Isnt a realistic game "Fun"?

[BDM313]

Re: Isnt a realistic game "Fun"?

honestly the game isnt that bad once you get the controls down I mean at first it was horrible until I took time out and hit practice mode after that it was pretty fun even tho the animations are choppy and hella fast but some things about the game makes elite playable but in my case not worth 60 bucks maybe ill rent it for the low....but in my opinion games that mimic real life are fun

[thugnificant]

Re: Isnt a realistic game "Fun"?

i always wondered this too. i had friends that played 2k10 and complain that it wasnt "fun" because it was to complicated. They would always invite me to live 10 matches so they could pull AND-1 iso moves all game. Wasnt very realistic or fun but i was baffled at why they felt that way.

[MrMars]

Re: Isnt a realistic game "Fun"?

After playing the demo for the last couple of days, The learning curve will be too steep for some based on the other issues with the game as a whole. Me personally, feel that the fun with this game will come from the EASBA and the "Become legendary" mode.

I anticipate that 5 on 5 with serious and conscientious players will be where the fun is -- though not necessarily realistic. I would imagine it would play as realistic as the individual players play, furthermore, while there will be stickmasters at the highest level of online play, I anticipate that most of us will be proficient at most skills while mastering certain elements that define the position and style of player we create. This appears to me that this will require a level of communication and teamwork that, if successful, will sometimes overcome stickskills, and that would be fun.

Getting better with the sticks while becoming more cohesive as a unit will be where most of the satisfaction will come from this game. Me, I'm looking forward to trying to find some players I can have fun and get better with. This is where the fun and the legs of this game are. The question now is; "Is that alone worth $65 bucks?"

MrMars

[Sinner]

Re: Isnt a realistic game "Fun"?

This is what most ppl on this site seem to have a problem with. Almost, like they subject themselves to frustration with their games.....Madden Demo sucks...I bought it anyway......I traded it in the day after....Well I picked it back up again....WTF?

If you don't like something don't play it, don't buy it. Give your constructive criticism and move on......or just move on.

I agree with this, its crazy how some people except something they aren't totally happy with... and as for some people saying its a good game after you get the controls down...well for me..like Da Czar said theres more to basketball than just controls/handles. Doesnt matter to me if I can do everything my heart desires as far as handling the ball if the other players around me arent moving realisticly to try and stop me and it doesnt represent or look like the NBA im not happy with it. Now im not saying others cant be happy with what Elite provides im stickly talking about myself.

[magicman32]

Re: Isnt a realistic game "Fun"?

Even in nba street if you try to do crazy crossovers with non ball handlers (like shaq for example), they fall down and loose the ball. I don't know what direction Elite is trying to head in. You can even make hook shots from the 3pt line if you get good enough. I don't know man. I don't know.

[dirtypuppet]

Re: Isnt a realistic game "Fun"?

I never get too caught up in realistic vs. unrealistic gameplay.

A game is as realistic or as unrealistic as you play it.

All of these game have arcade elements, and every last one of them provide easy outlets for people to act a fool if that is really what they want to.

Now, if I see something like Steve Nash dunking, like I saw in NBA Live '08...then no, I dont find that fun.


On superstar, I sw Ray Allen do a dunk that I havent seen him do since I was a sophmore at UCONN, and a dunk that KG has absolutely no chance of pulling off anymore.

Thats not fun.

I do get a kick out of 1)seeing teams run the sets that they run in real life, 2) play at the tempo they play and, and 3)have actualy real life plays from their playbooks, as well as 4)Dynamic AI wich allows the CPU to adapt to its surroundings

Elite does 1 1/2 of the 4 really well.

The team playbooks are excellent and as authentic as you can want them to be, with multiple variations. Thats neat to see

The CPU will run the sets, but unfortunately, they do not always react and adapt to what is going on around them. They tend to run the play by script, not flow.
--When the CPU offensive AI goes bonkers, definitely not fun.


Elite/Live has historically had the best defensive CPU AI in the business.

They'll trap a hot player, and force you to give up the ball on a Iso, they rotate well, they double team with authority.

All of that I love seeing.

