Why would you think blocking a dunk is realistic

[stillfeelme]

Re: Why would you think blocking a dunk is realistic

2K needs to take a look at 2K11 and sprinkle in the ability to protect the paint like that game. It doesn't have to be 100% 2K11 but we need some elements of that year's game. Dunking needs to have it's own shot quality feedback and attempting them too often with players in the wrong situation should result in misses or more contact animations, blocks turnovers, etc. The paint is the toughest place to score where defenders are just waiting in real life and dunking is so unrealistic this year. There is a reason why players "settle" for jumpers it is because they can't trigger a dunk over 2 players or finish at the rim over defenders with ease.

Some ideas on how to improve the paint

1. The defender and offense must have balance. Meaning I even as an elite blocker can't jump and block every dunk nor should an elite dunker be able to trigger an auto dunk animation as much as it can happen now. I should be punished by missing dunks or triggering contact layups more often than not. On the flip side as a blocker I shouldn't be able to jump and block every dunk. One way to implement this would be to make the block button and dunk stick a risk reward type situation the way you tweaked the stealing in 2K13 or bad things are going to happen.

2. Make more live ball blocking opportunities in the paint where timing a block matters. The elite shot blockers IRL wait until the ball is in the air and then jump to try to catch the block on the way up or meet at the summit. This would especially be true for players that want to take their PG's in the paint too often. If I jump too early I may draw a foul or I jump too late goaltending. This would make the user have to time their jumps to get the block and also it would make the guys that like to abuse the paint think twice. It also will make users not jump at everything.

3. Make the user use real life shot types when in the paint. Ex. If I want to get in the paint and finish with Wade over a center off the dribble. Then I should know to go to more floaters and Euro/hopsteps that can be altered or miss and make. I can't expect to be bailed out by a dunked on animation all the time. Nor should I expect that using hopsteps will bail me out as well. All of these animations for floaters hopsteps Euros should all have a block animation that goes along with it.

4. If it is possible make certain dunk animations require you to have a running start and then have certain dunks that can only be triggered when there is less defenders in the paint.

5. Just watching games the dunks that get blocked in real life occur more on standing dunk situatinos which makes since becuase the dunker doesn't jump as high on a standing vertical. Also a help defender can run and get a jump on the player on the way up. Hopefully you guys motion capture enough of these.

Lastly if this is too sim for the casual crowd give us the option to tweak the game to add these types of game situations in under special sliders. Therefore you can make the casual guys and the hadcore sim guys happy by slider adjustment.

sliders for perimeter blocking
sliders for paint blocking

videos for reference


<table style="width: 48pt; border-collapse: collapse;" border="0" cellSpacing="0" cellPadding="0" width="64"> <colgroup><col style="width: 48pt;" width="64"> <tbody><tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="border: 0px black; width: 48pt; height: 15pt; background-color: transparent;" height="20" width="64"><object width="560" height="315">


<embed height="315" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/4KF_5WfUXJc?version=3&hl=en_US" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always"></object>


<table style="width: 48pt; border-collapse: collapse;" border="0" cellSpacing="0" cellPadding="0" width="64"> <colgroup><col style="width: 48pt;" width="64"> <tbody><tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="border: 0px black; width: 48pt; height: 15pt; background-color: transparent;" height="20" width="64"><object width="560" height="315">


<embed height="315" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/yY9M-ajZ1S8?version=3&hl=en_US" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always"></object>


<table style="width: 48pt; border-collapse: collapse;" border="0" cellSpacing="0" cellPadding="0" width="64"> <colgroup><col style="width: 48pt;" width="64"> <tbody><tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="border: 0px black; width: 48pt; height: 15pt; background-color: transparent;" height="20" width="64"><object width="420" height="315">


<embed height="315" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="420" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Y3Vrj7mWKjM?version=3&hl=en_US" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always"></object>


<table style="width: 48pt; border-collapse: collapse;" border="0" cellSpacing="0" cellPadding="0" width="64"> <colgroup><col style="width: 48pt;" width="64"> <tbody><tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="border: 0px black; width: 48pt; height: 15pt; background-color: transparent;" height="20" width="64"><object width="560" height="315">


<embed height="315" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/G0oafn88huA?hl=en_US&version=3" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always"></object>


