Interview with NBA Live 13 Developer Scott O'Gallagher

[jsg]

Re: Interview with NBA Live 13 Developer Scott O'Gallagher

LOL, NBA Live has had 3 games bomb in since Live 07:

Live 07 = bomb
Live 08 = meh
Live 09 = meh
Live 10 = better
Elite 11 = cancelled by Hard8times
Elite 12/Live 12 = never released = bomb

People are expecting this new Live to be something special when the past track record has been craptastic.

Every year people fall for this EA hype of we have guys that know basketball rhetoric. People forget Jeff Antwi from Live 09/10, played ball too. No discredit to Jeff either. Just tired of all the "we got guys that know ball," and then your game falls flat on its face at release.

http://www.ea.com/nba-live-09/videos/7d12aaf217b00210VgnVCM100000ab65140aRCRD

I forgot who besides Mike W. played ball on Live 10, but then they let a hockey guy run a basketball franchise..

This is what I don't understand. It baffles me that people think this way. I want to see some game play. That's all I care about at this point.

[King_B_Mack]

Re: Interview with NBA Live 13 Developer Scott O'Gallagher

As always, I hold out optimism to see a good game, but you can't let hopes cloud your reality.

I grew up on Live and refused to play 2k until around 2006-07 when Live started going down the tubes. This generation of Live has been absolute trash. Aside from 2010, there wasn't one Live game that I bought that I felt that was even worth 1/10th of what I paid for it. (I never bought it new FYI). I don't even give EA credit for Live 10 either. That was Mike Wang's game and MW's team.

The most concerning part to me, was that there was so much positive feedback from Live 10, and it was absolutely ignored, to scrap for a bunch of guys who developed hockey games and their genius ideas. It's like they scrapped it just to scrap it so they can say it's an ALL NEW GAME so people can shell out 60 bucks for more trash. Yet, the fact that people continue to support and be apologetic for a brand that obviously doesn't care about anything else but making money off of you, is absolutely baffling to me.

They did the same thing to us when they moved to this generation. Live 2005 was still one of the funnest basketball games I ever played. Hell even Live 06 on PS2 was enjoyable, aside from the cheesy "roles" that they gave star players.

Then what happened? They went for all flash with no substance and the trend continued ever year. Lacking franchise modes, horrible CAP feature and terrible animations, player physics and models etc, which was a strong point in the previous generation.

Live 10 comes along. Totally revamped. Passing and dribbling controls done brilliantly. Presentation was incredible. And online was PLAYABLE. Obviously it still had it's flaws and quirky animations etc. but it was an incredible step in the right direction and a breath of fresh air that seemed Live got back on track and had a great buzz going around the community and gave us a competition again. Which in turn caused 2k to produce 2k11 which was a classic.

Blame it on the departure of MW, or blame it on EA, it doesn't matter. The concerning aspect to me, and should be to anyone defending this game or EA, is that EA as a whole, as a video game developer, couldn't even recognize that they had an incredible base to build from, and instead chose to completely trash it and start anew AGAIN, with some guys who make hockey games, for really no other good reason, other than to create some hype to sell a few more games. Which worked out really great I might add.

You can come in here and say 2k is stale, or 2k doesn't improve but you'd be dead wrong. Just because they don't totally revamp gameplay or player animations every year doesn't mean they aren't improving. 2k just did it the smart way. They found a formula that worked for the brand of basketball they wanted to produce, and improved upon it every year. The same way the team at San Diego does it for the Show. There is a reason both of those games continue to receive high marks year in and year out.

We've seen this schtick from EA, MANY times over and it appears people continue to fall for it. People need to learn to take a step back and view things objectively and stop living in the past.

So again, will I remain optimistic? Of course. As a fan of basketball and someone that grew up on Live, I definitely will. Do I have any faith in EA whatsoever to produce a playable basketball game? Absolutely not. At this point it is guilty until proven innocent, and after damn near 7 years of failures, that's how it should be. Don't give them the benefit of the doubt. They don't deserve it.

Wow, that's a great post man. You nailed it. Completely.

[kjjnesb]

Re: Interview with NBA Live 13 Developer Scott O'Gallagher

As always, I hold out optimism to see a good game, but you can't let hopes cloud your reality.

I grew up on Live and refused to play 2k until around 2006-07 when Live started going down the tubes. This generation of Live has been absolute trash. Aside from 2010, there wasn't one Live game that I bought that I felt that was even worth 1/10th of what I paid for it. (I never bought it new FYI). I don't even give EA credit for Live 10 either. That was Mike Wang's game and MW's team.

