Play of the day ID 2004 vid at IGN.

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • neovsmatrix
    MVP
    • Jul 2002
    • 2878

    #31
    Re: Play of the day ID 2004 vid at IGN.

    Hmm, couldn't be because of bias and the fact that NBA 2k3 was more polished, not to mention had an awesome presentation, and awesome graphics, could it? Actually, THAT is the reason why it was rated higher. It's a great product for the mainstream, but to a person who wants a game to play a realistic brand of basketball (and I'm talking about authentic plays, as well as real player tendencies and team tendencies and great AI, all of things which are still lacking except maybe great AI in the NBA 2k series now), the NBA 2k series for the most part doesn't do the trick, IMHO.

    Of course, there's also the simple and obvious answer as well. No set of reviews can offer insight into which is better when they were written by different reviewers. Steve Noah did not write the Xbox NBA 2k3 review, Jim Kelly did for this site, by the way.

    And not to mention that different reviewers put different weight on things. For instance, the Gamespot review even MENTIONED the absurdity in the playcalling system, thinking that it's odd fro a game to have so few plays, especially for a simulation. And yet, they still rated it high! Why the hell would they do that, unless they weren't concerned about the simulation market, just the average buyer who wouldn't even know or mind?

    By the way, ID 2003's animations graphics, and presentation were admittedly subpar. If I'd never played the game myself I'd consider it a sh*tty product as well. But I don't, because I have played it and I know better than to say it's a bad game. Id 2003's still a better game as far as I'm concerned than ESPN NBA Basketball, and unless Visual Concepts doesn't get their act together it'll still be a better product than next year's iteration. Meanwhile, EA Sports finally took the hint, and it seems to have modeled its game largely after ID 2003.

    I'll say this much: the competition is now a 2-horse race between EA Sports and High Voltage for my money from now on, until Visual Concepts gets their act together (which I really hope happens). By the way, I find that they are EXTREMELY slow in certain areas as far as response time goes. The first few NBA 2k iterations were frustrating, not because of the actual gameplay, but because of the devs' philosophy that ANYONE, even a terrible shooter, can light you up if you don't put a hand in their face. It took them several iterations just to fix something as simple as that. I'm glad they've finally added some good off-ball movement in ESPN, but the lack of plays offsets that drastically, IMHO. First the plays were generic in NBA 2k3, now they've made them even more generic. How can that be acceptable to an unbiased observer?

    By the way, have you even played ESPN NBA Basketball? I haven't heard your comments on it, yet you seem to be willing to defend it at all costs, possibly without even having played it. I have played it. And I know its flaws already, and they're pretty big. Some minor ones that are frustrating I can let go, but the major one which really gets me is the lack of plays and the fact that every team has the same set of plays in their arsenal. the only difference is they use it in different frequencies.

    Comment

    • jmood88
      Sean Payton: Retribution
      • Jul 2003
      • 34639

      #32
      Re: Play of the day ID 2004 vid at IGN.

      </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
      neovsmatrix said:
      Hmm, couldn't be because of bias and the fact that NBA 2k3 was more polished, not to mention had an awesome presentation, and awesome graphics, could it? Actually, THAT is the reason why it was rated higher. It's a great product for the mainstream, but to a person who wants a game to play a realistic brand of basketball (and I'm talking about authentic plays, as well as real player tendencies and team tendencies and great AI, all of things which are still lacking except maybe great AI in the NBA 2k series now), the NBA 2k series for the most part doesn't do the trick, IMHO.

      Of course, there's also the simple and obvious answer as well. No set of reviews can offer insight into which is better when they were written by different reviewers. Steve Noah did not write the Xbox NBA 2k3 review, Jim Kelly did for this site, by the way.

      And not to mention that different reviewers put different weight on things. For instance, the Gamespot review even MENTIONED the absurdity in the playcalling system, thinking that it's odd fro a game to have so few plays, especially for a simulation. And yet, they still rated it high! Why the hell would they do that, unless they weren't concerned about the simulation market, just the average buyer who wouldn't even know or mind?

      By the way, ID 2003's animations graphics, and presentation were admittedly subpar. If I'd never played the game myself I'd consider it a sh*tty product as well. But I don't, because I have played it and I know better than to say it's a bad game. Id 2003's still a better game as far as I'm concerned than ESPN NBA Basketball, and unless Visual Concepts doesn't get their act together it'll still be a better product than next year's iteration. Meanwhile, EA Sports finally took the hint, and it seems to have modeled its game largely after ID 2003.

