Reply With Quote
No they don't , you obviously don't know how to use them.
In my season, in pro, not rookie or starter, Manu averages 40.
Rasho averages 6 blocks for me, TD 5 blocks.
Barry = automatic 3 pointer in Live
I would have to go with ESPN. Just because in LIVE the rest of the spurs except for Tim Suck.
No they don't , you obviously don't know how to use them.
In my season, in pro, not rookie or starter, Manu averages 40.
Rasho averages 6 blocks for me, TD 5 blocks.
Barry = automatic 3 pointer in Live
Nba Live 2005, if you play it online , they've upgraded tim duncan from an 89 overall to a 91. just some FYI, but also, i wouldnt say the spurs "suck" in nba live, they are an 88 overall (89 overall if u replace bowen with barry) and parker is pretty quick in that game and rasho can play solid D in the game, so I'm pretty happy with the SPurs in live. I play with them all the tiem onlien for Live, and have managed a 33-13 record so far. I have espn 2k4 and liked, but its just a little slow, tho Live deifnitely has its share of flaws. tho Nba live does have some whacked ratings, like memphis being 91 overall, phoenix being just 79, dallas is an 88, as is houston.
Which one is better, I can't decide, I hear a lot more good things about 2k5
I have 2k4 and it was a solid game but I prefer Live. ESPN ones are a lot more simulated while the Live ones are more of an arcade style. I think ESPN is more consistent as a game, in the senese of a lot of bullsh*t happens in Live that is out of your control and blocking shots is WAY too easy in that game, but ESPN is a little too slow paced and kind of "blocky" in terms of movement. Live definitely gets your adrenaline pumping more than ESPN, and its much easier to make a comeback after being down big than you can in ESPN, but having said that, ESPN has the better graphics, and the more consistent gameplay.
Overall, I say go with Live, but definitely rent both since different people obviously have different opinions
NBA Live rates the players low.
Manu and Tony in LIVE are rated like 75 overall.
Allen Iverson is like 86......
I got live for Pc and espn on ps2, i play live a lot more and use custom rosters.
You can get em here
www.nbalive.org
and theres some others, though i dont like em as much...
www.nba-live.com
Hope that helps there definately worth it if you got live on pc.
Live is kinduva joke but if you play online there one of the best teams to have. Stats don't mean anything, i could average 60 ppg with manu if i played on rookie or starter.
Online i usually put barry at the SF and manu at SG so manu can guard the kobes's, etc...
Any game that gives brent barry and shawn bradley a defensive lock icon is obviously screwed up.
I like 2k5 much more but what I hate is that if I play the spurs team on pro level I win by like 30 or 40 pts. If I play allstar I lose by a couple of pts. I wish there was a level in between were I could win against almost all of the teams and lose every once and a while to good teams.
That's why you adjust the sliders. I refused to do this bc i felt it was cheating but then i got sick of making well planned out offensive plays and getting an open layup or shot and having someone from outside the arc come flying in and block it everytime.
Anyone have any experience with ESPN online? Live is a glorified version of NBA jam, does ESPN still play like basketball?
I play League NBA Live 2500 on Internet, and it is very cool. We have stats, divisions, everything like real NBA. We play on Superstar and when you learn to use every player then the wining begins. We finished already the first season, so we will now start the second season an we use new rosters with all new trades included. At the season we could trade so it`s cool when trading. But first we have draft.
Sorry to bump this old thread, but another question. Do any of y'all have Live 2004 AND 2005? Is there enough differences to warrent purchasing the new one? Any idea when 2006 will be out?
2004 is much better IMO. Don't waste your money, 2006 will be out towards the fall i'm guessing.
Yeah, NBA live 2005 sucks. The only good thing about it is the dunk contest and even that gets old after a while. 2004 is the best to date.
Basically, if you want simulation, get 2k5. If you want more liberal play, get NBA live.
WERD?!?!?!
They give Shawn Bradley a lock?!?!??!??!?
Unbelievable!
I like 2005 much better than 2004 (I have both). My main complaint about 2004 is that the pro hop is unguardable on it. On 2005 it's pretty easy to draw a charge against an opponent who decides to just jump into you, whereas in 2004 it wouldn't cause contact. Also, you can very effectively front the post in 2005 vs. 2004. In 2004 the only way to front was using freestyle to get your hands up for deflections, but in 2005 you can go for the steal on a post entry pass. Also, 2004 the AI shoots way too many threes and it's too hard to hit mid-range shots and too easy to hit the three - totally unrealistic. Live 2004 is ridiculously easy with a good post player like Duncan or Shaq, using the prohop.
man it must be nice to be able to sit around and play games all day long
I have Live 2005. Is it just me, or are the players short in franchise mode? I mean 3+ years into it, all the newer players are short.
PG's are like between 5'8" - 6'0"
SG's are 6'1"-6'4"
Does anyone else's game do that? JW
hahaha, exactly. I'm on year two of the cavs and i had acquired Piatkowski last year for some shooting. I scored a pick from the Bobcats for Diop and one of my three picks was the shooting guard i wanted so bad. He's awesome but i didn't look at his height, he's only 6'0" even. Needless to say he's my starting PG now. I signed McGinnis to a one year deal and swapped him for Morris Peterson.
Too bad Z's rating went down the ter after i gave him a seven year deal.
After 7+ years, almost every teams SG will be like 6'0" or 6'2" or 6'3" if some team gets lucky and drafts a "bigger" SG.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
