Guest Flyboy Report post Posted July 31, 2003 I refuse to believe that its THAT bad, where neither you or the opponent can miss. It is. Live is an arcade game to the extreme and is crap as far as I'm concerned. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
J. Hungerford Smith 0 Report post Posted July 31, 2003 I have NBA Live 2003, I'm happy with it for the most part. The only problem I have is dunks are missed way too often. I find this to happen more if you have a lead over the margin of 10. I know the computer is just trying to make it harder for you to keep your lead, but that's still not very realistic. But when have any EA basketball games been realistic? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rendclaw 0 Report post Posted July 31, 2003 Is it me or does everyone go for dunks? This is not NBA Jam. My whole thing is that I really don't want to think as much playing a basketball game as I would if I was on the court. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gert T 0 Report post Posted July 31, 2003 Hey I've only played Live, but what makes the 2K3 franchise mode better? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Big McLargeHuge Report post Posted July 31, 2003 I'll take EA over Sega any day of the week. Oh yeah, I already posted. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ripper Report post Posted July 31, 2003 Is it me or does everyone go for dunks? This is not NBA Jam. My whole thing is that I really don't want to think as much playing a basketball game as I would if I was on the court. Everyone goes for dunks in live because Crossover spin dunk is unstoppable. You do that everytime down court and it goes. And NBA2k3 isn't all just thinking to much. It just feels...right. I can't explain it. It does have its flaws like sometimes you'll be running the break and the guy will stop running and stop at the 3 point line, or the magical invisible wall that is in front of the players sometimes that stop you from getting blocks, and stops you from blowing past them. But I would take those flaws all day over live. I will say this though. Live is more fun to play in multi-player. But as a single player, NBA 2k3 is better . So if you are looking for more of a party game, then Live would be the way to go...it is a lot easier to get the hang of. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest shaqaustin34 Report post Posted July 31, 2003 I think you shoud get NBA 2K3 instead of NBA Live 2003. First of all NBA Live is not a realistic game. When you are playing live it's all about shooting the three pointer or dunking the rock, you would not need midrange shots. Also in NBA Live you can average about 4 blocks per game with a guy like Steve Nash, Iverson, Fisher, etc. In Live you can block a guy from about 5 feet away, and it does not take timing to get a block. Even though you can block from anout 5 feet away as much of a good blocker you have, like Ben Wallace, it is almost impossibble to block a dunk. If you wanted to pass the ball to someone you would have to go right beside that person to pass him the ball, because no matter how much a good passer you have, like Jason Kid, if the pass is from a distance most likely your pass will get intercepted, and the computer will run down the court for an easy 2 because there is no you could catch up to the computer on a fast break, because they run so damn fast. In the other hand NBA 2K3 is the most realistic game you will ever play. You have to use strategies to win the game. When you're playing 2K3 is not all about shooting threes and dunking the ball you also have to shoot midrange shots. In NBA 2K3 you have to use the players you have to win the game. For example if you are La Lakers and you are playing the Kings, you have to use Shaq's dominance in the paint as an advantage not only for scoring the bucket but also to make the other player score as weel. Like if you need a three pointer you could pass the ball to Shaq while he is in the paint and most likely Divac and Webber will double team you then when you're double teamed you could dish the ball out to Horry, and Horry would pop in the wide open three. NBA 2K3, so far, is the most realistic game that has ever came out.(Looking forward to NBA 2K4, or shoul I say ESPN NBA Basketbal) You should not compare NBA Live with NBA 2K3, you should compare NBA Live with NBA Inside Drive. So if you like an aracade style of basketball game, then you should get NBA Live 2003. But if you like a realistic style of game that would take strategy to play, then you should get NBA 2K3. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Snappy Nappy Dugout Report post Posted August 1, 2003 Well, I already posted my thoughts on NBA2K3(Can't wait for ESPN NBA Basketball). But I want everyone's thoughts on NBA Inside Drive 2003. I Heard it was WAYYY better then NBA2K3. Is that true? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jesse Badass 0 Report post Posted August 1, 2003 Well, I already posted my thoughts on NBA2K3(Can't wait for ESPN NBA Basketball). But I want everyone's thoughts on NBA Inside Drive 2003. I Heard it was WAYYY better then NBA2K3. Is that true? Who ever said NBA InsideDrive was better than 2K3? NBA Inside Drive is not even better than NBA live 2003. NBA Inside Drive 2003 is kind of like Live 2003. It's a arcade game like Live 2003. They don't even have decant crossover. The spins on Inside Drive 2003 are so ugly. NBA Inside Drive is not even close of being better than NBA2K3. People shouldn't even compare NBA 2K3 with Live or InsideDrive. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest shaqaustin34 Report post Posted August 2, 2003 I agree NBA Inside Drive is not better than NBA 2K3, not even close to being better than NBA 2K3. However NBA Live 2003 is not better than NBA Inside Drive 2003. Inside Drive does have some ugly crossover though, but it's graphic is better than Live. Both games, Inside Drive and NBA Live, are not realistic basketball games but in my opinion Inside Drive is better than Live. Also on NBA Live the player shooting percentage are fake as hell, but Inside Drive's shooting percentage is not that bad. On Live Ben Wallace can shoot better midrange than Tim Duncan, when you damn well that Ben Wallace can shoot midrange worth a shit. Probably in some people's opinion Inside Drive is the same good as Live. But if you look at both games bad stuff and good stuff I think you can come up with the coclusion that probably Inside Drive is a little better than NBA Live. That's just my opinion. But neither games are even good enough to be compared to NBA 2K3.(Lookin forward to ESPN NBA Basketbal ) Whetever game you decide to get don't get NBA Starting Five. Just like TPC said that game is crappy and pathetic. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jesse Badass 0 Report post Posted August 2, 2003 I agree NBA Inside Drive is not better than NBA 2K3, not even close to being better than NBA 2K3. However NBA Live 2003 is not better than NBA Inside Drive 2003. Inside Drive does have some ugly crossover though, but it's graphic is better than Live. Both games, Inside Drive and NBA Live, are not realistic basketball games but in my opinion Inside Drive is better than Live. Also on NBA Live the player shooting percentage are fake as hell, but Inside Drive's shooting percentage is not that bad. On Live Ben Wallace can shoot better midrange than Tim Duncan, when you damn well that Ben Wallace can shoot midrange worth a shit. Probably in some people's opinion Inside Drive is the same good as Live. But if you look at both games bad stuff and good stuff I think you can come up with the coclusion that probably Inside Drive is a little better than NBA Live. That's just my opinion. But neither games are even good enough to be compared to NBA 2K3.(Lookin forward to ESPN NBA Basketbal ) Whetever game you decide to get don't get NBA Starting Five. Just like TPC said that game is crappy and pathetic. NBA live and InsideDrive Shooting percentages are the same. It depends what difficulty level you play them on. Even if the game does not have a real shooting percentage, that's the way it should be. The game is supposed to be not realistic. If they game is not realistic then what the point of having realistic shooting percentage? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
