First of all, let me just say that I love this forum! I enjoy observing peoples comments on games and use the sliders that many here come up with to help my overall gaming experience. Above all though, I love sports video games(own all of the football, basketball, baseball) that come out every year. I like my sports games to play out as realistic as possible, meaning I will sacrifice enjoyment for realism. As an example, my favorite games of all time are High Heat and Winning Eleven. Not because these games have the best graphics or because I play them with a smile on my face all the time. They are great because most of what happens on the real playing surface happens in the game, regardless of how much I try to manipulate it. So in a nutshell, I want realistic play and stats for my skill level, which I would consider good but not great. Much to my suprise, NBA Live more than gives me a great experience.
I started franchises(Pacers) in both games, ESPN and Live. I have played through 12 games in each. In NBA live I use Jistics latest sliders(love his for ESPN College Hoops), and with ESPN I use Bizcanos. Let me be sure to say that both of these sliders are excellent, but I have found that certain aspects of each game cannot be effected enough by the sliders.
When I play Live, it feels as if each teams stars are playing the way they should. Lebron slashed but struggled from the outside. Pierce shot jumpers and posted when Artest wasnt in the game. Shaq, well Shaq dominated Foster like he should. In ESPN, these same guys didnt manufacture points the way that they should. Shaq hardly ever shoots outside of the lane, but in ESPN he has plenty. Pierce never went to the free throw line. Lebron took 12 three's against me. Im sorry, but this is not how these guys play. Stars play like stars in Live.
Next point, Free throws. There have been plenty of free throws in my Live franchise, hardly any in ESPN. Im sorry, but this is probably more important to me than stars playing like stars. You have to generate points from the stripe. In ESPN, I have yet to see either myself or the computer be in THE BONUS! Thats right, THE BONUS! While it may not be important to some people, this is key for my basketball experience.
Of course, another area of concern for me is timeouts. Yes it can be worked around(by calling timeouts for the computer), that still does not solve the strategy involved with timeouts. Teams go on runs at different points throughout a game. In Live, the computer will call a timeout if I go on a run in the first quarter. It will play score, foul, timeout late in the game. This experience makes it more realistic.
Other things would be that my stats , for the season(more important than single games) are pretty much dead on to what they were last season for the Pacers in Live. ESPN has noone scoring over 21pts a game in the NBA after 12 games. In fact, Live's stats are sometimes frighteningly accurate(Mcgrady 28pts a game, Bryant 27pts, Pacers 46% shooting for the season, Oneal 59%, Miller 41% 3pt.) The franchise as a whole also seems to work better for me, although I have not seen any crazy trades in ESPN as of yet.
Ultimately, for someone who only plays franchise and wants realism, Live is the basketball game for me. No its not perfect(players running, stop to catch, set plays not as in depth as ESPN), but for my NBA experience , Live more than satisfies. Hope I didnt offend anyone as I have read how many take it personally when their "game of choice" is analysed. Thank you for reading.
I started franchises(Pacers) in both games, ESPN and Live. I have played through 12 games in each. In NBA live I use Jistics latest sliders(love his for ESPN College Hoops), and with ESPN I use Bizcanos. Let me be sure to say that both of these sliders are excellent, but I have found that certain aspects of each game cannot be effected enough by the sliders.
When I play Live, it feels as if each teams stars are playing the way they should. Lebron slashed but struggled from the outside. Pierce shot jumpers and posted when Artest wasnt in the game. Shaq, well Shaq dominated Foster like he should. In ESPN, these same guys didnt manufacture points the way that they should. Shaq hardly ever shoots outside of the lane, but in ESPN he has plenty. Pierce never went to the free throw line. Lebron took 12 three's against me. Im sorry, but this is not how these guys play. Stars play like stars in Live.
Next point, Free throws. There have been plenty of free throws in my Live franchise, hardly any in ESPN. Im sorry, but this is probably more important to me than stars playing like stars. You have to generate points from the stripe. In ESPN, I have yet to see either myself or the computer be in THE BONUS! Thats right, THE BONUS! While it may not be important to some people, this is key for my basketball experience.
Of course, another area of concern for me is timeouts. Yes it can be worked around(by calling timeouts for the computer), that still does not solve the strategy involved with timeouts. Teams go on runs at different points throughout a game. In Live, the computer will call a timeout if I go on a run in the first quarter. It will play score, foul, timeout late in the game. This experience makes it more realistic.
Other things would be that my stats , for the season(more important than single games) are pretty much dead on to what they were last season for the Pacers in Live. ESPN has noone scoring over 21pts a game in the NBA after 12 games. In fact, Live's stats are sometimes frighteningly accurate(Mcgrady 28pts a game, Bryant 27pts, Pacers 46% shooting for the season, Oneal 59%, Miller 41% 3pt.) The franchise as a whole also seems to work better for me, although I have not seen any crazy trades in ESPN as of yet.
Ultimately, for someone who only plays franchise and wants realism, Live is the basketball game for me. No its not perfect(players running, stop to catch, set plays not as in depth as ESPN), but for my NBA experience , Live more than satisfies. Hope I didnt offend anyone as I have read how many take it personally when their "game of choice" is analysed. Thank you for reading.
Comment