      I'll say this much: the competition is now a 2-horse race between EA Sports and High Voltage for my money from now on, until Visual Concepts gets their act together (which I really hope happens). By the way, I find that they are EXTREMELY slow in certain areas as far as response time goes. The first few NBA 2k iterations were frustrating, not because of the actual gameplay, but because of the devs' philosophy that ANYONE, even a terrible shooter, can light you up if you don't put a hand in their face. It took them several iterations just to fix something as simple as that. I'm glad they've finally added some good off-ball movement in ESPN, but the lack of plays offsets that drastically, IMHO. First the plays were generic in NBA 2k3, now they've made them even more generic. How can that be acceptable to an unbiased observer?

      By the way, have you even played ESPN NBA Basketball? I haven't heard your comments on it, yet you seem to be willing to defend it at all costs, possibly without even having played it. I have played it. And I know its flaws already, and they're pretty big. Some minor ones that are frustrating I can let go, but the major one which really gets me is the lack of plays and the fact that every team has the same set of plays in their arsenal. the only difference is they use it in different frequencies.



      <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

      I think it was steve's impressions for nba2k4 where he said he liked nba2k3 more than inside drive or some other thread. ANyway, how can you determine what people base a game on and how much knowledge they have about basketball? Everytime someone says anything good about nba2k4 you start going off on how you know basketball how the reviewers don't know anything about basketball and are just giving a game a good score because it's more popular or because it looks better. If a person in these forums say anything good about nba2k4 or nba2k3 you start insulting them. If you don't believe me look at your posts in the espn nba forum. How is it that you know more about basketball then everyone who gives a game other than inside drive a high score?
      Originally posted by Blzer
      Let me assure you that I am a huge proponent of size, and it greatly matters. Don't ever let anyone tell you otherwise.

      If I went any bigger, it would not have properly fit with my equipment, so I had to optimize. I'm okay with it, but I also know what I'm missing with those five inches. :)

      Comment

      • jmood88
        Sean Payton: Retribution
        • Jul 2003
        • 34639

        #33
        Re: Play of the day ID 2004 vid at IGN.

        </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
        neovsmatrix said:
        Hmm, couldn't be because of bias and the fact that NBA 2k3 was more polished, not to mention had an awesome presentation, and awesome graphics, could it? Actually, THAT is the reason why it was rated higher. It's a great product for the mainstream, but to a person who wants a game to play a realistic brand of basketball (and I'm talking about authentic plays, as well as real player tendencies and team tendencies and great AI, all of things which are still lacking except maybe great AI in the NBA 2k series now), the NBA 2k series for the most part doesn't do the trick, IMHO.

        Of course, there's also the simple and obvious answer as well. No set of reviews can offer insight into which is better when they were written by different reviewers. Steve Noah did not write the Xbox NBA 2k3 review, Jim Kelly did for this site, by the way.

        And not to mention that different reviewers put different weight on things. For instance, the Gamespot review even MENTIONED the absurdity in the playcalling system, thinking that it's odd fro a game to have so few plays, especially for a simulation. And yet, they still rated it high! Why the hell would they do that, unless they weren't concerned about the simulation market, just the average buyer who wouldn't even know or mind?

        By the way, ID 2003's animations graphics, and presentation were admittedly subpar. If I'd never played the game myself I'd consider it a sh*tty product as well. But I don't, because I have played it and I know better than to say it's a bad game. Id 2003's still a better game as far as I'm concerned than ESPN NBA Basketball, and unless Visual Concepts doesn't get their act together it'll still be a better product than next year's iteration. Meanwhile, EA Sports finally took the hint, and it seems to have modeled its game largely after ID 2003.

        I'll say this much: the competition is now a 2-horse race between EA Sports and High Voltage for my money from now on, until Visual Concepts gets their act together (which I really hope happens). By the way, I find that they are EXTREMELY slow in certain areas as far as response time goes. The first few NBA 2k iterations were frustrating, not because of the actual gameplay, but because of the devs' philosophy that ANYONE, even a terrible shooter, can light you up if you don't put a hand in their face. It took them several iterations just to fix something as simple as that. I'm glad they've finally added some good off-ball movement in ESPN, but the lack of plays offsets that drastically, IMHO. First the plays were generic in NBA 2k3, now they've made them even more generic. How can that be acceptable to an unbiased observer?

