NBA Elite 11 Interview with Creative Director David Littman

[loadleft]

Re: NBA Elite 11 Interview with Creative Director David Littman

Since I've somewhat egged this discussion on let me defend and/or clarify my position. To me, rEAnimator, the real debate is about what are you simulating. There's one crowd that wants the game to simulate true to life NBA basketball (I am in this crowd). This group doesn't want the user to be able to give the players ability they don't posses in real life. So it's like saying what would it take for the Clippers to win the ring this year. The way the games sounds like it is setup the answer is just be good at manipulating the sticks. There sounds like there's is little to no benefit to seeking better players, sure the shot will be easier with a better player, but if I practice the release with the lesser player until I got it down pat then that makes that shot easier too. Now, I've removed the real life requirements to making a better team and substituted something that only exist in the video game world. For guys on my side of the aisle that isn't sim!

The other group is saying they want user skill to be the ultimate determining factor. Sure, I agree that would make a really good video game, but not so much a simulation of reality. I can't see how this is hard to understand, now you may decide that you don't want a true sim and that's understandable and I can at least respect that. However if you do, how could you make it so that anybody can do almost anything in terms of shooting when in reality they can't. Now we could be ridiculous just to make a point by saying that we'd have to play exactly as the real teams do in order to be a sim by my standard but that makes as much sense as saying that flight simulators need to have explosives installed in them so that you really blow up when you crash. The point of simulating something is to give you all the factors yet allow one to control them to achieve an alternate outcome. That's the case with simulations in all walks of life. With that said I just don't see the point of calling a game a simlation of the NBA if it doesn't accurately represent what the players in the NBA are capable of. If I can make each player be whatever I want him to be then what part of the NBA is being simulated? What I expect is to replace the players' mind (being that's what controls them) with my own, but not to make them taller, faster, or better in any way.

So how would I win with the Clipper you ask? By making better descisions but also accepting that in the REAL NBA the Clippers simply can't beat LA, Boston, Orlando, etc. without better players. If you're making the game so that they can you are as far from reality as giving the players wings. Obviously on any given night a team can slip up or another can get lucky but on a consistent basis some teams are just bad, that's why teams have GM's and all the rest of the staff that work hard to get players in place. When Kobe demanded a trade he didn't go out and demand that Smush work on his jumper, he asked for better players, and he got Gasol.

What I am getting at is I'd like the game to reflect reality not fantasy but I accept that I may not be in the majority too. So... I am simply offering a view for you to consider, and to let you know why gamers like me will turn away from your product if in the end it doesn't reflect what we see as reality. I've always been weird in that way, I won't play HALO because I can't get into shooting lasers and killing aliens but MW2 is one of my favorite games because even if dying and getting up isn't realistic the game is based on some sort of reality.

[RayDog253]

Re: NBA Elite 11 Interview with Creative Director David Littman

I don't see it as giving them anything extra, but being in control of the skills they do have. Nothing you do on the sticks gives the player better attributes.

They way I see it, it's going to be tough to hit shots with rondo. To have the best chance in hitting a shot with rondo You're probably going to have to be wide open, PERFECTLY STRAIGHT (cause he's not a good shooter) up on the sticks, and hit the perfect release/sweet-spot.

Some players might get lucky and hit a couple jumpers with rondo, but I'm pretty sure we wont see a Rondo type player shooting lights out from the floor.

Yeah, this is all speculation at the moment. But this is my understanding of the shooting mechanic. I guess we'll all see come demo time.

[Boilerbuzz]

Re: NBA Elite 11 Interview with Creative Director David Littman

It seems to be a discussion where no one is "wrong" per se. For me, I enjoy the elements of sports games where I'm tasked to succeed using these players' real life strengths and weaknesses. Overcoming those weaknesses using my knowlege of the sport is the fun of the challenge. I absolutely love the concept in many ways. But, if for some reason, I'm able to overcome the players' weaknesses in a way that doesn't fully accentuate the principles of the sport, then I don't know if like that. Basically, I would prefer the student of the game be more successful than the "joystick jockey". But, it's a video game and the creative freedom given is being used here. It's for this reason that I'm REALLY looking forward to the demo. I want to see this in action. It's sounds like a LOT of fun in a way, but I have some worries and I want to see how the Elite team addresses those concerns.