<table style="width: 48pt; border-collapse: collapse;" border="0" cellSpacing="0" cellPadding="0" width="64"> <colgroup><col style="width: 48pt;" width="64"> <tbody><tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="border: 0px black; width: 48pt; height: 15pt; background-color: transparent;" height="20" width="64"><object width="560" height="315">


<embed height="315" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/AOtCo9SosaE?version=3&hl=en_US" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always"></object>


<table style="width: 48pt; border-collapse: collapse;" border="0" cellSpacing="0" cellPadding="0" width="64"> <colgroup><col style="width: 48pt;" width="64"> <tbody><tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="border: 0px black; width: 48pt; height: 15pt; background-color: transparent;" height="20" width="64"><object width="560" height="315">


<embed height="315" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/VZ-_p6qnCnI?version=3&hl=en_US" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always"></object>

<table style="width: 48pt; border-collapse: collapse;" border="0" cellSpacing="0" cellPadding="0" width="64"> <colgroup><col style="width: 48pt;" width="64"> <tbody><tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="border: 0px black; width: 48pt; height: 15pt; background-color: transparent;" height="20" width="64"><object width="420" height="315">


<embed height="315" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="420" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Zd71EQFlBOA?hl=en_US&version=3" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always"></object></td> </tr></tbody></table></p></td> </tr></tbody></table></p></td> </tr></tbody></table></p></td> </tr></tbody></table>
</td> </tr></tbody></table></p></td> </tr></tbody></table></p></td> </tr></tbody></table></p>

[Ramboooo]

Re: Why would you think blocking a dunk is realistic

I do not believe there is a widespread belief or suggestion that blocked dunks should occur every time a defender has position. I also disagree with your notion that, "blocked dunks are so rare it's not even funny". To me, quadruple doubles are so rare it's not even funny. Blocked dunks are something that happens almost every night in the NBA. We remember the spectacular blocks (Maxiell on Chandler) but there's lower key dunk blocks happening everywhere, we just tend not to notice them as much (similar to many of the Drummond examples).

Unfortunately, NBA 2K13 most often does not account for the ability to block a dunk at all. If a shot blocking defender has an angle, good positioning, and has room and time to explode and that offensive player attempts a layup, 2K will often allow that defender to block or bother the shot. However, under the same defensive circumstances, if that offensive player initiates a dunk command, and that defender again correctly attempts to contest, they have nearly a 0% chance of blocking the dunk. Instead, the offensive player will very likely push the defender backward in midair, defying physics, then dunk the ball cleanly through the rim, perhaps with a foul.

I think the better question would be, why wouldn't you think blocking a dunk is realistic?

Already said before, never said it doesn't or shouldn't happen. But if you actually heard the complaints, one would think they expected a block every time. It shouldn't happen more than once a game. Doubt you see a blocked dunk more than once a game, if that.

[SPRINGS03]

Re: Why would you think blocking a dunk is realistic

I just want LeBron's ability to start his dunk animation from outside the paint to be removed from the game. I can live with everything else...

Honestly it's not just lebron. I've had instances where i'm using a player who is an ok dunker(say kobe bryant) and i've started driving into the paint, and i want to do a PULL UP JUMPSHOT. Buts sometimes it'll just make him run and dunk it in a canned animation over anyone. And i can always feel/tell when this animation starts. I don't care if i get an and 1 or score off of it, it's annoying and cheesy/arcadey. Let me control exactly what i want to do, i'm not trying to dunk all the time with kobe, that's not how he plays nowadays.

[Streaky McFloorburn]

Re: Why would you think blocking a dunk is realistic

Honestly it's not just lebron. I've had instances where i'm using a player who is an ok dunker(say kobe bryant) and i've started driving into the paint, and i want to do a PULL UP JUMPSHOT. Buts sometimes it'll just make him run and dunk it in a canned animation over anyone. And i can always feel/tell when this animation starts. I don't care if i get an and 1 or score off of it, it's annoying and cheesy/arcadey. Let me control exactly what i want to do, i'm not trying to dunk all the time with kobe, that's not how he plays nowadays.

You do have some control over this, just make sure you let go of turbo one step before you use the shot button/RS. You can't dunk w/o turbo. Might still get an animation you don't want, but at least it'll be a layup instead of a dunk. You could also change your dunk to a layup as soon as you take off.