        By the way, have you even played ESPN NBA Basketball? I haven't heard your comments on it, yet you seem to be willing to defend it at all costs, possibly without even having played it. I have played it. And I know its flaws already, and they're pretty big. Some minor ones that are frustrating I can let go, but the major one which really gets me is the lack of plays and the fact that every team has the same set of plays in their arsenal. the only difference is they use it in different frequencies.



        <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

        I think it was steve's impressions for nba2k4 where he said he liked nba2k3 more than inside drive or some other thread. ANyway, how can you determine what people base a game on and how much knowledge they have about basketball? Everytime someone says anything good about nba2k4 you start going off on how you know basketball how the reviewers don't know anything about basketball and are just giving a game a good score because it's more popular or because it looks better. If a person in these forums say anything good about nba2k4 or nba2k3 you start insulting them. If you don't believe me look at your posts in the espn nba forum. How is it that you know more about basketball then everyone who gives a game other than inside drive a high score?
        Originally posted by Blzer
        Let me assure you that I am a huge proponent of size, and it greatly matters. Don't ever let anyone tell you otherwise.

        If I went any bigger, it would not have properly fit with my equipment, so I had to optimize. I'm okay with it, but I also know what I'm missing with those five inches. :)

        Comment

        • jmood88
          Sean Payton: Retribution
          • Jul 2003
          • 34639

          #34
          Re: Play of the day ID 2004 vid at IGN.

          </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
          neovsmatrix said:
          Hmm, couldn't be because of bias and the fact that NBA 2k3 was more polished, not to mention had an awesome presentation, and awesome graphics, could it? Actually, THAT is the reason why it was rated higher. It's a great product for the mainstream, but to a person who wants a game to play a realistic brand of basketball (and I'm talking about authentic plays, as well as real player tendencies and team tendencies and great AI, all of things which are still lacking except maybe great AI in the NBA 2k series now), the NBA 2k series for the most part doesn't do the trick, IMHO.

          Of course, there's also the simple and obvious answer as well. No set of reviews can offer insight into which is better when they were written by different reviewers. Steve Noah did not write the Xbox NBA 2k3 review, Jim Kelly did for this site, by the way.

          And not to mention that different reviewers put different weight on things. For instance, the Gamespot review even MENTIONED the absurdity in the playcalling system, thinking that it's odd fro a game to have so few plays, especially for a simulation. And yet, they still rated it high! Why the hell would they do that, unless they weren't concerned about the simulation market, just the average buyer who wouldn't even know or mind?

          By the way, ID 2003's animations graphics, and presentation were admittedly subpar. If I'd never played the game myself I'd consider it a sh*tty product as well. But I don't, because I have played it and I know better than to say it's a bad game. Id 2003's still a better game as far as I'm concerned than ESPN NBA Basketball, and unless Visual Concepts doesn't get their act together it'll still be a better product than next year's iteration. Meanwhile, EA Sports finally took the hint, and it seems to have modeled its game largely after ID 2003.

          I'll say this much: the competition is now a 2-horse race between EA Sports and High Voltage for my money from now on, until Visual Concepts gets their act together (which I really hope happens). By the way, I find that they are EXTREMELY slow in certain areas as far as response time goes. The first few NBA 2k iterations were frustrating, not because of the actual gameplay, but because of the devs' philosophy that ANYONE, even a terrible shooter, can light you up if you don't put a hand in their face. It took them several iterations just to fix something as simple as that. I'm glad they've finally added some good off-ball movement in ESPN, but the lack of plays offsets that drastically, IMHO. First the plays were generic in NBA 2k3, now they've made them even more generic. How can that be acceptable to an unbiased observer?

          By the way, have you even played ESPN NBA Basketball? I haven't heard your comments on it, yet you seem to be willing to defend it at all costs, possibly without even having played it. I have played it. And I know its flaws already, and they're pretty big. Some minor ones that are frustrating I can let go, but the major one which really gets me is the lack of plays and the fact that every team has the same set of plays in their arsenal. the only difference is they use it in different frequencies.



          <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

          I think it was steve's impressions for nba2k4 where he said he liked nba2k3 more than inside drive or some other thread. ANyway, how can you determine what people base a game on and how much knowledge they have about basketball? Everytime someone says anything good about nba2k4 you start going off on how you know basketball how the reviewers don't know anything about basketball and are just giving a game a good score because it's more popular or because it looks better. If a person in these forums say anything good about nba2k4 or nba2k3 you start insulting them. If you don't believe me look at your posts in the espn nba forum. How is it that you know more about basketball then everyone who gives a game other than inside drive a high score?
          Originally posted by Blzer
          Let me assure you that I am a huge proponent of size, and it greatly matters. Don't ever let anyone tell you otherwise.

