Is this game really that bad????

[Admiral50]

Re: Is this game really that bad????

Thing is there were 18 million 'my life depends on this' SLIDER threads for both games last year, trying to get it to play right. Live 2006 plays much better out of the box than any recent Live and 2K6 apparantly does the same.

I know tweaking just a few sliders (speed down a little, steals down a lot, blocks down a little) fixes most problems criticized. I've tested over and over in that way (having the game for more than a week now) so there is no excuse for anyone to say steals are too common (even with the stopper move).

To those who haven't decided yet and keep seeing these comments that it's only a small upgrade on 2005, think of this...

Yes the core of the game looks the same and plays the same. Especially at first.

But in 2006 teams play different (noticeably), the spacing is better which allows for a half decent (still no great) mid range game, you'll see the cpu run plays where the point guard is patient up top while his guards are running off screens to get open or his big guy is looking for post position.

The overall pace is improved (even before sliders) as teams don't (not always anyway) just dribble like crazy until they can get a dunk. You see many jumpers and post moves mixed with the usual Live 'attack the basket' for a collision animation shot.

You'll see the PG come off screens himself and know if he is open or not (something various games in the past failed to recognise).

The fastbreaks are crazy, the cpu runs great 2 and 3 men breaks which are tough to combat (you can do the same on offense as the defense does not mysteriously catch up this year).

The amount of options (via many different controller/button combo's) for jumpshots, runners, hooks, banks, set shots, passes is amazing and the control great - all with the best animation ever in a basketball game.

The Superstar moves and control (as above) are a great addition. It does make stars standout in game.

The models are slightly improved but one thing that converted me from 2K this year is the unmatched animation. I don't think the models are that bad actually after seeing them in hi-res and 60 frames on my PC but yeah, the 2K models are much better. However, I now prefer to have the lower quality models and textures moving amazingly than high quality models that move stiff, sluggish and have strange animations (just my opinion there).

So, yeah, it is still Live, especially in appearance but it's by far the best Live since EA added freestyle.

It also seems 2K is the best 2K for a number of years (if not, ever) so Live and 2K fans should love their respective games. But on top of that, I think this is the year when 2K fans can also enjoy Live and by the sounds of it, Live fans can enjoy 2K also.

Hoop heaven I guess.

[KBomber]

Re: Is this game really that bad????

Hey there K

I have to say...IMO...it's infinitely better than LIVE05.

Personally, I can't see how anyone rates LIVE05 higher...that game had no fast breaks and no play sets + no team differences. I'd be hard pressed to rate LIVE 05 any higher than about 4/10.

LIVE06 has all of those things addressed...which makes it infinitely more of a 'SIM' IMO. Play sets being the key...

The more I play it though, I do agree that the superstar options are 'overdone'.

My personal playing style is that I don't use those much though and I'm playing with the Wolves who, KG aside, don't have anyone with those abilities. Maybe I notice it less for this reason.

The game is a long way short of perfect and it's still "LIVE Basketball" in many, many ways.

Much better than LIVE 05 though IMO...

Still not 'hard core' SIM...but the only LIVE i've been able to play for a few days without throwing in the direction of the bin...

Hope your well

Monk

Monk

I've been wondering where you wound up -- I hadn't realized that a name change was part of the equation

Here's what I've said today on Live in three different threads. Part of the issue with anything that I say on these boards seems to be that since I moderate for 2K Sports, I am somehow being biased against EA product. It's funny to me since I own EA product, but I don't deny that I'm not exactly thrilled with EA's corporate initiatives, but you tell me if these viewpoints are coloured with bias.

I don't think that the game is necessarily "bad". To me there are a couple of issues that make it tough for me to qualify as a game I need to buy:

1. I think it's slid back into more of an arcade feel from Live 2005. While that isn't a sin, my preferences lie more on the sim side

2. While there are some areas that have been improved, the difference between this game and Live 2005 isn't overly vast from my vantage point , so if I want an "arcade-sim", I already own 2005, why shell out another $70 CDN for a game that is, ostensibly, already in my collection

If you are a die-hard Live fan, or don't have Live 2005, I think there is enough here to warrant the buy. If you aren't a die hard or have the 2005 game then you may have the latitude to say "what do I really want/need in my collection?". For me the answer skews more towards not buying, but that's my preference. If you are desperate for a 2006 NBA title, then this is likely your choice if you want something a little more accessible and less technically challenging as a hoops sim. There are still a lot of good things going on here for people interested in the Live-style of play

Have fun.............