The most concerning part to me, was that there was so much positive feedback from Live 10, and it was absolutely ignored, to scrap for a bunch of guys who developed hockey games and their genius ideas. It's like they scrapped it just to scrap it so they can say it's an ALL NEW GAME so people can shell out 60 bucks for more trash. Yet, the fact that people continue to support and be apologetic for a brand that obviously doesn't care about anything else but making money off of you, is absolutely baffling to me.

They did the same thing to us when they moved to this generation. Live 2005 was still one of the funnest basketball games I ever played. Hell even Live 06 on PS2 was enjoyable, aside from the cheesy "roles" that they gave star players.

Then what happened? They went for all flash with no substance and the trend continued ever year. Lacking franchise modes, horrible CAP feature and terrible animations, player physics and models etc, which was a strong point in the previous generation.

Live 10 comes along. Totally revamped. Passing and dribbling controls done brilliantly. Presentation was incredible. And online was PLAYABLE. Obviously it still had it's flaws and quirky animations etc. but it was an incredible step in the right direction and a breath of fresh air that seemed Live got back on track and had a great buzz going around the community and gave us a competition again. Which in turn caused 2k to produce 2k11 which was a classic.

Blame it on the departure of MW, or blame it on EA, it doesn't matter. The concerning aspect to me, and should be to anyone defending this game or EA, is that EA as a whole, as a video game developer, couldn't even recognize that they had an incredible base to build from, and instead chose to completely trash it and start anew AGAIN, with some guys who make hockey games, for really no other good reason, other than to create some hype to sell a few more games. Which worked out really great I might add.

You can come in here and say 2k is stale, or 2k doesn't improve but you'd be dead wrong. Just because they don't totally revamp gameplay or player animations every year doesn't mean they aren't improving. 2k just did it the smart way. They found a formula that worked for the brand of basketball they wanted to produce, and improved upon it every year. The same way the team at San Diego does it for the Show. There is a reason both of those games continue to receive high marks year in and year out.

We've seen this schtick from EA, MANY times over and it appears people continue to fall for it. People need to learn to take a step back and view things objectively and stop living in the past.

So again, will I remain optimistic? Of course. As a fan of basketball and someone that grew up on Live, I definitely will. Do I have any faith in EA whatsoever to produce a playable basketball game? Absolutely not. At this point it is guilty until proven innocent, and after damn near 7 years of failures, that's how it should be. Don't give them the benefit of the doubt. They don't deserve it.

Well said Live 10 was great and they didn't bother to build on that.And before the enormous backlash they were prepared to launch Elite so there clearly has been a lack of self awareness and a def perception problem when it comes to this series on EA's part.

[DBMcGee3]

As always, I hold out optimism to see a good game, but you can't let hopes cloud your reality.

I grew up on Live and refused to play 2k until around 2006-07 when Live started going down the tubes. This generation of Live has been absolute trash. Aside from 2010, there wasn't one Live game that I bought that I felt that was even worth 1/10th of what I paid for it. (I never bought it new FYI). I don't even give EA credit for Live 10 either. That was Mike Wang's game and MW's team.

The most concerning part to me, was that there was so much positive feedback from Live 10, and it was absolutely ignored, to scrap for a bunch of guys who developed hockey games and their genius ideas. It's like they scrapped it just to scrap it so they can say it's an ALL NEW GAME so people can shell out 60 bucks for more trash. Yet, the fact that people continue to support and be apologetic for a brand that obviously doesn't care about anything else but making money off of you, is absolutely baffling to me.

They did the same thing to us when they moved to this generation. Live 2005 was still one of the funnest basketball games I ever played. Hell even Live 06 on PS2 was enjoyable, aside from the cheesy "roles" that they gave star players.

Then what happened? They went for all flash with no substance and the trend continued ever year. Lacking franchise modes, horrible CAP feature and terrible animations, player physics and models etc, which was a strong point in the previous generation.

Live 10 comes along. Totally revamped. Passing and dribbling controls done brilliantly. Presentation was incredible. And online was PLAYABLE. Obviously it still had it's flaws and quirky animations etc. but it was an incredible step in the right direction and a breath of fresh air that seemed Live got back on track and had a great buzz going around the community and gave us a competition again. Which in turn caused 2k to produce 2k11 which was a classic.