          If I went any bigger, it would not have properly fit with my equipment, so I had to optimize. I'm okay with it, but I also know what I'm missing with those five inches. :)

          Comment

          • WTF
            MVP
            • Aug 2002
            • 20274

            #35
            Re: Play of the day ID 2004 vid at IGN.

            I for one don't care which company gets my money, because every year, all three of "The Big Three" get my money. Every year, I buy all three games, and this year has been no different. I don't pay attention to the reviewers, because everyone has different gaming tastes. Like this year, I am absolutely Loving NBA Live. Last year I hated it. Last year I loved NBA 2k3 (For a while), this year I feel it is worse in gameplay and AI than Shootout was last year and I can't bare to play it any more. Last year, I loved ID, and hopefully this years game won't be too much of a change, but still enough to make it worth my $54.

            I don't think that a person's game preference, has anything to do with their knowledge of basketball, but I do however feel it has a lot to do with, the style of game they want to play, whether it be breakin ankles, or shooting the soft "J". Just because someone says they like ESPN basketball this year, doesn't make me say, "Hey, you know nothing about the sport of basketball", and I don't think Neo feels that way either (correct me if I am wrong neo), but the fact that some people make unsupported comments about a game, and show that they have no knowledge of the game.

            Just my $0.02...
            Twitter - WTF_OS
            #DropMeAFollow

            Comment

            • WTF
              MVP
              • Aug 2002
              • 20274

              #36
              Re: Play of the day ID 2004 vid at IGN.

              I for one don't care which company gets my money, because every year, all three of "The Big Three" get my money. Every year, I buy all three games, and this year has been no different. I don't pay attention to the reviewers, because everyone has different gaming tastes. Like this year, I am absolutely Loving NBA Live. Last year I hated it. Last year I loved NBA 2k3 (For a while), this year I feel it is worse in gameplay and AI than Shootout was last year and I can't bare to play it any more. Last year, I loved ID, and hopefully this years game won't be too much of a change, but still enough to make it worth my $54.

              I don't think that a person's game preference, has anything to do with their knowledge of basketball, but I do however feel it has a lot to do with, the style of game they want to play, whether it be breakin ankles, or shooting the soft "J". Just because someone says they like ESPN basketball this year, doesn't make me say, "Hey, you know nothing about the sport of basketball", and I don't think Neo feels that way either (correct me if I am wrong neo), but the fact that some people make unsupported comments about a game, and show that they have no knowledge of the game.

              Just my $0.02...
              Twitter - WTF_OS
              #DropMeAFollow

              Comment

              • WTF
                MVP
                • Aug 2002
                • 20274

                #37
                Re: Play of the day ID 2004 vid at IGN.

                I for one don't care which company gets my money, because every year, all three of "The Big Three" get my money. Every year, I buy all three games, and this year has been no different. I don't pay attention to the reviewers, because everyone has different gaming tastes. Like this year, I am absolutely Loving NBA Live. Last year I hated it. Last year I loved NBA 2k3 (For a while), this year I feel it is worse in gameplay and AI than Shootout was last year and I can't bare to play it any more. Last year, I loved ID, and hopefully this years game won't be too much of a change, but still enough to make it worth my $54.

                I don't think that a person's game preference, has anything to do with their knowledge of basketball, but I do however feel it has a lot to do with, the style of game they want to play, whether it be breakin ankles, or shooting the soft "J". Just because someone says they like ESPN basketball this year, doesn't make me say, "Hey, you know nothing about the sport of basketball", and I don't think Neo feels that way either (correct me if I am wrong neo), but the fact that some people make unsupported comments about a game, and show that they have no knowledge of the game.

                Just my $0.02...
                Twitter - WTF_OS
                #DropMeAFollow

                Comment

                • neovsmatrix
                  MVP
                  • Jul 2002
                  • 2878

                  #38
                  Re: Play of the day ID 2004 vid at IGN.

                  Well, I have no problem for them saying ESPN NBA Basketball is better as long as they can state why, especially when they put down another game in order to make ESPN NBA Basketball seem better than (IMHO) it really is. I think it's wrong when they claim that there are no flaws to the game, that plays don't matter, etc. That just seems like a way to excuse Visual Concepts for not putting in a great game and just focusing on trying to make it as mainstream as possible.

