Eye Candy or Gameplay?

[Se7enth_Sinn]

From all the reviews I've read about this game it seems like its getting crazy love because of all the Eye Candy. All the stuff to look at... Lots and lots of stuff, throwbacks, menu, pre and post game and they say wow... But me, I'll trade in all that Eye Candy to be able to make a bounce pass, make a layup, block or prevent a 3 point shot, take a charge, rebound, play my Crew with my Crew, play online and oh make a layup. All the eye candy in the world don't mean s**t if you undress the chick and she's got the body of a 90 year old woman.

[Mos1ted]

Re: Eye Candy or Gameplay?

That's what I miss about last gen: gameplay came first. Sure, you had games such as NFL 2K5 that had an emphasis on presentation and graphics, but those things didn't come at the expense of gameplay.

Having been on OS for nine years, it's hilarious how cyclical this board can be. Each year, a new sports game comes out, and the early impressions are always favorable. Then, after about two weeks or so, those favorable impressions turned into critical ones, and the flaws of the game really start to show. You have a handful of members who vow not to buy the next version, only for the game to sell more than it did the previous year.

This is what the lack of competition in sports game does. It makes you settle for games that you probably wouldn't had you had an alternative.

NBA 2K12 is not a horrible video game, but at this point, it's a horrible simulation basketball game. When online competitors with zero basketball knowledge are able to use some of the most ridiculous tactics and be successful, you know that fundamentals within the gameplay engine are missing.

[ffpp]

Re: Eye Candy or Gameplay?

That's what I miss about last gen: gameplay came first. Sure, you had games such as NFL 2K5 that had an emphasis on presentation and graphics, but those things didn't come at the expense of gameplay.

Having been on OS for nine years, it's hilarious how cyclical this board can be. Each year, a new sports game comes out, and the early impressions are always favorable. Then, after about two weeks or so, those favorable impressions turned into critical ones, and the flaws of the game really start to show. You have a handful of members who vow not to buy the next version, only for the game to sell more than it did the previous year.

This is what the lack of competition in sports game does. It makes you settle for games that you probably wouldn't had you had an alternative.

NBA 2K12 is not a horrible video game, but at this point, it's a horrible simulation basketball game. When online competitors with zero basketball knowledge are able to use some of the most ridiculous tactics and be successful, you know that fundamentals within the gameplay engine are missing.

I want to disagree that with last-gen games gameplay mostly came first.
I don't really know about 2k because I never had a PS or XBox and play NBA 2k only since 2k9 (first PC release). But I can tell you that there where many sports games before that put more emphasis on presentation rather than gameplay.

I also cannot say that 2k made a blant presentation-first product with 2k12. They obviously tried to fix some gamplay issues from 2k11, like to easy drives, too many dunks etc but just didn't fully succeed. That's why there are AI players with unhumanlike reaction times and such.
Also, the new live ball physics are a step in the right direction but also created some weird issues like people dribbling the ball onto their own feet or passes getting deflected by people's backs. (At least one can imagine such issues being created by a new and complex feature like live ball physics).

And don't want to list everything but I think its too easy to say they didn't care about gameplay with 2k12. Just look at the post game which got so much love and plays so much smoother than before.
I'm not denying that there are a lot of things left to fix with this game, though.

[Mos1ted]

Re: Eye Candy or Gameplay?

I want to disagree that with last-gen games gameplay mostly came first.
I don't really know about 2k because I never had a PS or XBox and play NBA 2k only since 2k9 (first PC release). But I can tell you that there where many sports games before that put more emphasis on presentation rather than gameplay.

I also cannot say that 2k made a blant presentation-first product with 2k12. They obviously tried to fix some gamplay issues from 2k11, like to easy drives, too many dunks etc but just didn't fully succeed. That's why there are AI players with unhumanlike reaction times and such.
Also, the new live ball physics are a step in the right direction but also created some weird issues like people dribbling the ball onto their own feet or passes getting deflected by people's backs. (At least one can imagine such issues being created by a new and complex feature like live ball physics).

And don't want to list everything but I think its too easy to say they didn't care about gameplay with 2k12. Just look at the post game which got so much love and plays so much smoother than before.
I'm not denying that there are a lot of things left to fix with this game, though.

I'm not saying that gameplay is being completely ignored, but from a marketing standpoint, presentation and glitz are definitely being pushed as the go-to features for new games rather than the gameplay. Madden, for example, was all about gameplay enhancements year to year on Xbox/PS2. It wasn't until this gen that presentation finally became somewhat of a focus for them. In fact, the knock on Madden when compared to 2K football was that 2K football always had better presentation. But Madden fans played Madden because of gameplay above all else.