Blame it on the departure of MW, or blame it on EA, it doesn't matter. The concerning aspect to me, and should be to anyone defending this game or EA, is that EA as a whole, as a video game developer, couldn't even recognize that they had an incredible base to build from, and instead chose to completely trash it and start anew AGAIN, with some guys who make hockey games, for really no other good reason, other than to create some hype to sell a few more games. Which worked out really great I might add.

You can come in here and say 2k is stale, or 2k doesn't improve but you'd be dead wrong. Just because they don't totally revamp gameplay or player animations every year doesn't mean they aren't improving. 2k just did it the smart way. They found a formula that worked for the brand of basketball they wanted to produce, and improved upon it every year. The same way the team at San Diego does it for the Show. There is a reason both of those games continue to receive high marks year in and year out.

We've seen this schtick from EA, MANY times over and it appears people continue to fall for it. People need to learn to take a step back and view things objectively and stop living in the past.

So again, will I remain optimistic? Of course. As a fan of basketball and someone that grew up on Live, I definitely will. Do I have any faith in EA whatsoever to produce a playable basketball game? Absolutely not. At this point it is guilty until proven innocent, and after damn near 7 years of failures, that's how it should be. Don't give them the benefit of the doubt. They don't deserve it.

Couldn't agree more about Live. When you think about the time it must have taken to even attempt to start from scratch with Elite 11, you have to think that Live 11 could've been a pretty solid outing had the devs spent all those months merely improving upon their base. I'm not saying it would have been better than 2k11, because honestly that game was incredible AND they had Jordan. I do feel, however, that EA could have used Live 11 as a legitimate stepping stone to a much more competitive product. All they really desperately needed was more authentic player motions (sig style) and an upgrade on the graphics. Obviously those are two HUGE aspects, and I'm sure if it was an easy problem to fix, they would have done it. Easy for me to sit on my couch and complain.

I can agree to a certain extent about 2k and their yearly improvements, but to me the changes from 2k11 to 2k12 were so subtle that it really bothered me to pay the full $60. I even felt it regressed in some ways, mainly that the isomotion went from bad to worse, and that is such a major part of the game that it really derailed the experience for me. I'm very curious to see what changes Mike Wang has made to the isomotion he supposedly "has always hated", despite hyping it up year after year in the months leading up to the game. If he can fix that and make the player speed actually matter, I would almost certainly buy 2k13. Based on that gameplay vid they showed awhile back, it doesn't look to me like they addressed either of those things unfortunately. Still months to go, so we'll see. We should all be happy, monopolies are no good for the consumer.

[CRMosier_LM]

This is probably the most assinine thing ive ever read on these forums to date. Sounds like something 22ced or gatorbait would type. Not to knock them in any manner, its just the similar to the way they type.

Youre saying all live 13 needs is good online and fundamentals for it to be a win, while 2k has to go back to the drawing board for next gen? Did I just read that?
Elites on court execution was on par with NBA Unrivaled.



Live 13 is recycled bits from past Live's with a few mods and anything new they might add, whats there to steal? I can understand being optimistic, but so far this game is so unproven, and what has been said thus far hasnt been flattering.

what happens if Live 13 doesnt sell well, will they scrap and start over yet again?

For it to be a win as in a successful.start.... Yes. It's a brand new.team that is still being assembled and working on code that is not their own. Any of you expecting them to come out and compete with 2k in all aspects of the game are sorely mistaken.

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2

[CRMosier_LM]

Whoa. Cape is too tight man.

No need to come at the other side. Defend your own game (the game you like) without taking digs at the competition.

Who cares who plays basketball?

A gamer doesn't have to play ball to know what jerky animations are.

Hoping just for solid fundamentals and good online experience is the exact reasons why next gen sports gaming has sucked for the most part. You're setting the bar too low and that's why consumers get these crap games year after year.

Reasons like this is what pisses me off. Don't you have some contact with EA? Tell them to raise the bar and that no...solid fundamentals and good online is a complete failure for a title that took one full year off without a release.

Hold them accountable man.

My own game? I haven't played EA basketball game in 5 years lol. I have no input on live, my opinion is purely from a fan standpoint. I don't think either game is a real representation of the sport. Cool off a sec man, I'm a Madden guy. Do I own nba 2k12? Yes... The approach to their game modes is great (online though is easily the worst in sports gaming according to nearly everyone on planet earth), their presentation is great... Their Gameplay isn't very good... Certainly not a simulation of the sport... Then again neither is Live. I don't care who makes a better game... I want the sport represented right. You should too.



Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2

[kg54mvp1]

Re: Interview with NBA Live 13 Developer Scott O'Gallagher

Alright enough with the pessimistic opinions!

