User reviews , people who own(not critics) seem to rate Live 15 quite high

[GisherJohn24]

Amazon reviews are over 4 out of 5 avg. On XBOX1, overall avg for people that downloaded it is nearly 5 out of 5. PS4 users, about 4 1/2 out of 5 for everyone who actually downloaded and bought it. It seems like if everyoen would give it a chance, I think people would be pleasantly please. It took me afew days for this game to grow on me. Spread the word, it's about 30 bucks now everywhere you go.

[Calvenn]

Re: User reviews , people who own(not critics) seem to rate Live 15 quite high

Your observation is very true. I read the Amazon reviews as well a week ago and came away with the same impression! In fact I read one of the most objective reviews I've seen yet from one of the reviewers comparing both games! Also read overwhelming amount of positive reviews from users at Gamespot some time back. Let's face it, they've come a long way with this game, just don't want them to rest on their laurels this year and for the foreseeable future! The user community clearly are realizing that it has tremendous potential!

[TSGuy]

Re: User reviews , people who own(not critics) seem to rate Live 15 quite high

If this game had customization/sliders. There would be SOOOOO many people playing this game. It's actually not bad. They just gotta make the modes deeper too.

[BiggD]

Re: User reviews , people who own(not critics) seem to rate Live 15 quite high

I play both ( as I'm sure a lot of us do) but I will say 90% of my time is on live15. As the above comment suggests.... You have more customisation you have yourself one hell of a ball game! .


The game does seem to improve over time as well. Overall I'm having fun, I can't wait to get home each day and fire up live 15 ( which is what computer games are suppose to be)

[Calvenn]

Re: User reviews , people who own(not critics) seem to rate Live 15 quite high

Here's that review. Pre-patch off course.


This review is from: NBA Live 15 - Xbox One (Video Game)
It's taken me about a month to log serious hours on NBA Live 15 and it's competitor NBA 2k15. Here's how they compare:

Overall Visuals
Live's most significant improvements from the 2014 installment come in the graphics department. Surprisingly, at a standstill and on cutaways, Live's graphics surpass those of the 2k franchise. While the 2K facial rendering might be slightly more true to the real-life players, the extra accuracy is accomplished by pulling a scanned face over a generic 3D mold that isn't as tailored to the player. The result is more recognizable faces that don't look nearly as human. Live, on the other hand, presents a stunning product from every angle. The Live players are still incredibly recognizable but the facial scans feel less forced and have more consistent skin tone. This smoothness makes Live a better-looking game overall, particularly when combined with Live's superior court and crowd graphics.

Visual Movement
While Live's base product is superior this year from a visual standpoint, the 2K franchise still maintains an edge when things start moving around. Live has almost entirely cleaned up the "teleporting" player movements and passes that marred the franchise's 2014 comeback, but there's still work to be done particularly in fast-break situations. In some ways, the differences between the 2 games in this area are starting to reflect a conscious choice by each game's developers. While Live has the tendancy to breakdown into teleporting graphics when the user is pounding conflicting orders into the controller, the 2K franchise tends to allow less player input during fast movement as a way to provide more fluid graphics. If a 2K player has his man running through a complex dribble routine and then calls for a shot midway through, the shot won't begin until after the previous commands have been run through to some extent. This delayed reaction provides 2K with more fluid visual movement but can make the task of eventually timing the shot meter unpredictable and difficult. Ultimately the 2K implementation can make the gameplay seem more random until a user learns to plan for it - a tradeoff that likely limited the Live team's correction of the teleportation problem.

