are done right and accurately reflect the players ability so that the creme of the crop plays different than a role player.

I know in my game most role players will be 60-70, with the very good role players being 70-76. Then, I'll have the all stars and superstars. That gives me a full 23 overall points(should I need it) to differentiate the stars, and, with MY average players being in the 65 area, there will be tons of difference between them and the very few 90's, 85's, or 80's in the league..

It's really, really huge that the ratings are being expanded this year... and I think people are going to enjoy it a lot.

# 60 23 @ 08/05/09 01:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 23


	Quote:Look for more on the game in the coming weeks, and an exclusive look at the full version of NBA 2K10 this Wednesday.

Wednesday is a callin!

« Previous 1 234 Next »

More Links

NBA 2K10 Draft Combine: 2K's DLC Gamble (Gamespot)