So No Steve Nash in NBA 2K17

[dilladawg4]

Re: So No Steve Nash in NBA 2K17

This is an absolute joke.

Almost at the point now where I'm not even going to bother getting 2k17.

First the Kings, then they removed the 85 sixers, now without Nash it's almost a cert they'll remove the Suns and Mavs.

Nope. No thanks 2k.

Unless you can add more teams instead of removing them, I don't think I want to give you my cash, seeing as I only buy this game for the classic teams.

uhhhhh...You're joking right? Why do people act as if they're not buying the every year for some ridiculous reason? EVERY YEAR, the same thing.

[daveberg]

Re: So No Steve Nash in NBA 2K17

Pippen is ****ing broke. Of anyone I'd expect him to get every cent he can.

Of course he isn't blameless for blowing his money but he was also criminally underpaid every year he played for the Bulls. Ron freaking Harper got paid more than he did.

As for Jordan, yes I'm sure there's a standard major fee for his likeness but 2K is a special case because he needs to be in 2K to keep his name relevant among teenagers who happen to be his bigger consumer base for his shoes. I'd be shocked if he got paid that much money when he sells more shoes for being in the game.

I wouldn't be too quick for jumping to blame guy for not being in the game. We don't know each individual circumstance and we don't know how much 2K has in their budget to get these guys. For all we know the money that would have landed Barkley and Webber went to Kareem.

I see your point with Pippen, most definitely agree but Jordan isn't struggling for cash, guy pretty much earned nearly 100 mil last year according to Forbes - he could drop out of 2k tomorrow, I'm sure he'd still be earning HUGE money.

I just don't get the logic behind the players and their choices not to accept money for pretty much doing NOTHING. 'Here, have thousands of dollars - you don't have to do anything, just let us use your likeness in a video game'. CHA CHING.

That's like someone coming up to you at work (or school for you youngers here) and saying , here, take 500 dollars so we can use your face in a poster. You're not going to say no, because it's EASY money. (Unless the poster is using your likeness to promote STD awareness or something equally grim)

For the players that get bent out of shape over Jordan's pay - well, you should've had a better career and been more 'like Mike' and you may have received a better rate......

uhhhhh...You're joking right? Why do people act as if they're not buying the every year for some ridiculous reason? EVERY YEAR, the same thing.

Dude, what's ridiculous to you, is important to someone else. We've all got our reasons for wanting the game. If it's not up to the standards we expect, we don't buy it. We're not all sheep and go out buying a product we're unhappy with every year just because it's 2k.

I skipped 2k14 because of how grim the legends looked/played, if we get anymore legends related bad news, then 2k17 is gonna get passed on, too.

Some of us literally only buy the game to play with the classic teams.

[Kstat]

Re: So No Steve Nash in NBA 2K17

Technically they players are getting paid for the name they made for themselves over decades of hard work. It isn't like they can put anybody in the game and sell extra copies. So that isn't a fair analogy. If I'm a player and I spent most of my life building myself into a brand that people would pay money to use in a video game, maybe I would put a price tag on that and maybe I wouldn't, but I can see why some players do. They're not "getting money for doing nothing." A company is using their hard earned name and likeness to make money.

Rasheed Wallace for whatever reason backed out when they obviously thought they had him. It murdered my 2 favorite historic additions last season, the 00 Blazers and 04 Pistons. But I don't blame Rasheed for that. He doesn't owe me ****. Things just didn't work out is all, for whatever reason that nobody but Rasheed and 2K knows. I'm not going to judge the guy because I'm sad about a video game.

[daveberg]

Re: So No Steve Nash in NBA 2K17

Technically they players are getting paid for the name they made for themselves over decades of hard work. It isn't like they can put anybody in the game and sell extra copies. So that isn't a fair analogy. If I'm a player and I spent most of my life building myself into a brand that people would pay money to use in a video game, maybe I would put a price tag on that and maybe I wouldn't, but I can see why some players do. They're not "getting money for doing nothing." A company is using their hard earned name and likeness to make money.