I agree with some of what Peter is saying here. The new animations are nice, especially in the dunk animations which I saw a lot of while playing the Nets today. On the player models side, I don't see enormous movement in that area, but I do think some of the postures have been cleaned up. The infamous "hunch run" seems to have been done away with, which is great

On the gameplay side, I'm not crazy about the playbooks right now -- there isn't much there comparatively to games like NBA 2k5 and ID 2004, but to be fair, I haven't had a chance to get too deep into that yet

In playing the Nets, I had good success with challenging VC, RJ and J-Kidd in the paint when they drove with Bosh and Villenueva. The steals were a bit out of control and I was able to limit J-Kidd with Rafer Alston on the perimeter while getting 9 steals for the game -- to me way out of whack

Another thing I noticed was that I was able to drill a lot of 3's with Joey Graham outside. It could have been a one game thing, but I don't think that is necessarily an aspect of his game that I've ever been familiar with. The first one was a fluke -- I actually thought I had Jalen Rose in at the time, but he went 5 of 8 for the game and finished with 25. He seemed a beast defensively and on the break as well -- btw the break is much improved over last year and I haven't seen the invisible wall syndrome in that area of the game as yet

Relative to the Barneys, I also thought that a lot of players seemed to play beyond their ratings. Raphael Araujo was able to be a legitimate presence in the post and had a vertical game that just isn't the case in reality. I was able to bring in Calderon off the bench as a low 60's player and do some damage in setting the offense, getting 8 assists out of him in a back-up role. I can back down post players like Etan Thomas with Chris Bosh. Bosh is a better player than Thomas, but his is a face up game, by and large, and he isn't going to work a guy like Thomas over with brute strength.

Some of the play on the boards was nice, but in some cases the ball "sucks in" to the net on strange trajectories and bounces, especially on free throws, which I didn't like in some cases. In around the net the action seems to be more "arcadey" with a lot of dunks, some of which, in context, aren't hugely realistic

For me Live 2006 is still a nifty enough game, but it doesn't elevate like VC (edit --That's Vince Carter and not EA's competition, I could feel a nasty flame war beginnning for the wrong reasons....) over 2005. It's more of a Robert Horry squeeze dunk with the "and 1" attached. My wish was that they were going to take the fun elements of 2005 and maybe temper that with the inclusion of some depth in play calling while addressing some of the issues with the hunch and skate animations. Instead what EA delivered was a return to even more of an arcade feel, more similar to the 2004 iteration than the 2005, which I enjoyed as a more casual gaming experience, compared to C-Hoops and NBA 2k5 (which were truer sims, and with C-Hoops being, by far in my opinion, the best hoops game of the 2005 vintage). The skate feel is still there in Live 2006, and it's high time it wasn't, although the bumper car thing has also been minimized compared to the last couple of versions of Live -- which is also good news

For me, Live isn't a purchase, I think. It's a good enough game, but I actually think I like 2005 better at this point. For guys who are looking for more of an arcade feel, I think Live will fit your needs. I'm looking forward to NBA 2K6 to see if it is as deep a sim as is currently being conveyed. That answer will likely come more towards the end of the week for me though

Have fun..........

If you understand the first thing about basketball, you may disappointed in Live. It's a fun little run, but it is definitely not a sim. I'm actually looking forward to trying NBA 2K6 if it is as challenging as people are saying. I'm looking for something that will make me work for wins

Like I said in my post, I pretty much agree with the Gamespot review and I'm leary of IGN because those guys are neophytes who just aren't into sim play. They are more interested in flash and sizzle, not substance and steak

As for the graphics in Live, their upgraded slightly, but it isn't a night and day difference to Live 2005. Some of the new animations are quite nice and the shoes may actually look better than some of the player models -- what's up with that?

Anyways, have fun, cowboy...............

As said, I've got two games under my belt and I haven't delved deeply into the playbooks. From what I have seen, there isn't as much variety in the playbooks as what was available in ID 2004 and NBA/College Hoops 2K5.

On the gameplay side of things, in two games with the Raptors on Superstar with the default settings I posted a 20+ point victory and a 40 point victory over the Wizards and Nets respectively. From those two games, with default settings, I observed an ability to manipulate guys like Joey Graham and Raphael Araujo into performances that, I think, aren't representative of their real-world abilities.

Have these performances been tempered by adjusting slider configurations? No.

Does that mean of have I said that these issues can't be addressed that way? No.

