[Calvenn]

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.