Rasheed Wallace for whatever reason backed out when they obviously thought they had him. It murdered my 2 favorite historic additions last season, the 00 Blazers and 04 Pistons. But I don't blame Rasheed for that. He doesn't owe me ****. Things just didn't work out is all, for whatever reason that nobody but Rasheed and 2K knows. I'm not going to judge the guy because I'm sad about a video game.

I will.

He ruined my gaming entertainment, so I'm moving over to Live now.

[Clutch0z]

Re: So No Steve Nash in NBA 2K17

Every year i get disappointed in the lack of Customizing and the Legends in the game....If the CAP menu was better and more detailed we would not have this problem.

IDK if it is confirmed you cant edit legend players ages ...but with the way the last few 2k games went I dont think they will let you do it this year either some unknown reason....sucks...

They added a way to customize a league so you can put the classic Jerseys/Courts/Logos on Retro teams if you decide to make a old school roster...which is great and all but its pointless if we cant use any of the Retro players with it.

Hope im wrong but i dont think i am with Steve Nash not even in the game

[Mauer4MVP]

Re: So No Steve Nash in NBA 2K17

I hadn't heard about the 76ers being removed.

Not having Moses Malone and Nash is super disappointing. I mean I'm super pumped for the game and it honestly may be the game I put the most ours into thus far into this generation, but it does impact my legends MyLeague a ton.

[scottyp180]

Re: So No Steve Nash in NBA 2K17

I see your point with Pippen, most definitely agree but Jordan isn't struggling for cash, guy pretty much earned nearly 100 mil last year according to Forbes - he could drop out of 2k tomorrow, I'm sure he'd still be earning HUGE money.

I just don't get the logic behind the players and their choices not to accept money for pretty much doing NOTHING. 'Here, have thousands of dollars - you don't have to do anything, just let us use your likeness in a video game'. CHA CHING.

That's like someone coming up to you at work (or school for you youngers here) and saying , here, take 500 dollars so we can use your face in a poster. You're not going to say no, because it's EASY money. (Unless the poster is using your likeness to promote STD awareness or something equally grim)

For the players that get bent out of shape over Jordan's pay - well, you should've had a better career and been more 'like Mike' and you may have received a better rate......



Dude, what's ridiculous to you, is important to someone else. We've all got our reasons for wanting the game. If it's not up to the standards we expect, we don't buy it. We're not all sheep and go out buying a product we're unhappy with every year just because it's 2k.

I skipped 2k14 because of how grim the legends looked/played, if we get anymore legends related bad news, then 2k17 is gonna get passed on, too.

Some of us literally only buy the game to play with the classic teams.

I'd venture to guess that the people that buy it every year aren't the ones that are unhappy with the product. For the most part people on here aren't unhappy with the game just because they have complaints. They just want every area of the game to be as good as possible. Like for m, i'm definitely not happy about missing legends or the lack of additional legend teams (also disappointed about no new hair styles for CAPs) but at the same time all the new improvements to gameplay and various other modes are more than enough to warrant a purchase for me.

It is completely possible to have complaints about a product but still thoroughly enjoy the product.

[daveberg]

Re: So No Steve Nash in NBA 2K17

I'd venture to guess that the people that buy it every year aren't the ones that are unhappy with the product. For the most part people on here aren't unhappy with the game just because they have complaints. They just want every area of the game to be as good as possible. Like for m, i'm definitely not happy about missing legends or the lack of additional legend teams (also disappointed about no new hair styles for CAPs) but at the same time all the new improvements to gameplay and various other modes are more than enough to warrant a purchase for me.

It is completely possible to have complaints about a product but still thoroughly enjoy the product.

Where as I agree, it depends on what you would view, personally, as a game breaker.

For guys like me who purchase 2k for no other reason than to play with the legends, this kind of thing really is a back breaker.