[sroz39]

Re: NBA Elite 11 Interview with Creative Director David Littman

I'm looking forward to this game. A lot. I have bought every 2K basketball game since it's inception and haven't bought Live since Live 2005. I was cautiously optimistic about Live 10 and it turned out to be pretty good, probably more fun than 2K10 in many respects. Didn't buy it though. I think what they are trying to do with this game is EXACTLY what basketball needs. The team working on the 2K series has become so reliant on adding animations in recent years that they've forgotten what it's all about and that's player control. In 2K9 and 2K10, the engine is so animation driven that to move the player I'm controlling with any consistency is a nightmare.

Sometimes, when I push the left stick all the way, my guy runs. Other times, he side-shuffles slowly. Trying to make a subtle move was next to impossible because it seemed like the game was guessing what you meant to do with the controller and animate according to some under-the-hood formula. Live 10 was fantastic when it came to player control. Where I wanted to move was where I went, for the most part. The problem Live ran into last year is when the two-man canned animations took over. It was awful at times. Seems like these kinds of instances is exactly what they are trying to eliminate. And I say good on them. In a game like basketball, hockey and football, the game almost has to be physics driven. Canned animations just won't cut it. It's why the NHL series is going that way and why this series is going that way.

Eventually, you've added so many animations to your game that inevitably, the game will pick the wrong one and something will look off. It happens in almost every game we play (other than Backbreaker) and kudos to EA for realizing this. They probably understood they've hit the plateau with their respective games' engines and needed to move on with their evolution from an animations-driven (last-gen) engine to a physics-driven one.

As for the player control argument, being a big time NHL player, I can tell you that even though they give you almost full control of what happens in the game, I can't take the Leafs and beat the Penguins more than 2 out of 10 times (with the right difficulty level). So yeah, everything's in my control but it doesn't allow me to turn a terrible player into a great one. What it does allow to happen is, every now and then, a fringe player will make a terrific play. Which is no different than what you guys are arguing about here. Though Rondo will not consistently hit the 3, he CAN and at times, it will happen in a very important part of the game. Sports are like that, it's why we watch them. For those moments. But if the Elite game is anything like the NHL series, ratings will still matter a great deal, regardless of how good you are on the sticks.

[dirtypuppet]

Re: NBA Elite 11 Interview with Creative Director David Littman

My understanding of this argument is putting the controls more firmly in the users hand isn't giving us the ability to make certain players play consistently above themselves like some are thinking.

In basketball, players have good and bad games, I think what is going to happen in Elite us that you have a certain amount of skill, but you're not perfect,
So instead of the CPU randomly fluctuating values to determine whether an uncontested shot goes in or not, it will be either your human error/ skill which controls the outcome. If tuned correctly, being a very skilled NBA Elite player should give you the best chance of making someone play with the best of their abilities (but not play out of their minds because they still have their in game ratings to hold things together)

Personally I think this is a great way to go, I just hope EA gets the balance right.

[bltzkrieg666]

Re: NBA Elite 11 Interview with Creative Director David Littman

What you are saying is wild 1st off, and you never actually proved my point wrong, just droped your opinion. Now, somebody like Kobe has mastered his release, everytime Kobe shoots the rock you see the exact same release point and the exact same flick of the wrist, Kobe is a 45% shooter for his career, Kobe does not make every single one of his open jumpers, noboby in the NBA makes 100% of their open jumpers, I could say that 15% of the league has mastered their releases, why is their no one shooting anywhere near 80%, let alone 100% on unguarded jumpshots, because its not possible.