In all honesty, I think I've been fair to Live at this point in limited playing time. Is the reality of the situation that Live is generally a more sim-based title? No, and that's by plan and it is accepted that this is a Live game, and that isn't how that title is traditionally developed. Live is developed, year in and year out, as an accessible title, with an AI base that is not deeply technical when compared to games like ID 2004 and NBA 2k5. That's not a bias. That is a reality of how these two companies position their product.

Hard core Live players love their game. That's a good thing. The game is meant to be enjoyed easily without the burden to assess how a CPU is defending and what types of plays best attack that defense. In that, Live is purposely developed as a more generic experience than its competitors. That's a reality and it's not a bad thing if that floats your boat.

I like Live 2005 when I want a more casual hoops experience. I can't take games like Ballers and Street very seriously, so when I want more of an arcade experience, I run Live 2005. Live 2005 was an improvement over Live 2004 by a wide margin, that's why I like it and it isn't NBA/College Hoops 2k5, so as a foil it's a great game to me.

But having that "arcadey" niche filled in my collection, does Live 2006 give me enough to warrant a $70 CDN outlay? For me, no. At least not at this point, with two games under my belt, having not seen what a decent slider set can bring to the game and having not gotten overly deep into any mode

For all my fans on this board, and you are legion, never forget that I started playing sports games on EA product and still to this day own EA product. I'm not thrilled with where EA is trying to move the genre of sports games by wiping out their competition. If you have any doubt as to why that is a problem, look at the wonderful variety that we are afforded in basketball that will not be available to us in football with all the licensed games being built off a single engine.

That being said, let me know if I have been unfair in my assessment of this title. I'd welcome the opportunity to discuss where you see specifically in my comments a bias that is based in anything but an analysis of the core issues of gameplay or graphical presentation

Have fun................

[Court_vision]

Re: Is this game really that bad????

Hey there Ralph

I haven’t got time to go into a lot of depth. I’m at work and I also have a very long ‘pub lunch’ planned for today…and tomorrow …so I’m trying to finish off a report that I have to complete by Friday afternoon.

Nevertheless…priority where it’s warranted and this debate is much more interesting than a report…

I didn’t like LIVE 05 at all basically.

I always play my basketball games in a ‘SIM’ style…and that game simply didn’t give me that option.

I want to use the Sonics and run Ray Allen off screens? I couldn’t, as there were no screen plays.

I want to use Jersey and run all day? I couldn’t as there was no fast break game…Kidd to RJ on the break? Not possible as RJ stops to catch the f-ing ball every time and the CPU’s slowest defender someone beats him down court.

I want to play the Suns and have them run all day…and play the Pistons and be challenged by their D? LIVE 05 both teams were identical.

That was LIVE 05. Generic basketball played by generic teams with no play sets and no fast breaks. IMO a badly flawed game.

Conversely, LIVE 06 allows me to play as the Sonics play. Run the break as Jersey does.

It allows me to take on fast break teams…and then match up with half court teams.

Essentially…that’s my criteria for a decent NBA sim.

I have to say…this is all with some slider adjustments and press box camera.

ANY other set up is basically unplayable. Not only are the camera’s TERRIBLE…but the whole feel of the game is wrong on every other setting IMO.

I think the games pretty good and ‘sim like’ in a lot of regards.

Agree that a lot of the issues you raise are very valid. There’s still an arcade element…and yes, it’s too easy to take a poor post player and score easily on a superior defender. The rebounding is terrible and, as you state, it doesn’t matter who your PG is…you can rack up assists like Nash.

I anticipate the moment I get NBA 2K6 that LIVE will gather dusk very, very quickly. I’ve no doubt 2K6 will be a superior SIM style game and thus the one I run with.

I do think that it’s a great year for ball games though. Live is definitely worth playing…2K6 looks the best ever…and we still have the XBOX 360 versions to come and, potentially, blow both away.

The great irony for me is that this year is absolutely the worst possible time for all these great ball games to land. Have a tonne on at the moment as I’m doing some post grad stuff + work + planning for a big move in the next few months. I’m already getting that ‘hey, we have heaps to do’ look from the wife just as I settle in for a Saturday afternoon of gaming if you know what I mean

[Ofizzle]

Re: Is this game really that bad????

with the default settings

I think this is where the problem lies. With default settings, the game is not a real sim, it is better than last year in some aspects, but default doesn't even have fatigue or subs on.