[mango_prom]

Re: Why would you think blocking a dunk is realistic

It shouldn't happen more than once a game. Doubt you see a blocked dunk more than once a game, if that.

While I like this logic, it doesn't make much sense in the context of a basketball game aimed at casuals. Now personally, I'd love a game based on replicating stats of an NBA game with full 12 min quarters. But you won't sell this to all the "8KB24" and "DRoseftw"-kids.
So if you actually want to compare the frequency of blocked shots in 2k to a real game, you'd basically have to rebuild 2k14 from scratch.

And dunks in general, going by the "it should happen as often as in real life"-logic...here's a link with dunk attempts adjusted per 36 min for the 10/11 season. http://weaksideawareness.wordpress.c...ba-in-2010-11/

You'll notice that even superstars don't dunk more than 3 times on average over the course of a full game. According to these stats Kobe dunked one time every second game, with Lebron at 1,19 and Durant at 1,52.
Now take a random 2k13 game with 5 min quarters, less than half a full game. It would be realistic to have dunk attempts scaled down accordingly, leading to less blocks, too.
Now you can't expect attention to details like this from a company promoting a Jay-Z name tag as the biggest feature of their latest game.

But since you would like blocks happening as frequent as in real life, do you think the same way about dunks,points in the paint, fatigue in short online games, circus shots, spin dunks and alley oops?

[Streaky McFloorburn]

Re: Why would you think blocking a dunk is realistic

While I like this logic, it doesn't make much sense in the context of a basketball game aimed at casuals. Now personally, I'd love a game based on replicating stats of an NBA game with full 12 min quarters. But you won't sell this to all the "8KB24" and "DRoseftw"-kids.
So if you actually want to compare the frequency of blocked shots in 2k to a real game, you'd basically have to rebuild 2k14 from scratch.

And dunks in general, going by the "it should happen as often as in real life"-logic...here's a link with dunk attempts adjusted per 36 min for the 10/11 season. http://weaksideawareness.wordpress.c...ba-in-2010-11/

You'll notice that even superstars don't dunk more than 3 times on average over the course of a full game. According to these stats Kobe dunked one time every second game, with Lebron at 1,19 and Durant at 1,52.
Now take a random 2k13 game with 5 min quarters, less than half a full game. It would be realistic to have dunk attempts scaled down accordingly, leading to less blocks, too.
Now you can't expect attention to details like this from a company promoting a Jay-Z name tag as the biggest feature of their latest game.

But since you would like blocks happening as frequent as in real life, do you think the same way about dunks,points in the paint, fatigue in short online games, circus shots, spin dunks and alley oops?

I think the most important thing is not to create a game that will play out with realistic stats/shot types all the time, just one that allows you to earn them if both players (or player/CPU) are well matched and trying to emulate the real teams.

There are so many difficulty and slider combos for offline play, and even greater variability in player skill level and playstyles in both online and offline games. It's incredibly unrealistic for anyone to expect that anything other than 48 minute CPU vs. CPU matchups should consistently generate realistic NBA stats, even in a game that reached the ultimate "Sim" ideal. People tinkering with settings don't objectively make the game better, they subjectively improve their (and sometimes others') personal experience with it.

What we do have a universal right to expect though, is that players who have put in both a high quality and large quantity of practice with any specific iteration of the game, can be much more effective than players who haven't.

Is it indicative of poor design if a top player can dunk 20x in a game without getting blocked once on rookie difficulty, or by an opponent who is playing for the first time? Not likely. But if the reverse scenarios were true, that's probably a huge issue. Good design should teach the player to use the tools that are meant to be effective, and ignore the the ones that aren't. It ought to reward persistence and adaptation, and punish ignorance and obstinance. If there is a way to block dunks that you aren't aware of, that's ignorance - but as long as the game itself can teach you the proper method, it's not broken. If you're aware of a successful method but refuse to use it, that's obstinance, and the game should punish you for being stubborn. Only if the game truly has no option to control basic functions, or the discovery of the function is impossible through natural experimentation, should it be deemed faulty. Underperformance of a function is a personal, and not universal determination, even if 98% of players agree with you.

If people could be honest with themselves about where they fall on those spectrums, and whether their playstyle is conducive to certain outcomes, there would probably be a lot more constructive criticism instead of complaining, and the developers might be able to make constant improvement rather than adding/taking things out based on the loudest voices, right or wrong.