                  Comment

                  • neovsmatrix
                    MVP
                    • Jul 2002
                    • 2878

                    #39
                    Re: Play of the day ID 2004 vid at IGN.

                    Well, I have no problem for them saying ESPN NBA Basketball is better as long as they can state why, especially when they put down another game in order to make ESPN NBA Basketball seem better than (IMHO) it really is. I think it's wrong when they claim that there are no flaws to the game, that plays don't matter, etc. That just seems like a way to excuse Visual Concepts for not putting in a great game and just focusing on trying to make it as mainstream as possible.

                    Comment

                    • neovsmatrix
                      MVP
                      • Jul 2002
                      • 2878

                      #40
                      Re: Play of the day ID 2004 vid at IGN.

                      Well, I have no problem for them saying ESPN NBA Basketball is better as long as they can state why, especially when they put down another game in order to make ESPN NBA Basketball seem better than (IMHO) it really is. I think it's wrong when they claim that there are no flaws to the game, that plays don't matter, etc. That just seems like a way to excuse Visual Concepts for not putting in a great game and just focusing on trying to make it as mainstream as possible.

                      Comment

                      • neovsmatrix
                        MVP
                        • Jul 2002
                        • 2878

                        #41
                        Re: Play of the day ID 2004 vid at IGN.

                        Uh, you should start looking at my posts a little longer, because I don't start insulting people blindly. When they start picking on me just because I challenge their views of why ESPN is better, I'll respond whatever way I see fit to respond.

                        As for how can I think game reviewers don't know anything about basketball, have you even LOOKED at how they even play the game in their vids? Or have you even bothered to READ their damn reviews? Because I can guarantee you AI is hardly part of the game critique, unless it's REALLY bad. By the way, EGM even mentioned the poor AI, but only a passing statement and nothing more. Same with Gamespot. And OXM (Official Xbox Magazine) rated Live 2004 a bit higher than ESPN NBA Basketball.

                        You're right about one thing: There's no way I can KNOW for sure, but I sure as hell SUSPECT that it is the case, and I've given my reasons to back that up. By the way, Steve also said he was enjoying Live 2004 more than NBA 2k4, so what does that tell you?

                        Let me ask you again: HAVE you played NBA 2k4? hell, maybe you're just really slow or maybe you just really want to believe Visual Concepts makes great basketball games so it takes you so long to realize the truth. Since it took you so long to realize NBA 2k3's flaws until now, you may enjoy the game, but the flaws are very evident right from when you start the game.

                        Comment

                        • neovsmatrix
                          MVP
                          • Jul 2002
                          • 2878

                          #42
                          Re: Play of the day ID 2004 vid at IGN.

                          Uh, you should start looking at my posts a little longer, because I don't start insulting people blindly. When they start picking on me just because I challenge their views of why ESPN is better, I'll respond whatever way I see fit to respond.

                          As for how can I think game reviewers don't know anything about basketball, have you even LOOKED at how they even play the game in their vids? Or have you even bothered to READ their damn reviews? Because I can guarantee you AI is hardly part of the game critique, unless it's REALLY bad. By the way, EGM even mentioned the poor AI, but only a passing statement and nothing more. Same with Gamespot. And OXM (Official Xbox Magazine) rated Live 2004 a bit higher than ESPN NBA Basketball.

                          You're right about one thing: There's no way I can KNOW for sure, but I sure as hell SUSPECT that it is the case, and I've given my reasons to back that up. By the way, Steve also said he was enjoying Live 2004 more than NBA 2k4, so what does that tell you?

                          Let me ask you again: HAVE you played NBA 2k4? hell, maybe you're just really slow or maybe you just really want to believe Visual Concepts makes great basketball games so it takes you so long to realize the truth. Since it took you so long to realize NBA 2k3's flaws until now, you may enjoy the game, but the flaws are very evident right from when you start the game.

                          Comment

                          • neovsmatrix
                            MVP
                            • Jul 2002
                            • 2878

                            #43
                            Re: Play of the day ID 2004 vid at IGN.

                            Uh, you should start looking at my posts a little longer, because I don't start insulting people blindly. When they start picking on me just because I challenge their views of why ESPN is better, I'll respond whatever way I see fit to respond.

                            As for how can I think game reviewers don't know anything about basketball, have you even LOOKED at how they even play the game in their vids? Or have you even bothered to READ their damn reviews? Because I can guarantee you AI is hardly part of the game critique, unless it's REALLY bad. By the way, EGM even mentioned the poor AI, but only a passing statement and nothing more. Same with Gamespot. And OXM (Official Xbox Magazine) rated Live 2004 a bit higher than ESPN NBA Basketball.