You mentioned too many shots going in, and that's definately a sign of the defaults. Joey Graham has a 35 3PT rating or something, he shouldn't even be hitting three's [and that rating might be a little low]. I think if you get some good sliders, it will actually challenge you, and you can get a sim feel out of it, though I don't think on 2K6's level. It still seems to offer more control in the dribbling area though...

[dylzzzzz]

Re: Is this game really that bad????

Hey there Ralph

I haven’t got time to go into a lot of depth. I’m at work and I also have a very long ‘pub lunch’ planned for today…and tomorrow …so I’m trying to finish off a report that I have to complete by Friday afternoon.

Nevertheless…priority where it’s warranted and this debate is much more interesting than a report…

I didn’t like LIVE 05 at all basically.

I always play my basketball games in a ‘SIM’ style…and that game simply didn’t give me that option.

I want to use the Sonics and run Ray Allen off screens? I couldn’t, as there were no screen plays.

I want to use Jersey and run all day? I couldn’t as there was no fast break game…Kidd to RJ on the break? Not possible as RJ stops to catch the f-ing ball every time and the CPU’s slowest defender someone beats him down court.

I want to play the Suns and have them run all day…and play the Pistons and be challenged by their D? LIVE 05 both teams were identical.

That was LIVE 05. Generic basketball played by generic teams with no play sets and no fast breaks. IMO a badly flawed game.

Conversely, LIVE 06 allows me to play as the Sonics play. Run the break as Jersey does.

It allows me to take on fast break teams…and then match up with half court teams.

Essentially…that’s my criteria for a decent NBA sim.

I have to say…this is all with some slider adjustments and press box camera.

ANY other set up is basically unplayable. Not only are the camera’s TERRIBLE…but the whole feel of the game is wrong on every other setting IMO.

I think the games pretty good and ‘sim like’ in a lot of regards.

Agree that a lot of the issues you raise are very valid. There’s still an arcade element…and yes, it’s too easy to take a poor post player and score easily on a superior defender. The rebounding is terrible and, as you state, it doesn’t matter who your PG is…you can rack up assists like Nash.

I anticipate the moment I get NBA 2K6 that LIVE will gather dusk very, very quickly. I’ve no doubt 2K6 will be a superior SIM style game and thus the one I run with.

I do think that it’s a great year for ball games though. Live is definitely worth playing…2K6 looks the best ever…and we still have the XBOX 360 versions to come and, potentially, blow both away.

The great irony for me is that this year is absolutely the worst possible time for all these great ball games to land. Have a tonne on at the moment as I’m doing some post grad stuff + work + planning for a big move in the next few months. I’m already getting that ‘hey, we have heaps to do’ look from the wife just as I settle in for a Saturday afternoon of gaming if you know what I mean

ahaha, yea. looks like it.

[Court_vision]

Re: Is this game really that bad????

Typing off line in MS word... with a bit of cut and paste...and you look 'busy' at work

[HMcCoy]

Re: Is this game really that bad????

Part of the issue with anything that I say on these boards seems to be that since I moderate for 2K Sports, I am somehow being biased against EA product. It's funny to me since I own EA product, but I don't deny that I'm not exactly thrilled with EA's corporate initiatives, but you tell me if these viewpoints are coloured with bias.

I always enjoy your takes K Bizzle, they are nearly always on point... but as a 2K mod, you'll prolly never have any credibility here as being unbiased until you become a strong proponent of an EA game over its 2k counterpart. Until then, the "bones" you toss to Live seem a bit patronizing, IMO. Your Live comments have essentially been: "Hey, Its not completely terrible, but it does however fall short in these 25 areas, and its even worse than last year" WTF? So far, I think NBA2K6 is a bit better, but Live 06 is lightyears better than Live 05. Lightyears. No one can deny that.

Statements like that make us question your motives.

I stayed out of the baseball threads, so maybe you embraced MVP over MLB2k5...if so, then disreguard these statements. If not, then I won't disrespect you by pulling the 2K fanboy card...but you definitely come across as a mark for VC, no offense

[KBomber]

Re: Is this game really that bad????

I always enjoy your takes K Bizzle, they are nearly always on point... but as a 2K mod, you'll prolly never have any credibility here as being unbiased until you become a strong proponent of an EA game over its 2k counterpart. Until then, the "bones" you toss to Live seem a bit patronizing, IMO. Your Live comments have essentially been: "Hey, Its not completely terrible, but it does however fall short in these 25 areas, and its even worse than last year" WTF? So far, I think NBA2K6 is a bit better, but Live 06 is lightyears better than Live 05. Lightyears. No one can deny that.