[spankdatazz22]

Re: Eye Candy or Gameplay?

This is what the lack of competition in sports game does. It makes you settle for games that you probably wouldn't had you had an alternative.

NBA 2K12 is not a horrible video game, but at this point, it's a horrible simulation basketball game. When online competitors with zero basketball knowledge are able to use some of the most ridiculous tactics and be successful, you know that fundamentals within the gameplay engine are missing.

Give me a break. I don't play online much but have some (I think I'm 6-3) so maybe I shouldn't be commenting. But have problems with your views. One, you seem to be basing your "[2K12]'s a horrible basketball simulation game" view on how people play the game online which imo is ridiculous. By FAR most of the people that purchase this game aren't going to take the time to really learn it. Most of the people here don't take the time to really learn it. The game has levels of depth we haven't seen in another basketball game, perhaps other sports games. I don't know the game inside/out so I can't say what a really knowledgeable player might do to a cheeser. But from what I've seen really knowledgeable players can more often than not win out against people using cheesey tactics. I don't know your playstyle but people that do the equivalent of the British during the Revolutionary War and stand right in front of their opponent to get shot - and not adapt to an opponent's tactics - should lose.

You need to accept you're in the minority. People like you try to use the "game's not SIM" label as some derogatory term because you want to force everyone to play like you play. While we can debate 2K's execution, I don't think anyone can question their intention. imo they have tried to deliver one of the deepest sports games to date and gives gamers a lot of options in terms of making the game as sim or arcade as the gamer would like. Views like yours are very short-sighted and imo would hurt the game overall with this narrow view of how things should be.

[spankdatazz22]

Re: Eye Candy or Gameplay?

Madden, for example, was all about gameplay enhancements year to year on Xbox/PS2. It wasn't until this gen that presentation finally became somewhat of a focus for them. In fact, the knock on Madden when compared to 2K football was that 2K football always had better presentation. But Madden fans played Madden because of gameplay above all else.

Blatantly false. Madden 2004 was all about Michael Vick - they tailored the gameplay around playing as Vick, and it yielded people being able to score 70+pts a game regularly in 5min quarters. It was so out of whack even John Madden himself famously said he disliked what the game had become. The next year w/Ray Lewis on the cover you had LBs and DBs jumping out of shoes and socks to knock down/intercept passes which kept scores down. In both cases people loved Madden's gameplay. But even the best Madden players admit that there's a big difference to playing football, and playing Madden. What Madden (and NCAA) had that people loved was it's system of movement and momentum. They were also very deep games in terms of gameplay options and franchise depth. But trying to pass off 2K as only having better presentation is again short-sighted; 2K's system of player interaction (they were the first to implement a real QB pocket), tackling, tiered-playcalling system, etc. made it far more than just "eye candy".

Both games had strengths/weaknesses. But neither was all gameplay/no fluff or vice versa. Trying to portray 2K12 as mostly eye candy and little gameplay substance is equally as silly.

[Mos1ted]

Re: Eye Candy or Gameplay?

Give me a break. I don't play online much but have some (I think I'm 6-3) so maybe I shouldn't be commenting. But have problems with your views. One, you seem to be basing your "[2K12]'s a horrible basketball simulation game" view on how people play the game online which imo is ridiculous. By FAR most of the people that purchase this game aren't going to take the time to really learn it. Most of the people here don't take the time to really learn it. The game has levels of depth we haven't seen in another basketball game, perhaps other sports games. I don't know the game inside/out so I can't say what a really knowledgeable player might do to a cheeser. But from what I've seen really knowledgeable players can more often than not win out against people using cheesey tactics. I don't know your playstyle but people that do the equivalent of the British during the Revolutionary War and stand right in front of their opponent to get shot - and not adapt to an opponent's tactics - should lose.

You need to accept you're in the minority. People like you try to use the "game's not SIM" label as some derogatory term because you want to force everyone to play like you play. While we can debate 2K's execution, I don't think anyone can question their intention. imo they have tried to deliver one of the deepest sports games to date and gives gamers a lot of options in terms of making the game as sim or arcade as the gamer would like. Views like yours are very short-sighted and imo would hurt the game overall with this narrow view of how things should be.