Gameplay
Both Live and 2K have converged on many of the similar gameplay routines, but the differences that remain between the franchises are worth discussing. While Live is unquestionably a cleaner game this year than it was in 2014, the gameplay is more arcade-style in the sense that its commitment to realism has limits. For example deep into a 2K game, if one member of a team has taken too many shots in a game - whatever the quality or FG% may be - so-called "shot fatigue" will set in and that player will be unlikely to make shots for the remainder of the game even if the user is almost perfect in filling the shot meter. Live allows video-game numbers to be had by a user who has mastered the game. The only way to make the game more realistic in the box score is to up the difficulty or take control of a less-capable player. Live does allow for plays to lose effectiveness (you can't run the pick-and-roll for 48 minutes straight with consistent success) but open shots with perfect releases will continue to go in at high percentages even if the player shooting already has 70 points in the game. This difference is less pronounced on the defensive side of the ball, where both franchises seem to embrace the idea that incredible body control and speedy recovery are required to guard the top players in the association. This belief is uncontroversial in theory, but less-robust controls on the defensive side of both games make guarding some of the most highly-rated players seem like a losing effort. If a great slasher is able to get the ball and wants to drive to the hoop in either game, your chances of stopping him are pretty slim when using the highest difficulty settings. If you're looking to play around this, both games seem to emphasize shutting down passing lanes as the only way to control the Lebron's and KD's of the world. Otherwise, if your 95+ assignment gets the ball at all, he's going to score the majority of the time.

Extras
Live continues its relationship with ESPN this year and offers the most realistic overall package for users who like an experience that obscures the fact that they're playing a video game. Jalen Rose records regular commentary which can be heard while navigating through the game's menus and which covers up-to-the-minute news taking place in the real NBA. JVG's in-game commentary isn't entirely revamped form Live 14 but rather builds on a growing bank of responses and comments. 2K on the other hand has taken a unique approach towards continually updated content that comes in the form of a weekly in-game television show which covers basketball topics and features an impressive number of player interviews. The 2KTV episodes are remarkably well done and take themselves less seriously than Live's content but ultimately are minimally integrated into the game itself. Still though, for basketball fans, it's a unique TV show within the game that is somewhat unlike what's available on traditional TV.

Game Modes
I won't say much about the game modes since I don't think the differences between the 2 games are about what's wrong/right but rather are unique choices that will appeal to different gamers. Worth noting within Live is the revamped Rising Star campaign. Unlike last year, career-long milestones seems to be introduced earlier and at higher point values, allowing you to move past the beyond-terrible player ratings at a quicker clip. The scoring system has also been redone to allow your player to take (and miss) open shots without penalty. There's still not as much forced story as 2K's comparable MyCareer mode, but better feedback is provided at the end of each month regarding your star's minutes and progress.

[GisherJohn24]

Re: User reviews , people who own(not critics) seem to rate Live 15 quite high

Here's that review. Pre-patch off course.


This review is from: NBA Live 15 - Xbox One (Video Game)
It's taken me about a month to log serious hours on NBA Live 15 and it's competitor NBA 2k15. Here's how they compare:

Overall Visuals
Live's most significant improvements from the 2014 installment come in the graphics department. Surprisingly, at a standstill and on cutaways, Live's graphics surpass those of the 2k franchise. While the 2K facial rendering might be slightly more true to the real-life players, the extra accuracy is accomplished by pulling a scanned face over a generic 3D mold that isn't as tailored to the player. The result is more recognizable faces that don't look nearly as human. Live, on the other hand, presents a stunning product from every angle. The Live players are still incredibly recognizable but the facial scans feel less forced and have more consistent skin tone. This smoothness makes Live a better-looking game overall, particularly when combined with Live's superior court and crowd graphics.

Visual Movement
While Live's base product is superior this year from a visual standpoint, the 2K franchise still maintains an edge when things start moving around. Live has almost entirely cleaned up the "teleporting" player movements and passes that marred the franchise's 2014 comeback, but there's still work to be done particularly in fast-break situations. In some ways, the differences between the 2 games in this area are starting to reflect a conscious choice by each game's developers. While Live has the tendancy to breakdown into teleporting graphics when the user is pounding conflicting orders into the controller, the 2K franchise tends to allow less player input during fast movement as a way to provide more fluid graphics. If a 2K player has his man running through a complex dribble routine and then calls for a shot midway through, the shot won't begin until after the previous commands have been run through to some extent. This delayed reaction provides 2K with more fluid visual movement but can make the task of eventually timing the shot meter unpredictable and difficult. Ultimately the 2K implementation can make the gameplay seem more random until a user learns to plan for it - a tradeoff that likely limited the Live team's correction of the teleportation problem.