Statements like that make us question your motives.

I stayed out of the baseball threads, so maybe you embraced MVP over MLB2k5...if so, then disreguard these statements. If not, then I won't disrespect you by pulling the 2K fanboy card...but you definitely come across as a mark for VC, no offense

I appreciate your comments, but the simple fact of the matter, for me, is that with the superstar feature being somewhat exagerated, the gameplay, even with playbooks, slides over a bit more to the arcade side at this time. In limited playing time with Live 06, my observation remains that I actually had better statistical representations with Live 05

I'm up again this morning trying the game out and I have a couple of days yet to get more familiar with the detail of the gameplay experience, so as I play more I'll post if my impressions dramatically change

I think you'll need to show me where I said that there are "25 things" wrong with the game. If you look at what I've said, I've mentioned many more things that the game has done right, but that, for me, I'm not sure if the cumulative, given my early impression, is worth a "buy" right now, for me

You guys must think I'm orally fixated with the way you continually seek to put words in my mouth

Have fun.................

[Court_vision]

Re: Is this game really that bad????

I'm not sure that 'statistical representations' really are a good way to judge a game K...not over gameplay issues. I honestly can't see how anyone could call LIVE05 without play sets...without a single screen play(!)... and with all teams playing absolutely identical...more 'realistic' than 2006.
I enjoy your posts just like Macca does. However, I can see where Macca is coming from though bro...you did write a long article once praising NBA 2K4 as a great SIM.

I remember reading it and thinking..."how am I missing all this, the game sounds awesome..." and getting the game back out of my dustbin.

Put it back in...played a few hours...and thought "I don't know what K's smoking..."

2K4 was terrible.

I guess the fact you went to bat for that game so publicly kind of sent off a few hints of 'bias' in some peoples minds.

Not that there's anything wrong with that...you have your links there and should go to battle for those guys.
Publicly praising NBA 2K4 strongly though was akin to writing a refernce for Michael Jackson to work in a child care center

[KBomber]

Re: Is this game really that bad????

I'm not sure that 'statistical representations' really are a good way to judge a game K...not over gameplay issues. I honestly can't see how anyone could call LIVE05 without play sets...without a single screen play(!)... and with all teams playing absolutely identical...more 'realistic' than 2006.

I played the Barneys against the Pistons this morning using a slider set picked up from these forums. I'll have to look at the author to properly credit them, but they did help the game somewhat, although I did make an adjustment to game speed, because the set in question used 36 as its standard and I found the game crawled along a little too much

I only got a half in as I was playing with the sliders, but at that point I was up by 6 and was getting a better feel for the game

One thing I will say is that I still am not crazy about how the playbooks are implemented, because I have absolutely no idea how any play is supposed to run in this game. I'm clicking away that the flipping right analog stick like a crazy person and Chauncey Billups is happily stealing the ball on me while I'm doing it, so since actually running plays isn't working for me, I'm resorting to running my PG and SG through a bunch of drive and kick, drive and draw and drive and take, which are working for me, although the process is making my offense very simple, effective, yet repetitive as all get out. ANyone who wants to explain what I'm missing here on the old Xbox, fire away

If you try to tell me that the playbooks are as good as 2k5, or implemented as well, I will fly down to Australia and be forced to pick you up by the ankles and shake you for a while

The Superstar feature still seems somewhat cheap to me. I liken it to sort of a catch-all idiot stick, honestly. The tools that you have in Live to control your players are already varied and quite powerful. You can pull off fantastic plays with the players on their own if you have some creativity the are nimble on a control pad. To me, the Superstar functionality is a way by which inferior players can pull off superior moves without the native gameplay talents

One thing that I noticed as a by-product of how I have had to adapt my offense is that the CPU substitutions weren't making a lot of sense to me. I had Ben Wallace with 3 fouls early in the second and was able to get Rasheed Wallace to 4 with about 2 and change left in the first half and the CPU only subbed him out after getting into severe foul trouble. I'm not sure if that a configuration problem with the slider set, but it raised a Spockian eyebrow

I enjoy your posts just like Macca does. However, I can see where Macca is coming from though bro...you did write a long article once praising NBA 2K4 as a great SIM.

I remember reading it and thinking..."how am I missing all this, the game sounds awesome..." and getting the game back out of my dustbin.

Put it back in...played a few hours...and thought "I don't know what K's smoking..."