Like I said to you in the other thread, until you download the patch and play online, keep your opinion about my opinion to yourself. We're literally discussing apples and oranges here. Your impression of online is based on whatever version you're playing right this moment. My impression of online is based on the latest version from 2K Sports, a version you haven't been able to play yet, I'm assuming. I had no problem with the game online before the 1.03 patch. Now I do. Before the 1.03 patch, I was like 9 and 2 in online quick games, and those 2 losses were from buzzer beaters. Since the patch, I'm like 5 and 5, including 3 blowout losses. Obviously, something has changed and it's not my "stick skills."

And when I'm evaluating a game's "simness" online, I'm referring to how much success a cheeser can have versus a "simmer." If a guy wants to cheese, but I can still beat him 10 times out of 10 playing actual basketball, then by all means cheese away because you're only hurting yourself. I'm not an idiot. I'm not going to fault the game for how the cheeser chooses to play.

However, if the cheeser is able to spam steal and play frantic defense, ball hog with his best player, and leave my guys open literally every possession and still win, then I have a problem with that. That's when I do fault the game because those type of tactics shouldn't win out against superior basketball knowledge and execution. I'd like to see the Lakers try that against the Timberwolves. The Timberwolves would run them out the gym, and I think we all can agree on that. But that's not the case now since the patch. But, wait, you actually have to play it first to judge for yourself...

Don't believe online has gotten worse since the patch? Just go to the 2K Forums and see for yourself. You think people complain here? It doesn't even hold a candle to what goes on over there.

[Mos1ted]

Re: Eye Candy or Gameplay?

Blatantly false. Madden 2004 was all about Michael Vick - they tailored the gameplay around playing as Vick, and it yielded people being able to score 70+pts a game regularly in 5min quarters. It was so out of whack even John Madden himself famously said he disliked what the game had become. The next year w/Ray Lewis on the cover you had LBs and DBs jumping out of shoes and socks to knock down/intercept passes which kept scores down. In both cases people loved Madden's gameplay. But even the best Madden players admit that there's a big difference to playing football, and playing Madden. What Madden (and NCAA) had that people loved was it's system of movement and momentum. They were also very deep games in terms of gameplay options and franchise depth. But trying to pass off 2K as only having better presentation is again short-sighted; 2K's system of player interaction (they were the first to implement a real QB pocket), tackling, tiered-playcalling system, etc. made it far more than just "eye candy".

Both games had strengths/weaknesses. But neither was all gameplay/no fluff or vice versa. Trying to portray 2K12 as mostly eye candy and little gameplay substance is equally as silly.

Me and my ambiguous statements...I need to work on that.

Nowhere am I implying that Madden had superior gameplay or that their gameplay improvements were beneficial to replicating real football. I'm saying that when it came to year to year improvements, their focus was mostly on gameplay changes (not always for the better) and not presentation.

[wepr3]

Re: Eye Candy or Gameplay?

From all the reviews I've read about this game it seems like its getting crazy love because of all the Eye Candy. All the stuff to look at... Lots and lots of stuff, throwbacks, menu, pre and post game and they say wow... But me, I'll trade in all that Eye Candy to be able to make a bounce pass, make a layup, block or prevent a 3 point shot, take a charge, rebound, play my Crew with my Crew, play online and oh make a layup. All the eye candy in the world don't mean s**t if you undress the chick and she's got the body of a 90 year old woman.

No, I don't feel that way about 2k12. Yeah, it's pretty, but when I take her dress off, she's at least a MILF.

Seriously though, like most people, I like great graphics, but gameplay is most important. For instance, I've been playing CH2k8 for a long time, but had gotten tired of it. I thought about picking up NCAA Basketball 10 - but, while much prettier than CH, the gameplay was atrocious IMO. That truly was finding a 90 year old in a cheerleaders body.

Anyway, regarding 2k12, I think the play calling alone makes this game a step above any bball game I've ever played. I'm not crazy about the WAY you pick the plays, but I think that's because it's new and I'm still getting used to it. But the plays themselves are a thing of beauty. The player movement and the passing options are so deep, I just am amazed at the number of choices I have running 1 play.

Sliders have helped the some of the wonky passing issues for me, and I'm hoping that 2k will tune it even tighter with the upcoming patch.

I don't play online, so if you're opinions are based on that side, I can't speak to it. But playing the cpu or another (local) human has been a great overall experience for me.

[spankdatazz22]

Re: Eye Candy or Gameplay?

Like I said to you in the other thread, until you download the patch and play online, keep your opinion about my opinion to yourself.

lol please. You're on a message board. If you don't want comments to be debated then don't comment in the first place. You were complaining a ton about the game pre-patch, and you're still complaining I guess because they didn't do exactly what you felt they should do. What I said wasn't based on the patch, it was about your overall view of the game "being a horrible simulation game" as you called it - seemingly just because of how people choose to play online. And you seemingly disregarding everything else.