If someone is trying to solve a problem, it doesn't help to have people simply telling you they don't like it. Nor does it help to say "2k11 was so much better!" People complained about the bumping on the perimeter in 2k11 way more than they praised it, so it was taken out. Block animations were super canned looking (and sometimes superhuman, with players occasionally getting their chest above the rim), not to mention there were just as many clipping issues, so they chose to try something different. It's possible that they haven't found a way to make those 2k11 animations play out in an organic looking way, so they're trying to figure that part out before we get them back, or better ones in the future. People believed that their issues with the "live ball" in 2k12 weren't mostly user error (they were), so instead of that addition being refined, it was dialed way back.

A full physics system isn't coming in the next generation of hardware, but they will have the capacity to generate more active collision points. Even though the ball passing through various parts of the body can likely be eliminated, the series will continue to improve primarily based on refinements/additions to the animations that are generated in different scenarios. If you want to make a difference, think about specifically what each scenario on the court should look like, and how that can be accomplished. Try to understand why things happen, not just that they do or don't. Take responsibilty for your part in the interaction. And know that if something feels like a step backward, it's probably because they took the previous concept to its limit and still found it lacking, hence the need for a new concept which must be built upon before it feels as polished as the old, technically inferior one did.

None of this is to excuse faults and inconsistencies in 2k13. Like many, I found 2k11 to be less frustrating than 2k13 can be, and much less than 2k12 was at its worst. But 2k13 at its best feels more organic and satisfying than 2k11 ever did, and it's doing a lot more to boot. It drives me crazy when people act like gameplay is neglected, because I can't think of another annually released title that feels as singularly distinct in each new version, for better or worse. I can be patient with the areas that need further refinement, knowing the limitations of a one year development cycle, and not knowing what restrictions are placed on the people working on each area of the game.

We have already been told that this issue is being worked on for 2k14, and Mike Wang personally stated that the dribble stick controls will have additions/improvements. None of us should have any doubt that 2k14 will stand on its own, even if we don't like every aspect of it as much as in some older versions.

[mango_prom]

Re: Why would you think blocking a dunk is realistic

I think the most important thing is not to create a game that will play out with realistic stats/shot types all the time, just one that allows you to earn them if both players (or player/CPU) are well matched and trying to emulate the real teams.

To me that's the key for improving future games. And you're right, the game should not force you to play full blown sim. If someone prefers highlights all day, fine. But the issue is whether 2k tries to at least enable a more life like playing style. And I'm not only talking about online, where 2 players can establish some sim rules if they want to, but also about offline gameplay against the CPU, where easy fixes are so obvious, it hurts my brain.

Basketball is actually a sport where realistic outcomes can be achieved easier than with say soccer or hockey, because it's fairly linear due to the shot clock and change of possession.
Now we've got countless tendencies already in the game, so we can influence, how players react in certain situations. What 2k refuses to improve is, when and how often these specific events occur.

That's why I go all OCD about the broken touches logic. If 2k gave us the ability to distribute plays called however we please according to touches/usage/however you name it, we could model the way CPU teams behave exactly after real life games.

There's everything in place already, we can alter tendencies for every aspect of the game from shooting to passing out, individual dribble preferences and so on.But 2k uses pointless scripting for playcalling, effectively preventing us from creating a realistic experience.
They got the principle (touches) right, but since 2k11 it's a mess and I could show them in 5 minutes how deeply this issue affects every aspect of offline gameplay. It blows my mind that 2k ignores this yet claims to release a "basketball simulation".

So a hum vs. hum game can be everything from NBA Jam to hardcore sim, you're absoutely right.
But do we really need fancy next-gen physics?
Would 2k really lose millions of budget by releasing a patch that fixes issues within the framework of current gen?
Is increasing turnovers from dunk attempts in traffic to encourage ball movement and fixing a simple probability distribution script (what "touches" would be if working correctly) really a matter of impossible difficulty for a game development company?

So I'm not complaining about current-gen limitations at all, but the ignorance of the small details mentioned above that could have a huge impact on game quality. I wouldn't mind having the same graphics/physics for another 5 years if these things get attention. But maybe I'm ignorant on how programming works, don't know...

Anyway, you've made some great points. There is much to like about 2k13, but since I play mostly offline on PC, it doesn't matter how fluid the game looks if the most simple AI issues get completely ignored for years. I could download everything, most people do. Instead I've bought every PC version to support 2k, and I feel like I care more than they do.