Jumpers are a crapshot reguardless of how Elite is trying to spin it, no offense, but I feel like the Elite workers are trying to get people to believe that in real life you have 100% control of if the shot goes in or not, when in reality you do your best to get your perfect release and the rest is a sit and watch cinema, this is real basketball logic, and real sports logic to be honest. Players can not even pass the ball directly through a hole in the skills challenge 100% of the time, you mean to tell me that its easier to shoot the ball with a perfect release and make 100% of your shots than it is to make a simple chest pass through a hole thats 20 feet away from you, the logic to these things are scaring me as far as what you guys are believeing and whats being put into this game. That is not realistic, simple, there is no way around it, nobody in this world can make 100 straight shots wide open if they get a perfect release everytime, come on man.

There is such a thing as the perfect shot and that is what separates the pros from us amateurs. It's a pros ability to consistently hit the perfect shot. What Littman is referring to in the interview is that in the past shooting in games is just a button press and and the result is just left up to mathmatic equations. I can't count the number of rediculously easy shots are missed in basketball games because of this. With EA's new shot control is functions in a similar fashion to, lets say the kick meter in Madden 10. The point being that it is your ability to hit that sweet spot that will determine success and failure and not some random equation. Of course each players sweetspot will be different and will dynamically change based upon things like distance from hoop, defender in the face, real life stats etc. So what makes this great is that it all rests with you. If you suck then you will miss shots and if you are good then you make shots but there will be no BS factor in this because if a basket is made you know it was earned. Every other sport works like this and alwasy has. Its about time basketball has finally caught up with other sports.

[bltzkrieg666]

Re: NBA Elite 11 Interview with Creative Director David Littman

Since I've somewhat egged this discussion on let me defend and/or clarify my position. To me, rEAnimator, the real debate is about what are you simulating. There's one crowd that wants the game to simulate true to life NBA basketball (I am in this crowd). This group doesn't want the user to be able to give the players ability they don't posses in real life. So it's like saying what would it take for the Clippers to win the ring this year. The way the games sounds like it is setup the answer is just be good at manipulating the sticks. There sounds like there's is little to no benefit to seeking better players, sure the shot will be easier with a better player, but if I practice the release with the lesser player until I got it down pat then that makes that shot easier too. Now, I've removed the real life requirements to making a better team and substituted something that only exist in the video game world. For guys on my side of the aisle that isn't sim!

The other group is saying they want user skill to be the ultimate determining factor. Sure, I agree that would make a really good video game, but not so much a simulation of reality. I can't see how this is hard to understand, now you may decide that you don't want a true sim and that's understandable and I can at least respect that. However if you do, how could you make it so that anybody can do almost anything in terms of shooting when in reality they can't. Now we could be ridiculous just to make a point by saying that we'd have to play exactly as the real teams do in order to be a sim by my standard but that makes as much sense as saying that flight simulators need to have explosives installed in them so that you really blow up when you crash. The point of simulating something is to give you all the factors yet allow one to control them to achieve an alternate outcome. That's the case with simulations in all walks of life. With that said I just don't see the point of calling a game a simlation of the NBA if it doesn't accurately represent what the players in the NBA are capable of. If I can make each player be whatever I want him to be then what part of the NBA is being simulated? What I expect is to replace the players' mind (being that's what controls them) with my own, but not to make them taller, faster, or better in any way.

So how would I win with the Clipper you ask? By making better descisions but also accepting that in the REAL NBA the Clippers simply can't beat LA, Boston, Orlando, etc. without better players. If you're making the game so that they can you are as far from reality as giving the players wings. Obviously on any given night a team can slip up or another can get lucky but on a consistent basis some teams are just bad, that's why teams have GM's and all the rest of the staff that work hard to get players in place. When Kobe demanded a trade he didn't go out and demand that Smush work on his jumper, he asked for better players, and he got Gasol.

What I am getting at is I'd like the game to reflect reality not fantasy but I accept that I may not be in the majority too. So... I am simply offering a view for you to consider, and to let you know why gamers like me will turn away from your product if in the end it doesn't reflect what we see as reality. I've always been weird in that way, I won't play HALO because I can't get into shooting lasers and killing aliens but MW2 is one of my favorite games because even if dying and getting up isn't realistic the game is based on some sort of reality.