If you're ONLY talking about how the game plays online, then you should specify that because I'd agree with you. But with the caveat that there's no way ANY game can govern how people choose to play. And I'd still disagree with the overall premise of the thread that 2K12 is more eye candy than gameplay. It's another one of those situations where the community begs developers to take well-rounded approaches to developing games, then some in the community do a 180 and [essentially] say they should only focus on gameplay. It's far too narrow a view.

[Mos1ted]

Re: Eye Candy or Gameplay?

lol please. You're on a message board. If you don't want comments to be debated then don't comment in the first place. You were complaining a ton about the game pre-patch, and you're still complaining I guess because they didn't do exactly what you felt they should do. What I said wasn't based on the patch, it was about your overall view of the game "being a horrible simulation game" as you called it - seemingly just because of how people choose to play online. And you seemingly disregarding everything else.

If you're ONLY talking about how the game plays online, then you should specify that because I'd agree with you. But with the caveat that there's no way ANY game can govern how people choose to play. And I'd still disagree with the overall premise of the thread that 2K12 is more eye candy than gameplay. It's another one of those situations where the community begs developers to take well-rounded approaches to developing games, then some in the community do a 180 and [essentially] say they should only focus on gameplay. It's far too narrow a view.

The fact that I immediately referenced the online portion after saying that NBA 2K12 was a horrible representation of simulation basketball should let you know that I wasn't necessarily referring to offline.

Is the game perfect offline? No, but at least it's still simulation in my opinion. My main gripes with the game offline is due to the regression in some areas to previous versions, more specifically the passing and offensive movement for the user. It greatly hampers offensive execution in my opinion. However, offline flaws are easier to live with because of sliders.

Online, the game has a totally different set of problems, and they cannot be fixed with sliders.

And yes, I know I'm on a message board. I kinda figured that out when I joined the site nine years ago. But to disagree with someone's opinion without actually playing the same game as them is what I was referring to. For example, you will never hear me talk about or debate Battlefield 3 and MW3 with someone because I don't play those games. They aren't my cup of tea. If a person has a complaint about the game, who am I to argue and say their complaint is invalid? I have no first hand experience to offer them a rebuttal with.

And to address your last point about focusing on gameplay...

The reason why people feel gameplay isn't being addressed is because problems that have existed for years are still in the game. Other areas of the gameplay have regressed. The only part of the game that has consistently improved and not regress is the presentation. That's why people feel the way they feel. It's impossible to say that 2K hasn't addressed gameplay at all without using hyperbole. Anyone playing this game for a week can tell that improvements were made here and there. Personally, I judge a sports game based on how well they nail the fundamentals of its respective sport. Tell me if this is fundamental basketball to you:

- Players jump up for rebounds without boxing out and fighting for positions. Instead, rebounds are determined by who simply can jump the highest.

- The CPU defender knows exactly where you're going to go before you go there, whether it's passing or dribbling.

- The 1.03 patch fixed this, but players could hit contested shots like they were throwing rocks in the ocean.

- Defenders can magically catch up with players on the break despite being 4 to 5 steps behind.

- Animations sometimes delay or don't trigger for the user's offensive player, allowing the defense to recover to contest a shot or cut off a lane.

- The CPU can pass out of a shot or a double team without actually knowing where a teammate is (with perfect accuracy), but if the user tries the same thing, the ball is either bobbled on the catch, thrown out of bounds, or deflected/intercepted.

- Slower, less agile defenders are able to stay in stride against superior ballhandlers despite the ratings matchup

These are issues that weren't present before but are present now. Some apply online, but they all apply offline. So, in my opinion, people's complaints are valid. All we're asking for is balance within the engine. If you're going to punish the user for certain things, do the same for the CPU.

[kenny123123]

Re: Eye Candy or Gameplay?

I'm really getting sick and tired of people coming on here making threads on how bad 2k is its getting old now! The base of this game is better than any other basketball that ever came out, i know the mistakes this games has trust me i scream at my tv every time i play. i dont play online so i cant speak on that but you people really need to quit the 2k hate.

[Sundown]

While I agree with you mostly on fundamental gameplay issues, Mos1ted, I don't think 2k over focused on presentation over gameplay. In fact most of our problems this year is because they tried to change or add gameplay mechanics for the better, but they weren't fully tested with the big picture in mind. The whole revamped post play and attempt at live ball fixes and the massive extension of plays that really only appeal to hardcore simmers is proof of that. Even the 3 point problem and delayed lead passing that some hate are proof of that. 2k actually took a step backwards in some presentation areas, like getting rid of sweat reflections. Also if they were slaves to presentation, all the team colors would be right and we would never have lost 2k10's walk dribble animations.