Look at self-alleys and spin dunks. They've added the animations themselves...everything they add to the game works exactly like they want it to. I'm not buying into physics limitations. It's up to them to decide how effective a move is via game logic. So even if collision detection is restrained by current gen, the fact remains that the success rate of any event in the game is the decision of the game designers. That's my issue with 2k13, not the lack of next-gen real time physics.

[Streaky McFloorburn]

Re: Why would you think blocking a dunk is realistic

To me that's the key for improving future games. And you're right, the game should not force you to play full blown sim. If someone prefers highlights all day, fine. But the issue is whether 2k tries to at least enable a more life like playing style. And I'm not only talking about online, where 2 players can establish some sim rules if they want to, but also about offline gameplay against the CPU, where easy fixes are so obvious, it hurts my brain.

Basketball is actually a sport where realistic outcomes can be achieved easier than with say soccer or hockey, because it's fairly linear due to the shot clock and change of possession.
Now we've got countless tendencies already in the game, so we can influence, how players react in certain situations. What 2k refuses to improve is, when and how often these specific events occur.

That's why I go all OCD about the broken touches logic. If 2k gave us the ability to distribute plays called however we please according to touches/usage/however you name it, we could model the way CPU teams behave exactly after real life games.

There's everything in place already, we can alter tendencies for every aspect of the game from shooting to passing out, individual dribble preferences and so on.But 2k uses pointless scripting for playcalling, effectively preventing us from creating a realistic experience.
They got the principle (touches) right, but since 2k11 it's a mess and I could show them in 5 minutes how deeply this issue affects every aspect of offline gameplay. It blows my mind that 2k ignores this yet claims to release a "basketball simulation".

So a hum vs. hum game can be everything from NBA Jam to hardcore sim, you're absoutely right.
But do we really need fancy next-gen physics?
Would 2k really lose millions of budget by releasing a patch that fixes issues within the framework of current gen?
Is increasing turnovers from dunk attempts in traffic to encourage ball movement and fixing a simple probability distribution script (what "touches" would be if working correctly) really a matter of impossible difficulty for a game development company?

So I'm not complaining about current-gen limitations at all, but the ignorance of the small details mentioned above that could have a huge impact on game quality. I wouldn't mind having the same graphics/physics for another 5 years if these things get attention. But maybe I'm ignorant on how programming works, don't know...

Anyway, you've made some great points. There is much to like about 2k13, but since I play mostly offline on PC, it doesn't matter how fluid the game looks if the most simple AI issues get completely ignored for years. I could download everything, most people do. Instead I've bought every PC version to support 2k, and I feel like I care more than they do.

Look at self-alleys and spin dunks. They've added the animations themselves...everything they add to the game works exactly like they want it to. I'm not buying into physics limitations. It's up to them to decide how effective a move is via game logic. So even if collision detection is restrained by current gen, the fact remains that the success rate of any event in the game is the decision of the game designers. That's my issue with 2k13, not the lack of next-gen real time physics.

As far as touches go, unfortunately they're part of an area that only a small but dedicated minority will make any noise about, because the quality of their implementation doesn't strongly affect the casual experience. Anybody can easily notice if the '95 Magic aren't feeding Shaq in the post enough, but it doesn't strongly inhibit their enjoyment of the game, they just won't play as much against that team. As long as 2k makes sure that the current superstars all score a lot, most players won't examine why. All you can do is continue to advocate for the things that you feel are important, and hope that they get noticed by someone with creative or technical control, without getting denied by those with financial control.

Not wanting to derail the thread any more than I already have, I think what you're saying about the designers deciding what works and doesn't via fully intended game logic might be missing something that we're not currently aware of, when it comes to dunk blocks or any other specific example.

We know that it's possible to block dunks, that the necessary animations do exist in 2k13. The problem for most people seems to be that they feel unreasonably hard to trigger, particularly with the traditional block button. So, was that a decision simply to make dunks harder to block, or was it meant to foreshadow a control change in 2k14 that will use the current block button for some other function? Perhaps the goal is to train players not to contest with Y/Triangle.