Look, we are playing a video game and video games are supposed to be about YOUR skill and not the AI skill. If the game performs like its real life counterparts then the game becomes scripted and contrived. If Kobe shoots 45% from the field then the game is going to construct that and quite frankly that is BS. Players have great games, and bad games. and when you base a game on mathmatical equations your just going to get the averages. I want my skill to shine in a game and not the AI's. Every other sports game is based on user skill so why do you want the AI to play the game for you. If you want the AI to decide every aspect of this game for you then you might as well just put it on CPU vs CPU and just sit back and watch the games because you ain't playing it.

You can't tell me that we all haven't pulled our hair out at how rediculous the AI is at times in determining when a shot falls or not. I am a Live 10 player and I have wanted to break my controller so many times over routine shots and/or easy put backs that miss the mark. At least in elite this year those misses will be of my own doing and I am perfectly satisfied with that. Video games are supposed to showcase the users abilities and not the statisticians.

[bltzkrieg666]

Re: NBA Elite 11 Interview with Creative Director David Littman

I'm looking forward to this game. A lot. I have bought every 2K basketball game since it's inception and haven't bought Live since Live 2005. I was cautiously optimistic about Live 10 and it turned out to be pretty good, probably more fun than 2K10 in many respects. Didn't buy it though. I think what they are trying to do with this game is EXACTLY what basketball needs. The team working on the 2K series has become so reliant on adding animations in recent years that they've forgotten what it's all about and that's player control. In 2K9 and 2K10, the engine is so animation driven that to move the player I'm controlling with any consistency is a nightmare.

Sometimes, when I push the left stick all the way, my guy runs. Other times, he side-shuffles slowly. Trying to make a subtle move was next to impossible because it seemed like the game was guessing what you meant to do with the controller and animate according to some under-the-hood formula. Live 10 was fantastic when it came to player control. Where I wanted to move was where I went, for the most part. The problem Live ran into last year is when the two-man canned animations took over. It was awful at times. Seems like these kinds of instances is exactly what they are trying to eliminate. And I say good on them. In a game like basketball, hockey and football, the game almost has to be physics driven. Canned animations just won't cut it. It's why the NHL series is going that way and why this series is going that way.

Eventually, you've added so many animations to your game that inevitably, the game will pick the wrong one and something will look off. It happens in almost every game we play (other than Backbreaker) and kudos to EA for realizing this. They probably understood they've hit the plateau with their respective games' engines and needed to move on with their evolution from an animations-driven (last-gen) engine to a physics-driven one.

As for the player control argument, being a big time NHL player, I can tell you that even though they give you almost full control of what happens in the game, I can't take the Leafs and beat the Penguins more than 2 out of 10 times (with the right difficulty level). So yeah, everything's in my control but it doesn't allow me to turn a terrible player into a great one. What it does allow to happen is, every now and then, a fringe player will make a terrific play. Which is no different than what you guys are arguing about here. Though Rondo will not consistently hit the 3, he CAN and at times, it will happen in a very important part of the game. Sports are like that, it's why we watch them. For those moments. But if the Elite game is anything like the NHL series, ratings will still matter a great deal, regardless of how good you are on the sticks.

You know "FUN". You never hear anyone mention that word anymore when playing sports games. Everybody just wants to tear the games apart and over analyze every aspect of it. I too thought Live 10 was just plain more fun than 2k. The game was fast, fluid, and easy to pick up and play. The online was solid and the presentation and graphics were quite good.

I never cared about flashy animations or overly complex controls. I prefer the KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) approach to games.

[loadleft]

Re: NBA Elite 11 Interview with Creative Director David Littman

Look, we are playing a video game and video games are supposed to be about YOUR skill and not the AI skill. If the game performs like its real life counterparts then the game becomes scripted and contrived. If Kobe shoots 45% from the field then the game is going to construct that and quite frankly that is BS. Players have great games, and bad games. and when you base a game on mathmatical equations your just going to get the averages. I want my skill to shine in a game and not the AI's. Every other sports game is based on user skill so why do you want the AI to play the game for you. If you want the AI to decide every aspect of this game for you then you might as well just put it on CPU vs CPU and just sit back and watch the games because you ain't playing it.