2K4 was terrible.

I'll go the grave saying this, but compared to Live 2004, NBA 2K4 was a better game, especially once you got into the slider aspects. Vicarlush had a slider set for that game that made it very competitive while providing realistic stats. We had this conversation way back when, but I remember saying that I could see where VC was going with 2k4 and even though every team played very generically, I understood where they were trying to get. Those impressions were realized in 2k5 and 2k6. You don't get to those two games without the 2k4 experience

In the time since, I have revisited ID 2004 and once I got over how completely heinous it was to look at, I've come to appreciate what the developers of that game did

One thing I did always like about 2k4 was how it played D. That was the first year without the "crouch crutch" and it was the first time in a video game that the defensive side of the ball was a challenge. The guide I wrote on that aspect of the game is still on the 2k site

I guess the fact you went to bat for that game so publicly kind of sent off a few hints of 'bias' in some peoples minds.

Not that there's anything wrong with that...you have your links there and should go to battle for those guys.
Publicly praising NBA 2K4 strongly though was akin to writing a refernce for Michael Jackson to work in a child care center

Mike never touched that kid. I heard he just wanted to "Beat It" and "Keep it in a Closet"

Like I said, to this day, I still think NBA 2k4 > Live 2004 -- that game was dreck

Neither one of them touched College Hoops 2k4, though, or as I've come to realize ID 2004

Havge fun................

[koolbubbaice]

Re: Is this game really that bad????

EA isn't even sim mined.. There is no fatigue in online ranked games.. Just like in Madden..4 minute quarters too.. No one gets tired.. & in MVP 5 inning ranked games? EA dumbs down their sports games, cause they know thats what the casual gamer wants..VC does that to a certain extent too, but nothing like EA.. Arcade sports games are fun to play, just don't market them as a sim..

[Philstat]

Re: Is this game really that bad????

Yes to the original question it's that bad, basically NBA Street 5 vs 5 with ice skates!

[Bordeaux9196]

Re: Is this game really that bad????

"That being said, let me know if I have been unfair in my assessment of this title. I'd welcome the opportunity to discuss where you see specifically in my comments a bias that is based in anything but an analysis of the core issues of gameplay or graphical presentation

Have fun.............."


No need for further discussion, sounds like your mind is made up. I just don't get how you spend so much time writing about a game that you obviously have no interest in buying. I would think you would have better thinks to do with your time, such as playing NBA 2K6. I cannot believe how personnal some of you take a video game for gods sake. We get it, you will not be purchasing live.

[blackceasar]

Re: Is this game really that bad????

"That being said, let me know if I have been unfair in my assessment of this title. I'd welcome the opportunity to discuss where you see specifically in my comments a bias that is based in anything but an analysis of the core issues of gameplay or graphical presentation

Have fun.............."


No need for further discussion, sounds like your mind is made up. I just don't get how you spend so much time writing about a game that you obviously have no interest in buying. I would think you would have better thinks to do with your time, such as playing NBA 2K6. I cannot believe how personnal some of you take a video game for gods sake. We get it, you will not be purchasing live.

I own both. Live although is noticably differnet that last years Live its still LIVE if you know what i mean.. With that said I have to say that Im dissapointed... the game being diffferent that last year doesnt mean its better than last years..its just different with new gimicks added..that doesnt do anything for me. I personally didnt really get into 2k5 that much last year, for me some reason there was just something about it that was bugging me and of course I really didnt care for live at all last year. But this year 2k6 is probably the best pro basketball game to come out to date with only Inside drive giving it a run for its money..but just to prove im not a 100% 2k loyalist, I loved MVP baseball where MLB 2k5 might as well be a coaster for my Heinekins lol

[Court_vision]

Re: Is this game really that bad????

If you try to tell me that the playbooks are as good as 2k5, or implemented as well, I will fly down to Australia and be forced to pick you up by the ankles and shake you for a while

...

Now, there's a thought. It would be good to have a beer or three with you finally...so if it's going to get you on the plane...Live's playbooks are better than 2K5's

Live's play books aren't to the level of ID...but they're not bad IMO. The screen plays are pretty sweet and I like how some teams run screens...but LA gives Kobe getting Iso's etc.

It's a start anyway...I am still reeling from seeing a screen play run in NBA Live after a decade.

It's amazing the amount of people who have defended LIVE over the years with "plays don't matter" and "there are no plays run in the NBA"...

With a fan base like that...it's no wonder they took a decade to add any