This post is soley to debate LIVE's graphics. Anyone who knows me, knows that graphics are way down on my list in terms of importance.
No discussion of gameplay needed here...we've done that to death elsewhere, and we all agree this is a good to very good game this year

Graphics ARE important though. They help create the illusion of a SIM, they help with gameplay (knowing it's Kerry Kittles about to stick a 3 point J on you and guarding him tightly / knowing it's Ricjard Jefferson and giving him the three ball.) Seeing Kenyon Martin roar after a dunk, not some freak show contestant who looks like he's got the face of a drag queen...gives you a better feel that your playing KMart and the Nets.
Let's not fool ourselves, LIVE's graphics are horrible for a 2004 video game. I have an XBox, hooked up to a big screen TV and the graphics are hardly better than my old PS1...and worse than some on the DC.
So...why are they so bad? That's what I'd like to know. I mean this in a serious manner, ie can someone explain how they can come up with the graphics below (see the Nets in LIVE...and how they look in ESPN). Is it because the style of animation makes doing faces hard? LIVE's artists (who I have no dount are top class) go for a cartoon look so they move better? EA simply has inferior design? There must be a reason...because they are just so far behind that it's not even close.
LIVE NJ Nets and how the SHOULD be looking in 2004
Comment