I wish that the CPU was just as dynamic on the offensive end of the floor, as they are on defense.

Realism on both ends of the floor, helps keep me engaged.

As far as why I like the game, and its realistic elements

-- I do feel a difference in the players I am controlling

---Derek Fisher isnt very quick or elusive.. I have yet to generate any effective dribble-drive penetration with him.

---Artest is a brute once he gets a head of steam, but again, isnt that quick or explosive

---Kobe is every bit as quick, fluid and exlposive as I would like..I defintely feel a difference between moving from jab step/pivot, and chaining dribble drive moves together.

--Pau Gasol's post move success rate/finish rate, is much better then Bynum's.

I can do a nice, smooth, up and under, drop step or shoulder fake into a fallaway, layup, jumper, or hook with Gasol. Bynum is far less agile,quick and smooth with when I get fancy in the post with him.

For me, the fun factor and realism is there as far as what I can do with who.

I understand that I am probably in the minority, in this view.

I spent literally hours, with the controls, and I take my time to set things up and set up moves.

I really, truly believe that how much realism you experience out of the game, will be directly related with how well you understand what to do with your player, when and how.

Great Post. I'm getting the same experience as you. All of the problems with animation are glaring, but once you get the controls down, I can definitely have fun with the game. It's a total contrast to the 'other' game which is nice. In no way is it polished, but it definitely can give you a dynamic, controlled gameplay experience (after hours of practice).

[bears5122]

Re: Isnt a realistic game "Fun"?

I think realistic is fun for diehard fans of the sport, but not casual fans. Let me give you an example.

The Jets-Ravens game was by all accounts, not that exciting. Low scoring, not many yards, not many big plays. Now a diehard football fan as many of us are could probably get into a game like that. We'd love to battle for field position and try to create a big turnover. But the casual gamer probably just wants to throw for some touchdowns and make some big runs and call it a day.

I think that's the issue at hand. There can be a realistic game in all sports, and we'd all here love it, but they probably look at it as a way to lose even more sales. Does the casual gamer want to deal with running a real NBA offense that involves screens, picks, and movement? Or does he just want to take Kobe, hit the turbo button, and do a 360 dunk over someone?

A lot of people say they want realism, but do they just want the exciting parts of that realism? Do they really want the 10-9 defensive football game, the grind it out fundamental basketball game? I think that's a question that still needs to be asked. There are some companies and some games being built around realism, and they appear to be doing well. But I wonder if there is a ceiling with how well they can do.

[The 24th Letter]

Re: Isnt a realistic game "Fun"?

For me its like going to a movie...

If I go see a comedy like "Scary Movie", I know im going into the show ready to have some mindless fun\ laughter, whatever...im getting what I paid for...

If I go into a drama like Inception, and get the same slapstick and gags from Scary Movie id be pissed....even if some of the gags made me chuckle every once in while. Sure I could take it for what it was..but thats not what I went to see lol

Point is, I know how to take off my hat and enjoy myself...video games should be fun after all. But if im not getting whats advertised....its pretty hard to enjoy...

[dirtypuppet]

Re: Isnt a realistic game "Fun"?

A lot of people say they want realism, but do they just want the exciting parts of that realism? Do they really want the 10-9 defensive football game, the grind it out fundamental basketball game? I think that's a question that still needs to be asked.

I want realism in the fact that the results are grounded to reality. The players I use on the court should be limited to their abilities in real life and overall reflect that as much as possible so my knowledge of the sport is used to my advantage creates a realistic gameplay experience.

That being said, this is a game and not a movie so I want to feel like it is my control input that is putting the virtual players in the best position to carry succeed. This is what Elite is trying to do, it's just that so far the first point is off. The players aren't grounded enough to their real life limitations and/ or the user input has too much influence on the results.

It's a good idea though and a good (albeit very rough around the edges) starting point.

[MLB01]

Re: Isnt a realistic game "Fun"?

Even in nba street if you try to do crazy crossovers with non ball handlers (like shaq for example), they fall down and loose the ball. I don't know what direction Elite is trying to head in. You can even make hook shots from the 3pt line if you get good enough. I don't know man. I don't know.

It's like they sacraficed player's ability ratings ( realism ) for user control.

[Gotmadskillzson]

Re: Isnt a realistic game "Fun"?

It's like they sacraficed player's ability ratings ( realism ) for user control.

Pretty much sums it up.. The controls are fine and can be learned in an hour. It is the fact there is no limitation with the controls that is the problem. What you can do with the controls should be limited by the ratings of that player.

As it is now, you can take the lowest player on the bench, put him in and make him do Derrick Rose and CP3 type of moves. Turn Adam Morrison into the next hakeem on the low block.

[bigball12]

Re: Isnt a realistic game "Fun"?

The fact that this game is marketed as simulation, and is anything but, should automatically kill the fun factor.

[dmm0816]

Re: Isnt a realistic game "Fun"?

You make it fun by throwing out any concept of sim basketball, sit back, turn on some music, and just play. I wouldnt say you force yourself to do certain things, but you basically play how you did when you were little.. Some people can't revert back.

That sort of playing style may get stale after a month, so thats why I'm truly waiting it out.

Pretty much the AI is terrible in any regard, so that could be a total buzz kill to the vast majority. The only TRUE immersion factor is total control. But that may only get you a complete games deep before you realize, you want much more than a 1997 nba live experience.

And yes, as your thread title states, Isnt a realistic game "fun"? That is true. But it can, in no way, be applied to this game/ SO you have to find your fun in other ways. You just have to.

perfectly stated....i've always played live always even when they had the couple down yrs but to me it was always fun. Elite is diff and it's gonna take sometime to get used to but i can tell from the demo once you get the new controls down, and get out of the habit of trying to press turbo and throwin ally opps everywhere (like me lol) it's gonna be a blast. I'm just torn between elite and the other game...i just figure if i have to learn new controls for both (i never have played the other game) i'll start with the other game and possibly do a trade in for elite a little later. but to be honest both games look fun this yr elite is just missing a lot of things that gives it the replay value like live 10

[sportyguyfl31]

Re: Isnt a realistic game "Fun"?

Pretty much sums it up.. The controls are fine and can be learned in an hour. It is the fact there is no limitation with the controls that is the problem. What you can do with the controls should be limited by the ratings of that player.

As it is now, you can take the lowest player on the bench, put him in and make him do Derrick Rose and CP3 type of moves. Turn Adam Morrison into the next hakeem on the low block.

I gotta disagree with "turn any player on the court, into a all star."

Derek Fisher absolutely stinks on ice in this game. He cant get to the rim at all, and is slow.

I can only make spot up shots with the guy.

[sportyguyfl31]

Re: Isnt a realistic game "Fun"?

I think realistic is fun for diehard fans of the sport, but not casual fans. Let me give you an example.

The Jets-Ravens game was by all accounts, not that exciting. Low scoring, not many yards, not many big plays. Now a diehard football fan as many of us are could probably get into a game like that. We'd love to battle for field position and try to create a big turnover. But the casual gamer probably just wants to throw for some touchdowns and make some big runs and call it a day.

I think that's the issue at hand. There can be a realistic game in all sports, and we'd all here love it, but they probably look at it as a way to lose even more sales. Does the casual gamer want to deal with running a real NBA offense that involves screens, picks, and movement? Or does he just want to take Kobe, hit the turbo button, and do a 360 dunk over someone?

A lot of people say they want realism, but do they just want the exciting parts of that realism? Do they really want the 10-9 defensive football game, the grind it out fundamental basketball game? I think that's a question that still needs to be asked. There are some companies and some games being built around realism, and they appear to be doing well. But I wonder if there is a ceiling with how well they can do.

Thats an over-generalization.

Ive been an athlete all my life, competed on the D-I level, and as much a sports junkie, stat geek, and sports historian, as any 'hardcore' gamer or sports fan, out there.


Now Im just a regular working man, workout warrior, with a family to provide for.

When I put the disk in the console, I want to play a fun game, with the players and teams that I like, that keeps me engaged.

I see all kinds of nonsense happen in sports games of all brands.

The day I play a sports game that is incapable of being turned into a circus act, will be the 1st.