Gameplay
Both Live and 2K have converged on many of the similar gameplay routines, but the differences that remain between the franchises are worth discussing. While Live is unquestionably a cleaner game this year than it was in 2014, the gameplay is more arcade-style in the sense that its commitment to realism has limits. For example deep into a 2K game, if one member of a team has taken too many shots in a game - whatever the quality or FG% may be - so-called "shot fatigue" will set in and that player will be unlikely to make shots for the remainder of the game even if the user is almost perfect in filling the shot meter. Live allows video-game numbers to be had by a user who has mastered the game. The only way to make the game more realistic in the box score is to up the difficulty or take control of a less-capable player. Live does allow for plays to lose effectiveness (you can't run the pick-and-roll for 48 minutes straight with consistent success) but open shots with perfect releases will continue to go in at high percentages even if the player shooting already has 70 points in the game. This difference is less pronounced on the defensive side of the ball, where both franchises seem to embrace the idea that incredible body control and speedy recovery are required to guard the top players in the association. This belief is uncontroversial in theory, but less-robust controls on the defensive side of both games make guarding some of the most highly-rated players seem like a losing effort. If a great slasher is able to get the ball and wants to drive to the hoop in either game, your chances of stopping him are pretty slim when using the highest difficulty settings. If you're looking to play around this, both games seem to emphasize shutting down passing lanes as the only way to control the Lebron's and KD's of the world. Otherwise, if your 95+ assignment gets the ball at all, he's going to score the majority of the time.

Extras
Live continues its relationship with ESPN this year and offers the most realistic overall package for users who like an experience that obscures the fact that they're playing a video game. Jalen Rose records regular commentary which can be heard while navigating through the game's menus and which covers up-to-the-minute news taking place in the real NBA. JVG's in-game commentary isn't entirely revamped form Live 14 but rather builds on a growing bank of responses and comments. 2K on the other hand has taken a unique approach towards continually updated content that comes in the form of a weekly in-game television show which covers basketball topics and features an impressive number of player interviews. The 2KTV episodes are remarkably well done and take themselves less seriously than Live's content but ultimately are minimally integrated into the game itself. Still though, for basketball fans, it's a unique TV show within the game that is somewhat unlike what's available on traditional TV.

Game Modes
I won't say much about the game modes since I don't think the differences between the 2 games are about what's wrong/right but rather are unique choices that will appeal to different gamers. Worth noting within Live is the revamped Rising Star campaign. Unlike last year, career-long milestones seems to be introduced earlier and at higher point values, allowing you to move past the beyond-terrible player ratings at a quicker clip. The scoring system has also been redone to allow your player to take (and miss) open shots without penalty. There's still not as much forced story as 2K's comparable MyCareer mode, but better feedback is provided at the end of each month regarding your star's minutes and progress.

fantastic. thanks for posting this.

[The 24th Letter]

Re: User reviews , people who own(not critics) seem to rate Live 15 quite high

Amazons ratings are the highest I've seen...user reviews mostly everywhere else mirror the site reviews.

With that said, I think EA has done a great job in rebuilding the franchise and at this point just has to earn the players trust back to get them back on board. If they keep building and accomplish what they said they would (customization etc.) in Live 16 it should be quite the game...

[ThaLiveKing]

Re: User reviews , people who own(not critics) seem to rate Live 15 quite high

If this game had customization/sliders. There would be SOOOOO many people playing this game. It's actually not bad. They just gotta make the modes deeper too.

NBA Live 16 has the potential to turn everything around, it needs customization and save rosters to start, also deep CAP for online team play!!