As I said to the other dude earlier, it maybe small fry to others, but to some, it's a big deal.

Anyhow, no amount of griping from my end or anyone like minded is going to change the situation, it is, sadly, what it is.

[dilladawg4]

Re: So No Steve Nash in NBA 2K17

I see your point with Pippen, most definitely agree but Jordan isn't struggling for cash, guy pretty much earned nearly 100 mil last year according to Forbes - he could drop out of 2k tomorrow, I'm sure he'd still be earning HUGE money.

I just don't get the logic behind the players and their choices not to accept money for pretty much doing NOTHING. 'Here, have thousands of dollars - you don't have to do anything, just let us use your likeness in a video game'. CHA CHING.

That's like someone coming up to you at work (or school for you youngers here) and saying , here, take 500 dollars so we can use your face in a poster. You're not going to say no, because it's EASY money. (Unless the poster is using your likeness to promote STD awareness or something equally grim)

For the players that get bent out of shape over Jordan's pay - well, you should've had a better career and been more 'like Mike' and you may have received a better rate......



Dude, what's ridiculous to you, is important to someone else. We've all got our reasons for wanting the game. If it's not up to the standards we expect, we don't buy it. We're not all sheep and go out buying a product we're unhappy with every year just because it's 2k.

I skipped 2k14 because of how grim the legends looked/played, if we get anymore legends related bad news, then 2k17 is gonna get passed on, too.

Some of us literally only buy the game to play with the classic teams.

Yeah,ok...my point is that people formulate an excuse EVERY year...wow...I think I just had an epiphany. These forums are largely used to complain and gripe about these games annually. I usually dont bother getting on forums because I see the same comments EVERY year. For the record, I'm one of those "SHEEP" who gives NBA LIVE a chance EVERY year just because I like alternatives also nastalgia. Those non-sheep who constantly have issues with 2K...theres always next year (nba live after new year edition)

[BluFu]

Re: So No Steve Nash in NBA 2K17

I wouldn't be too quick for jumping to blame guy for not being in the game. We don't know each individual circumstance and we don't know how much 2K has in their budget to get these guys. For all we know the money that would have landed Barkley and Webber went to Kareem.

And all that money should be used to work on giving us the WWE CAP Creator

[23]

Re: So No Steve Nash in NBA 2K17

Rofl @ MJ needing 2k to stay relevant.

[VinsanityLives]

Re: So No Steve Nash in NBA 2K17

I really wish the players' union or the Hall of Fame would allow digital distribution rights to its members' likenesses in perpetuity in association with NBA video games...or something like that (I'm not a lawyer).

But that's the way it is.

And situations like this are part of what we have to stomach when we demand entire teams.

If you ask me, we should just go the 2K3 route, where it has teams full of stars of a certain decade...

...or, go Madden's route, and have them in the game as ROOKIES, so we can insert them onto teams for MyLeague or whatever, and resolve the question "What if Mikan/Wilt/Jordan/Olajuwon/etc. played in today's NBA?"

I don't need end-of-the-bench guys very few people care about. I don't need entire teams--that just makes the missing players that much more noticeable! Just get us the big ones. I'm fine with that.

Idk I gotta disagree, the full teams are way better and great. The starting five plus key bench guys are important if you're into the retro.

For all the teams they have now, losing Nash sucks but there's still plenty of retro teams to go around.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[xman2k]

Re: So No Steve Nash in NBA 2K17

Forget Nash, give me 11 Mavs with Cardinal. Also where is Bernard King Knicks?? Has any Bernard King team been in a 2K game yet??

[JJRuelz]

Re: So No Steve Nash in NBA 2K17

might as well take out that suns team if you are not going to have him

Or they could replace them with the shaq team, it's nearly Identical.

[Jrocc23]

Re: So No Steve Nash in NBA 2K17

Hopefully they don't take out his FT animation. At least name it as a numbered FT.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk