I think they probably changed leading developer, since it was a DRASTIC change from Live 2001 to Live 2004 where it looked like was being taken to a new direction, a direction i didn't want to see it go.
Something went wrong at EA canada from LIVE 2001 to LIVE 2004
Collapse
Recommended Videos
Collapse
X
-
Something went wrong at EA canada from LIVE 2001 to LIVE 2004
I remember the gameplay being much realistic in 2001, no skiing on ice but actual walking, 2002 was an update of 2001 good overall gameplay, then came 2003 that was when all when down hill. Did they change the leading developer?, or has it been the same guy since 2001?.
I think they probably changed leading developer, since it was a DRASTIC change from Live 2001 to Live 2004 where it looked like was being taken to a new direction, a direction i didn't want to see it go.Tags: None -
Re: Something went wrong at EA canada from LIVE 2001 to LIVE 2004
Originally posted by JOEdellisI remember the gameplay being much realistic in 2001, no skiing on ice but actual walking, 2002 was an update of 2001 good overall gameplay, then came 2003 that was when all when down hill. Did they change the leading developer?, or has it been the same guy since 2001?.
I think they probably changed leading developer, since it was a DRASTIC change from Live 2001 to Live 2004 where it looked like was being taken to a new direction, a direction i didn't want to see it go.
imo, live 2002 was the worst, it was horrible.
03 was no defnse. i think 04, and 05 have been their best games, not great, but very playable. while 2k graphics have been great, i still prefer live in 04 and 05 . i will buy both again in 06, and hope both continue to improve.
imo,
1995-2001 only played live on pc
2002 2k , id, live (all xbox since 2002)
2003 id, 2k, live
2004 id/live 2k
2005 live 2k
overall, i would have to say i enjoyed id03 the most. their rosters were pretty accurate from the start. gameplay very good . id 04 roster issues were frustrating, and live made big improvement that yr in gameplay -
Re: Something went wrong at EA canada from LIVE 2001 to LIVE 2004
i would have to say the live 2004 was the best and most enjoyable. i t maybe that i got it on pc and patch the **** of it.."Never say never, because limits are like fears and they are often just an illusion."-M.J.Comment
-
Re: Something went wrong at EA canada from LIVE 2001 to LIVE 2004
Originally posted by hokupguyi would have to say the live 2004 was the best and most enjoyable. i t maybe that i got it on pc and patch the **** of it..Comment
-
Re: Something went wrong at EA canada from LIVE 2001 to LIVE 2004
I think you guys need to go look at some GAMEPLAY videos of 2001 and 2002, so you can refresh your memories of the actual game movement and pace.
I decided to do that and realized how EA transformed a very good pace of basketball to a borderline arcade pace of basketball in the last 2 recent nba lives.
Even the overall look of 2001 and 2002 were more REALISTIC looking in terms of player scale and such, they didn't look like they do now, which is SHORT and borderline cartoonish.
I wonder if it has been the same lead developer on all Lives or have they switched them since Live 2002?, which looked to be developed by the same guy that did 2001.Last edited by JOEdellis; 08-14-2005, 08:56 PM.Comment
-
Re: Something went wrong at EA canada from LIVE 2001 to LIVE 2004
I thought Live 2002 played like NBA 2k3 without all of that ball juggle ish.Comment
-
Re: Something went wrong at EA canada from LIVE 2001 to LIVE 2004
Originally posted by ludacris06I thought Live 2002 played like NBA 2k3 without all of that ball juggle ish.
NBA 2k1 to 2k3 owned the sports gaming industry.Comment
-
Re: Something went wrong at EA canada from LIVE 2001 to LIVE 2004
I'm serious. The pace of the whole game was slow and you couldn't really run fast breaks without the CPU catching up to you eaither. The whole sluggishness of NBA 2k3 was in Live 2002.
Fans complained Live 2002 was too slow and EA sped it up and made 2003 a fast break fest, which was the same thing with NBA 2k4. Both of those games played identically IMO.Comment
-
Re: Something went wrong at EA canada from LIVE 2001 to LIVE 2004
Originally posted by ludacris06I'm serious. The pace of the whole game was slow and you couldn't really run fast breaks without the CPU catching up to you eaither. The whole sluggishness of NBA 2k3 was in Live 2002.
Fans complained Live 2002 was too slow and EA sped it up and made 2003 a fast break fest, which was the same thing with NBA 2k4. Both of those games played identically IMO.Comment
-
Re: Something went wrong at EA canada from LIVE 2001 to LIVE 2004
The reason I will unlikely play Live this year(btw this is the first year of no NCAA or Madden....I am holding out so far) is because how they "fix" things.
The fastbreak fest was countered by setting everyteams to halfcourt defense and having the PG bump so there would be no fastbreaks. Live's like of coherent NBA strategy(just like Madden and NCAA football) is why Live is dead to me....been dead since year 2000 for the PC!Comment
-
Re: Something went wrong at EA canada from LIVE 2001 to LIVE 2004
Ever since Live moved to PS2 its been terrible. Its starting to get better but its still not worth the $50 they charge for it.Comment
-
Re: Something went wrong at EA canada from LIVE 2001 to LIVE 2004
Originally posted by jrcainThe reason I will unlikely play Live this year(btw this is the first year of no NCAA or Madden....I am holding out so far) is because how they "fix" things.
The fastbreak fest was countered by setting everyteams to halfcourt defense and having the PG bump so there would be no fastbreaks. Live's like of coherent NBA strategy(just like Madden and NCAA football) is why Live is dead to me....been dead since year 2000 for the PC!Comment
-
Re: Something went wrong at EA canada from LIVE 2001 to LIVE 2004
Live 2001 on the PC was the pinacle of the series for me. It was a fantastic game in every sense for it's time. Sure, it might not hold up now but for it's time it was quite an incredible game.
If EA did nothing but continue to build off of Live 2001 -- and maybe just improve the graphics and animations while add some tendancies, nobody would be able to touch the series by now. Unfortunatly EA feels there is greater market share to be had by focusing on making the game a cross between a sim and street ball.
Fortunatly for EA, 2k took a nose dive over the past couple of years while most gamers had no clue about Inside Drive. Unfortunatly for EA, VC has brought back the lead guy who was in charge of the classic 2k games and some of the key people from the Inside Drive team. If VC can manage to release a 2k game without bugs and glitches this time, EA will have their backs against the wall. EA is lucky that there's a new console gen starting up so they can start over because the current Live engine is just not very good.Comment
Comment