[GisherJohn24]

Re: User reviews , people who own(not critics) seem to rate Live 15 quite high

NBA Live 16 has the potential to turn everything around, it needs customization and save rosters to start, also deep CAP for online team play!!

I think word of mouth with be 16's saving grace. I'm hoping people give 15 a chance with the chance to get it so reasonable now.

[ThaLiveKing]

Re: User reviews , people who own(not critics) seem to rate Live 15 quite high

I think word of mouth with be 16's saving grace. I'm hoping people give 15 a chance with the chance to get it so reasonable now.

Depending how Live 15 ends up at the end of this cycle after all the patches etc, I think people will take notice. Need all the main features though, a MUST, cause people really want something other than the other game

[TSGuy]

Re: User reviews , people who own(not critics) seem to rate Live 15 quite high

NBA Live 17 is my prediction that will be back to prime time ball game

[noshun]

Re: User reviews , people who own(not critics) seem to rate Live 15 quite high

Amazon reviews are over 4 out of 5 avg. On XBOX1, overall avg for people that downloaded it is nearly 5 out of 5. PS4 users, about 4 1/2 out of 5 for everyone who actually downloaded and bought it. It seems like if everyoen would give it a chance, I think people would be pleasantly please. It took me afew days for this game to grow on me. Spread the word, it's about 30 bucks now everywhere you go.

It's all moot at this point. The apathy wont help the begging of spreading the word. Cynicism is too strong that they've outdone last years worst selling Live, with this years. This game is perceived as toxic, and is irreparably damaged brandwise. Gotta be embarrassing by sales standards. They're getting slaughtered Facebreaker style.
Synergy is a mask, as I've said many times. You're just catching a whiff why now, but not fully understanding what it really is..

[Walt Frazier]

Re: User reviews , people who own(not critics) seem to rate Live 15 quite high

As someone who has played all LIVEs...15 is good in about 30% of things. The pick and roll is great, as is spacing,


And it is absolutely terriblein the other 70% of things...post game is absolutely woeful...play sets are so limited your average kids team knows how to run more plays...no player tendencies at all...no team styles...no point forwards or ball carrying two guards....every teams offense starts via a point guard...generic, repetitive stuff...

If you really love basketball and know the game...this game is pretty bad in way too many aspects to be taken seriously...every player can swat ahots...every player can dunk...it is a poor effort for a 2015 sports title. To be honest, I expected a lot more.

If you want arcade fun...it is okay.

[GisherJohn24]

Re: User reviews , people who own(not critics) seem to rate Live 15 quite high

As someone who has played all LIVEs...15 is good in about 30% of things. The pick and roll is great, as is spacing,


And it is absolutely terriblein the other 70% of things...post game is absolutely woeful...play sets are so limited your average kids team knows how to run more plays...no player tendencies at all...no team styles...no point forwards or ball carrying two guards....every teams offense starts via a point guard...generic, repetitive stuff...

If you really love basketball and know the game...this game is pretty bad in way too many aspects to be taken seriously...every player can swat ahots...every player can dunk...it is a poor effort for a 2015 sports title. To be honest, I expected a lot more.

If you want arcade fun...it is okay.

With all the quirks you mentioned and I only sort of agree, Live comes down to fun factor. Quirks aside, I'm having a blast with it. I haven't played the other game in weeks.

[Walt Frazier]

Re: User reviews , people who own(not critics) seem to rate Live 15 quite high

With all the quirks you mentioned and I only sort of agree, Live comes down to fun factor. Quirks aside, I'm having a blast with it. I haven't played the other game in weeks.

Yes, everyone who is enjoying it seems to value the fun factor. There is nothing wrong with that. It is fun for a quick game.

It is nothing like a simulation though...way, way too limited.

It will be interesting to see what direction they head in the future. They may be best just making it a wild, over the top fun style game like NBA street. The simulation market is so heavily dominated by 2K that it may be best just going for the fun market.

I personally would like to see them go hard core sim...but that market seems too hard for them to crack at this stage.