                            You're right about one thing: There's no way I can KNOW for sure, but I sure as hell SUSPECT that it is the case, and I've given my reasons to back that up. By the way, Steve also said he was enjoying Live 2004 more than NBA 2k4, so what does that tell you?

                            Let me ask you again: HAVE you played NBA 2k4? hell, maybe you're just really slow or maybe you just really want to believe Visual Concepts makes great basketball games so it takes you so long to realize the truth. Since it took you so long to realize NBA 2k3's flaws until now, you may enjoy the game, but the flaws are very evident right from when you start the game.

                            Comment

                            • jmood88
                              Sean Payton: Retribution
                              • Jul 2003
                              • 34639

                              #44
                              Re: Play of the day ID 2004 vid at IGN.

                              </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                              neovsmatrix said:
                              Uh, you should start looking at my posts a little longer, because I don't start insulting people blindly. When they start picking on me just because I challenge their views of why ESPN is better, I'll respond whatever way I see fit to respond.

                              As for how can I think game reviewers don't know anything about basketball, have you even LOOKED at how they even play the game in their vids? Or have you even bothered to READ their damn reviews? Because I can guarantee you AI is hardly part of the game critique, unless it's REALLY bad. By the way, EGM even mentioned the poor AI, but only a passing statement and nothing more. Same with Gamespot. And OXM (Official Xbox Magazine) rated Live 2004 a bit higher than ESPN NBA Basketball.

                              You're right about one thing: There's no way I can KNOW for sure, but I sure as hell SUSPECT that it is the case, and I've given my reasons to back that up. By the way, Steve also said he was enjoying Live 2004 more than NBA 2k4, so what does that tell you?

                              Let me ask you again: HAVE you played NBA 2k4? hell, maybe you're just really slow or maybe you just really want to believe Visual Concepts makes great basketball games so it takes you so long to realize the truth. Since it took you so long to realize NBA 2k3's flaws until now, you may enjoy the game, but the flaws are very evident right from when you start the game.


                              <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                              Look, you need to stop insulting people. I'm not the one sitting here insulting you at all so shut up. No, I haven't gotten the game yet but I'm going to.
                              Originally posted by Blzer
                              Let me assure you that I am a huge proponent of size, and it greatly matters. Don't ever let anyone tell you otherwise.

                              If I went any bigger, it would not have properly fit with my equipment, so I had to optimize. I'm okay with it, but I also know what I'm missing with those five inches. :)

                              Comment

                              • jmood88
                                Sean Payton: Retribution
                                • Jul 2003
                                • 34639

                                #45
                                Re: Play of the day ID 2004 vid at IGN.

                                </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
                                neovsmatrix said:
                                Uh, you should start looking at my posts a little longer, because I don't start insulting people blindly. When they start picking on me just because I challenge their views of why ESPN is better, I'll respond whatever way I see fit to respond.

                                As for how can I think game reviewers don't know anything about basketball, have you even LOOKED at how they even play the game in their vids? Or have you even bothered to READ their damn reviews? Because I can guarantee you AI is hardly part of the game critique, unless it's REALLY bad. By the way, EGM even mentioned the poor AI, but only a passing statement and nothing more. Same with Gamespot. And OXM (Official Xbox Magazine) rated Live 2004 a bit higher than ESPN NBA Basketball.

                                You're right about one thing: There's no way I can KNOW for sure, but I sure as hell SUSPECT that it is the case, and I've given my reasons to back that up. By the way, Steve also said he was enjoying Live 2004 more than NBA 2k4, so what does that tell you?

                                Let me ask you again: HAVE you played NBA 2k4? hell, maybe you're just really slow or maybe you just really want to believe Visual Concepts makes great basketball games so it takes you so long to realize the truth. Since it took you so long to realize NBA 2k3's flaws until now, you may enjoy the game, but the flaws are very evident right from when you start the game.


                                <hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

                                Look, you need to stop insulting people. I'm not the one sitting here insulting you at all so shut up. No, I haven't gotten the game yet but I'm going to.
                                Originally posted by Blzer
                                Let me assure you that I am a huge proponent of size, and it greatly matters. Don't ever let anyone tell you otherwise.

                                If I went any bigger, it would not have properly fit with my equipment, so I had to optimize. I'm okay with it, but I also know what I'm missing with those five inches. :)

                                Comment

                                Working...