You can't tell me that we all haven't pulled our hair out at how rediculous the AI is at times in determining when a shot falls or not. I am a Live 10 player and I have wanted to break my controller so many times over routine shots and/or easy put backs that miss the mark. At least in elite this year those misses will be of my own doing and I am perfectly satisfied with that. Video games are supposed to showcase the users abilities and not the statisticians.

All I can say is try rereading my post to see if you can get a better understanding of what I said because I said nothing about having the AI play for me. My entire post was about simulating NBA basketball, which is what I though most users at OS wanted. All kinds of ways to have fun so being accurate is not in opposition to that.

[TUSS11]

Re: NBA Elite 11 Interview with Creative Director David Littman

All I can say is try rereading my post to see if you can get a better understanding of what I said because I said nothing about having the AI play for me. My entire post was about simulating NBA basketball, which is what I though most users at OS wanted. All kinds of ways to have fun so being accurate is not in opposition to that.

Since I've somewhat egged this discussion on let me defend and/or clarify my position. To me, rEAnimator, the real debate is about what are you simulating. There's one crowd that wants the game to simulate true to life NBA basketball (I am in this crowd). This group doesn't want the user to be able to give the players ability they don't posses in real life. So it's like saying what would it take for the Clippers to win the ring this year. The way the games sounds like it is setup the answer is just be good at manipulating the sticks. There sounds like there's is little to no benefit to seeking better players, sure the shot will be easier with a better player, but if I practice the release with the lesser player until I got it down pat then that makes that shot easier too. Now, I've removed the real life requirements to making a better team and substituted something that only exist in the video game world. For guys on my side of the aisle that isn't sim!

The other group is saying they want user skill to be the ultimate determining factor. Sure, I agree that would make a really good video game, but not so much a simulation of reality. I can't see how this is hard to understand, now you may decide that you don't want a true sim and that's understandable and I can at least respect that.

You want a video game that's a true simulation of NBA basketball. And you say that user skill being the ultimate determining factor is not sim. So you don't want user skill to be the deciding factor. Correct? Which means you want the team's or individual players' limitations being the deciding factor.

If that's the case, let's consider a late game situation. You're inbounding the ball, down by 1 with 5 seconds left. You pass it into your best scorer (who is normally inconsistent but has made his last 3 shots). You call for an on-ball screen and come off the screen wide open. So you pull up for the game winning jumper but this time the game considers the player's real life consistency (or lack thereof) combined with the fact that he's hit his last 3 shots, and calculates that the result that's most true to life is a miss. So you miss the shot and lose the game. How would that make you feel, knowing that you're skill wasn't the deciding factor?

[Teebone21]

Re: NBA Elite 11 Interview with Creative Director David Littman

oh no the ultimate EA fanboy bltzkrieg666 is here lol.Please dude dont start arguments here

[TUSS11]

Re: NBA Elite 11 Interview with Creative Director David Littman

oh no the ultimate EA fanboy bltzkrieg666 is here lol.Please dude dont start arguments here

Fanboy? He's articulating a valid point of view with coherent sentences and this is all you can manage to post? Hypocrisy.

[loadleft]

Re: NBA Elite 11 Interview with Creative Director David Littman

You want a video game that's a true simulation of NBA basketball. And you say that user skill being the ultimate determining factor is not sim. So you don't want user skill to be the deciding factor. Correct? Which means you want the team's or individual players' limitations being the deciding factor.

If that's the case, let's consider a late game situation. You're inbounding the ball, down by 1 with 5 seconds left. You pass it into your best scorer (who is normally inconsistent but has made his last 3 shots). You call for an on-ball screen and come off the screen wide open. So you pull up for the game winning jumper but this time the game considers the player's real life consistency (or lack thereof) combined with the fact that he's hit his last 3 shots, and calculates that the result that's most true to life is a miss. So you miss the shot and lose the game. How would that make you feel, knowing that you're skill wasn't the deciding factor?