If we just got 2k11 with improved graphics, the game would play better out of the box. The issue seems to be something with their development schedule and testing, and how they evaluate whether their changes are actually playing like a sim online and off. That's why 2k games have eventually played much better after the last patch. Also, they need to upgrade whatever their "Insider" process is. If he's a single person, be doesn't understand basketball quite as much as plenty of 2k players do. If he's just a pseudonym for the gameplay team, they need to change up how they do things.

2k has implemented depth and nuance this year beyond what most of us asked for. They just need to fix the many new holes they've made. I think a real public beta, both offline and on, would really help. In the end, it's a process thing not a misplaced focus thing-- especially when most of the art and gameplay people can't do
the other's job.

Also I hardly think madden focuses on presentation. It still has huge gaps visually. It's been seven years since I've seriously looked at the game and I'm still hard pressed to see the improvements. Players still slide around and it still doesn't look like tv football. As I understand it, madden simply focuses on gimmick game modes and minor updates. What's funny is this is how games tend to look when they cater to those who want absolute control and favor "gameplay". They neither play or look like the real thing.

One thing I have to commend 2k on that's almost flawless presentation wise. The play by play commentary this year. That team is pushing limits and executing every year. Madden still sounds terrible today. We have five, count them, FIVE, real life NBA personalities as part of the commentary team, all of them with significant numbers of lines, and that's before we count David Stern and Adam Silver-- the DEPUTY commissioner that no one even really knows about. Madden can't even get one or two people to sound like they're watching a real game or even a video game.

[Mos1ted]

Re: Eye Candy or Gameplay?

While I agree with you mostly on fundamental gameplay issues, Mos1ted, I don't think 2k over focused on presentation over gameplay. In fact most of our problems this year is because they tried to change or add gameplay mechanics for the better, but they weren't fully tested with the big picture in mind. The whole revamped post play and attempt at live ball fixes and the massive extension of plays that really only appeal to hardcore simmers is proof of that. Even the 3 point problem and delayed lead passing that some hate are proof of that. 2k actually took a step backwards in some presentation areas, like getting rid of sweat reflections. Also if they were slaves to presentation, all the team colors would be right and we would never have lost 2k10's walk dribble animations.

If we just got 2k11 with improved graphics, the game would play better out of the box. The issue seems to be something with their development schedule and testing, and how they evaluate whether their changes are actually playing like a sim online and off. That's why 2k games have eventually played much better after the last patch. Also, they need to upgrade whatever their "Insider" process is. If he's a single person, be doesn't understand basketball quite as much as plenty of 2k players do. If he's just a pseudonym for the gameplay team, they need to change up how they do things.

2k has implemented depth and nuance this year beyond what most of us asked for. They just need to fix the many new holes they've made. I think a real public beta, both offline and on, would really help. In the end, it's a process thing not a misplaced focus thing-- especially when most of the art and gameplay people can't do
the other's job.

Also I hardly think madden focuses on presentation. It still has huge gaps visually. It's been seven years since I've seriously looked at the game and I'm still hard pressed to see the improvements. Players still slide around and it still doesn't look like tv football. As I understand it, madden simply focuses on gimmick game modes and minor updates. What's funny is this is how games tend to look when they cater to those who want absolute control and favor "gameplay". They neither play or look like the real thing.

One thing I have to commend 2k on that's almost flawless presentation wise. The play by play commentary this year. That team is pushing limits and executing every year. Madden still sounds terrible today. We have five, count them, FIVE, real life NBA personalities as part of the commentary team, all of them with significant numbers of lines, and that's before we count David Stern and Adam Silver-- the DEPUTY commissioner that no one even really knows about. Madden can't even get one or two people to sound like they're watching a real game or even a video game.

Completely agree with what you said.

I just wanted to reiterate to people that when I say Madden focuses on this and that, I'm not implying that they are doing it well LOL. I'm just saying that year-to-year improvement's perspective, it's obvious that more time was spent on this area versus that area.

[Sundown]

Beating a dead horse but here's one gamepjust change that's not just unbalanced but fundamentally problematic: slow passing and poor pass AI. It's fundamental to basketball and balancing the game around a subpar implementation is just all kinds of bad. Most of the new holes can be patched without much repercussion, but a lot of rebalancing might need to be made if the passing was improved. I hope it's not necessary and if it is, 2k does it anyway.


---
I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=33.946797,-118.407393