 |
Quote: |
 |
|
|
 |
Originally Posted by VDusen04 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think you may have misinterpreted what I was saying here. Five of the classic teams added by 2K in NBA 2K12 were the 2002 Sacramento Kings, the 1987 Los Angeles Lakers, the 1985 76ers, the 1977 76ers and the 1971 Milwaukee Bucks. Among them, well over 40 individual classic players were accounted for, including an extremely high percentage of regular rotation players.
Even in 2K12, people were left a little flummoxed with the inclusion of the '85 Sixers, for without Charles Barkley it seems as if they would have been better off making an '83 team. The presumption was 2K may have been on the verge of signing Barkley or believed they could sign him, thus leading to a preemptive classic Sixers squad. Then, Barkley's absence, combined with Andrew Toney's, made for a pretty empty classic team. Each of the other teams mentioned though, were mostly only missing 9-12th men - the Mateen Cleaves and Marv Winkler's of the world. As such, we were pretty solid on that front. I had to create my own Chucky Brown? So be it. It was still a pretty full set of five awesome classic teams.
Now we have NBA 2K13 on the horizon. All signs point toward a few big stars bowing out for the new edition: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Chris Webber, and Julius Erving. All the teams these players were a part of, were already created last year by 2K, when the rosters (except for the '85 squad) were mostly full. I'm saying, I'm glad 2K at least decided to retain the rosters and teams they put together last year and didn't pull a jerk move of unnecessarily pulling them out just because a few stars didn't sign. Even without the three mentioned, those teams still account for 40 classic players. It seems it would have taken more work to eliminate those teams from the game than it would have to keep them in just in case folks opted to create the missing stars and fill out the squads again (which I'm certain scores of gamers most definitely will do).
Point being, it's not as if 2K's just saying, "Hey, we can't get the rights to Alex English, Kiki Vandeweghe, or Fat Lever. Let's make a 1988 Nuggets team anyway." The teams we're talking about were full (again, except for the '85 Sixers) and instead of randomly ridding of all those other players who played on those teams (Darryl Dawkins, Joe Dandridge, Oscar Robertson, and Kurt Rambis among them), 2K kept them around because they figured if they made them last year and they still had them, why not share them with us in spite of the superstars apparently deciding to not sign back on again?
It would have been cool to have the Chris Webber back on that '02 Kings squad again this year. But now, since 2K didn't axe the team they'd already put together, I'm just one solid Chris Webber create-a-player away from having a full team again. And I'd much rather have that than having to create 8 Kings myself and then use them on the modern Kings court, having to pretend they're using the early 2000's floor.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
I understand the reasons why things are the way they are, and I agree that having what remains of the 84-85 Sixers is not inherently a bad thing. However, I still feel that it is a problem to have a team with no competitive usefulness (and not in the way that the worst current team in the NBA arguably has) as currently constructed. All of the new elements that were added to 2k13 to increase realism are working against this team; sig skills which the CAP roster fillers won't have, increased fatigue which will necessitate playing those CAPs, etc. Correct me if I'm wrong about how replacing those players works, but it could also be a problem to have to put 6 more John Browns into the FA pool to fix the team, rather than 1-3.
If they could give us the rest of the real bench players it would be easier to work with, or editable CAPs with the proper ratings/sigs but different names/faces for the missing stars.
I appreciate what you're saying, and my intent is not to get the team removed at this point. Even when expressing frustration, I'd like to offer something constructive. It's just at this point, I don't know if there's anything that can be done, and I don't know if there's any precedent for this particular situation, there's simply no comparison between teams missing 1 key player, and this one which is missing 3 of them, and 6 total. I know that the devs probably find it as unacceptable as I do, and that if they could do something about it, they would. For all I know, they already have, and I'm hopeful that one of my favorite teams won't be one that I have to intentionally overlook.