1st to answer your question, I'd want the player's ratings, game situation, defense, and proximity along with the INFLUENCE of my stick skills to decide the shot success but not allow my stick skill to over ride all those other factors. On the flipside how would you feel if I master big baby's release and so when you wisely force the ball out of Peirce Allen and KG's hand I win the game w/nothing but bottoms from 23 ft w/Davis, then proceed to hit other key baskets w/him in like fashion in the rematch? For me that's no good.

I'd rather use my real life knowledge of a player's abilities to know that I can leave a certain player open on certain shots to focus on the higher percentage players. With a game that says anybody can hit anything if the release is right, my knowledge goes out the window. I don't have a clue who you've mastered and who you haven't. That's not even my real concern, my real concern is that if a player can't really hit that shot IRL I don't want to see it in the game. I would think a cheeser's dream is to learn to shoot with someone who shouldn't be able to and then pummel the competition w/him, kinda like the guy shooting 3's w/Kobe in 23's videos.

FOR ME, I am interested in a simulation that gives me control of the real life factors to see if I can manipulate them in to a better outcome. Again, that's me, if no one else wants that fine, I can keep my money.

[TUSS11]

Re: NBA Elite 11 Interview with Creative Director David Littman

1st to answer your question, I'd want the player's ratings, game situation, defense, and proximity along with the INFLUENCE of my stick skills to decide the shot success but not allow my stick skill to over ride all those other factors. On the flipside how would you feel if I master big baby's release and so when you wisely force the ball out of Peirce Allen and KG's hand I win the game w/nothing but bottoms from 23 ft w/Davis, then proceed to hit other key baskets w/him in like fashion in the rematch? For me that's no good.

Your understanding of Elite's shot system may be inaccurate. The game takes the player's ratings, game situation, defense, and proximity and calculates how difficult the shot would be then adjusts the sweet spot accordingly.

And regarding Glen Davis hitting a 3 to win the game, his ratings would make it an extremely difficult shot. The developers already said they can make shots nearly impossible to make simply by decreasing the sweetspot. And if you recall, Big Baby hit that game winning shot against the Magic in the second round of the 2009 play-offs. Was that not a key shot?

I'd rather use my real life knowledge of a player's abilities to know that I can leave a certain player open on certain shots to focus on the higher percentage players. With a game that says anybody can hit anything if the release is right, my knowledge goes out the window. I don't have a clue who you've mastered and who you haven't. That's not even my real concern, my real concern is that if a player can't really hit that shot IRL I don't want to see it in the game. I would think a cheeser's dream is to learn to shoot with someone who shouldn't be able to and then pummel the competition w/him, kinda like the guy shooting 3's w/Kobe in 23's videos.

Again, the difficult of the shot is determined by ratings, among other factors. They can tune the difficult so that a non-threat in real life is a non-threat in the game. I wouldn't look to far into those videos because they were playing on Pro, the second easiest difficulty.

[loadleft]

Re: NBA Elite 11 Interview with Creative Director David Littman

Your understanding of Elite's shot system may be inaccurate. The game takes the player's ratings, game situation, defense, and proximity and calculates how difficult the shot would be then adjusts the sweet spot accordingly.

And regarding Glen Davis hitting a 3 to win the game, his ratings would make it an extremely difficult shot. The developers already said they can make shots nearly impossible to make simply by decreasing the sweetspot. And if you recall, Big Baby hit that game winning shot against the Magic in the second round of the 2009 play-offs. Was that not a key shot?



Again, the difficult of the shot is determined by ratings, among other factors. They can tune the difficult so that a non-threat in real life is a non-threat in the game. I wouldn't look to far into those videos because they were playing on Pro, the second easiest difficulty.

Cool, I hope you're right and I am wrong! I am rooting for this game though I fear it's already doomed.