There is also the possibility that in a test environment, where a programmer could see the proper window and trigger point for the block, the results were more favorable to the defender, and having memorized those things, they were able to maintain that rate w/o the extra visual cues, not realizing that the end user would struggle to find the proper timing.

I tend not to give up too many dunks, and of the ones I do allow, the majority aren't contestable. There have been a few standing dunks that I felt I had a good chance to block, but on almost every one, it seemed like the reason I didn't get them was the dunk animation playing out too quickly rather than the block attempt being too slow/weak. I haven't been bothered by that old 2k animation where the defender felt completely stuck to the ground but would look like they sort of raised up on their toes or did a tiny hop.

The main problem with blocks, steals, and other assorted animations feeling inorganic is that the body/hands are activated by animation triggers, rather than having any independent tracking. From what I can observe, the head and feet of each player are "always on", but the rest of the body is only "solid" when a particular animation tells it to be. For the game to treat the hands (or in my dreams, individual fingers) as constantly active collision points with changeable properties like "hard" and "sticky", vast amounts of animations might have to be reworked, like dribbling, catching passes, etc. Constantly tracking >20 more objects would likely cause major slowdown on consoles. Add other assorted body contact points as independently tracked and interactive objects generating highly specific animations, and you'd be lucky to max out at 10fps, if it would run at all.

Right now, the game has to track the ball (the only object which likely has any real physics governing it), the rim/backboard, 10 players worth of heads and feet, and of course control inputs, (while calculating rating/tendency based probabilities) to determine which animations are appropriate at any given time. Current top-end PCs and next gen consoles should easily be able to handle constant tracking of the 2-5x more data points and more complex, anatomy-specific animations needed for the scenario in the above paragraph, and though that's not even sniffing real-time physics, it should start to feel like it at that point.

[Rockie_Fresh88]

Re: Why would you think blocking a dunk is realistic

Yeah that's why I can't wait to see 2k14 in next gen systems this year.

Physics have to be improved if not this gen next gen.

[nyrangers81]

Re: Why would you think blocking a dunk is realistic

This happens so rarely in the NBA it's not even funny. If they're already close enough to dunk, you've already lost the battle and should just concede the dunk. A better defensive strategy would be to

1) Stop penetration in the paint before they get momentum and position to dunk
2) Steal the entry pass
3) Go for the on the ball steal (if you have a player with active hands sig it helps more)
4) Use your best post defender


just sick of the "I can't block dunks, this game is broke!"

While I'm at it. If you're not using 2k cam, you're not seeing A LOT of angles that will help you particularly on Defense and Rebounding. And also, just because you have a A+ release doesn't = automatic shot. You gotta also factor in hot and cold / momentum / shot selection.

/ rant

I see you've never played basketball or paid attention when watching.

Dunks don't happen as often in real life as the game, want to know why? Because big men are there and block most attempts, or persuade a player to try a layup instead. Only in clear paths do most dunks happen. But in the 2k universe, dunks happen every other play. The play of big men doesn't matter because the driving player is not affected by anybody standing in his way. Layups and dunks never get contested.

[mango_prom]

Re: Why would you think blocking a dunk is realistic

Yeah that's why I can't wait to see 2k14 in next gen systems this year.

Physics have to be improved if not this gen next gen.

Has it been confirmed for next gen yet?

[MVP9072]

Re: Why would you think blocking a dunk is realistic

Has it been confirmed for next gen yet?

No but it makes sense obviously

[Rockie_Fresh88]

Re: Why would you think blocking a dunk is realistic

Has it been confirmed for next gen yet?

Well it's out for Wii U technically

[JazzMan]

Re: Why would you think blocking a dunk is realistic

It's not necessarily about blocking dunks for me, but more of guys going through my elite big man defender for a dunk. Or when you try to block a guy and he dunks, and the ball goes literally through the defender's hand. That is what irritates me.

[thedream2k13]

Re: Why would you think blocking a dunk is realistic

It's not necessarily about blocking dunks for me, but more of guys going through my elite big man defender for a dunk. Or when you try to block a guy and he dunks, and the ball goes literally through the defender's hand. That is what irritates me.

Live ball in 2k12 rewarded players but people weren't ready for those physics due to the ball being "really" live. Apparently the only part of human anatomy that can block a ball is the hands when irl and in nba games i see forearms and sometimes elbows blocking shots if defender jumps high enough lol. Anyways 2k will somehow get it right i hope