Does anybody know if anything will be revealed with this open house for ea today or tomorrow? The suspense is killing me.

[JerzeyReign]

Re: Interview with NBA Live 13 Developer Scott O'Gallagher

My own game? I haven't played EA basketball game in 5 years lol. I have no input on live, my opinion is purely from a fan standpoint. I don't think either game is a real representation of the sport. Cool off a sec man, I'm a Madden guy. Do I own nba 2k12? Yes... The approach to their game modes is great (online though is easily the worst in sports gaming according to nearly everyone on planet earth), their presentation is great... Their Gameplay isn't very good... Certainly not a simulation of the sport... Then again neither is Live. I don't care who makes a better game... I want the sport represented right. You should too.



Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2

Spoiler

[JerzeyReign]

Re: Interview with NBA Live 13 Developer Scott O'Gallagher

Alright enough with the pessimistic opinions!

Does anybody know if anything will be revealed with this open house for ea today or tomorrow? The suspense is killing me.

Tweet Scott O'Gallagher -- he may respond and let you know.

[kg54mvp1]

Re: Interview with NBA Live 13 Developer Scott O'Gallagher

Tweet Scott O'Gallagher -- he may respond and let you know.

Thanks, he is my go-to source, shame that the developers are not very active on twitter...
but I will give it a try and see what happens!

[JerzeyReign]

Re: Interview with NBA Live 13 Developer Scott O'Gallagher

Thanks, he is my go-to source, shame that the developers are not very active on twitter...
but I will give it a try and see what happens!

He's pretty active though so you should be able to get a response.

[aholbert32]

Re: Interview with NBA Live 13 Developer Scott O'Gallagher

My own game? I haven't played EA basketball game in 5 years lol. I have no input on live, my opinion is purely from a fan standpoint. I don't think either game is a real representation of the sport. Cool off a sec man, I'm a Madden guy. Do I own nba 2k12? Yes... The approach to their game modes is great (online though is easily the worst in sports gaming according to nearly everyone on planet earth), their presentation is great... Their Gameplay isn't very good... Certainly not a simulation of the sport... Then again neither is Live. I don't care who makes a better game... I want the sport represented right. You should too.



Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2

Thats comical. "Not a simulation of the sport"? What are you looking for? Is it a perfect simulation? No. But there has never been a basketball game thats had the animations, strategy and atmosphere that NBA 2k12 has. 2k12 and 2k11 are the closest we've ever gotten to a true sim (especially with slider tweaks). Seriously what are you looking for?

[23]

Re: Interview with NBA Live 13 Developer Scott O'Gallagher

Thats comical. "Not a simulation of the sport"? What are you looking for? Is it a perfect simulation? No. But there has never been a basketball game thats had the animations, strategy and atmosphere that NBA 2k12 has. 2k12 and 2k11 are the closest we've ever gotten to a true sim (especially with slider tweaks). Seriously what are you looking for?

That's exactly what I've been wanting to know but Im sure you'll keep getting EA tagline answers about stuff like online, presentation and passing

[noshun]

Re: Interview with NBA Live 13 Developer Scott O'Gallagher

My own game? I haven't played EA basketball game in 5 years lol. I have no input on live, my opinion is purely from a fan standpoint. I don't think either game is a real representation of the sport. Cool off a sec man, I'm a Madden guy. Do I own nba 2k12? Yes... The approach to their game modes is great (online though is easily the worst in sports gaming according to nearly everyone on planet earth), their presentation is great... Their Gameplay isn't very good... Certainly not a simulation of the sport... Then again neither is Live. I don't care who makes a better game... I want the sport represented right. You should too.



Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2

I find it comical youre on the AC, & havent played Live in 5 yrs. What exactly can you possibly tell the EA devs about the things you dislike from Live? Dont want to assume, but since I don't know how extensively you've played Live within the last 5 years, be it through friends or from the demos? Like what do you tell them?? Mind boggling...

[aholbert32]

Re: Interview with NBA Live 13 Developer Scott O'Gallagher

That's exactly what I've been wanting to know but Im sure you'll keep getting EA tagline answers about stuff like online, presentation and passing

Thats what I don't get. The 2k series isn't perfect on the court (lack of charges, occasional bad animations) but I don't know anyone who would say its not a real representation of the sport. If thats not the closest we've gotten to a real representation, what is?

As for Live, I'm looking forward to seeing more of it. Feature wise, it will probably be behind 2k13 (Live 10 didn't even have a 30 team season or franchise mode) but I want to see if the game has improved since 10.