ESPN NBA 2k5 - I'm impressed!
Tags:
- PC gaming
- Games
- Xbox
- Video Games
- Product
Last response: in Video Games
Anonymous
October 17, 2004 1:57:49 PM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
Okay, I put off buying a basketball game this year because I wasn't
impressed with either game last year. ESPN was just too "stiff" - I.e.
just didn't feel right. EA's Live, was just ridiculously arcadey (fast-
break city).
Well, because ESPN was only $20 and I had the basketball itch, I decided
to use some of my store credit and pick it up. Boy, am I glad I did. I
have the Xbox version and it looks fantastic in 480p widescreen. You can
immediately tell just by looking at the players who they are. The models
are fantastic and the textures are great as well. Not only that, but the
mannerisms for each player seem to be dead-on (I'm not a huge follower
of the NBA, but I do watch games).
More importantly, the GAMEPLAY is simply fantastic. I have never played
a basketball game before that made me feel so much like I was actually
playing a simulation of the NBA game. Almost all prior renditions have
had way too many fastbreaks and way too much scoring. ESPN NBA 2k5,
however, is realistic on all accounts, even with the default settings.
DL updated rosters from OperationSports.com and use the available slider
settings there and you will find the experience to be simply amazing.
As to online play, I haven't really tried it yet, so I can't say how
much fun the game would be online.
Lastly, the 5.1 DD sound is outstanding. It's just like sitting in a
real arena. The sounds of the crowd, the heckling, the squeak of the
sneakers the rumble of the backboard after a dunk, EVERYTHING is dead-
on.
This is the best $20 I have spent on a game in a long time and is
definitely more worth the money than ESPN NFL 2k5 was. If you like NBA
basketball at all, I highly recommend this game.
--
Rob Berryhill
Okay, I put off buying a basketball game this year because I wasn't
impressed with either game last year. ESPN was just too "stiff" - I.e.
just didn't feel right. EA's Live, was just ridiculously arcadey (fast-
break city).
Well, because ESPN was only $20 and I had the basketball itch, I decided
to use some of my store credit and pick it up. Boy, am I glad I did. I
have the Xbox version and it looks fantastic in 480p widescreen. You can
immediately tell just by looking at the players who they are. The models
are fantastic and the textures are great as well. Not only that, but the
mannerisms for each player seem to be dead-on (I'm not a huge follower
of the NBA, but I do watch games).
More importantly, the GAMEPLAY is simply fantastic. I have never played
a basketball game before that made me feel so much like I was actually
playing a simulation of the NBA game. Almost all prior renditions have
had way too many fastbreaks and way too much scoring. ESPN NBA 2k5,
however, is realistic on all accounts, even with the default settings.
DL updated rosters from OperationSports.com and use the available slider
settings there and you will find the experience to be simply amazing.
As to online play, I haven't really tried it yet, so I can't say how
much fun the game would be online.
Lastly, the 5.1 DD sound is outstanding. It's just like sitting in a
real arena. The sounds of the crowd, the heckling, the squeak of the
sneakers the rumble of the backboard after a dunk, EVERYTHING is dead-
on.
This is the best $20 I have spent on a game in a long time and is
definitely more worth the money than ESPN NFL 2k5 was. If you like NBA
basketball at all, I highly recommend this game.
--
Rob Berryhill
More about : espn nba 2k5 impressed
Anonymous
October 17, 2004 7:29:33 PM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
>
> More importantly, the GAMEPLAY is simply fantastic. I have never played
> a basketball game before that made me feel so much like I was actually
> playing a simulation of the NBA game. Almost all prior renditions have
> had way too many fastbreaks and way too much scoring. ESPN NBA 2k5,
> however, is realistic on all accounts, even with the default settings.
> DL updated rosters from OperationSports.com and use the available slider
> settings there and you will find the experience to be simply amazing.
>
I don't know, I haven't been able to fix (through slider adjustments) the
problem of fouls. Any basketball game that has two or four fouls a game per
team (and that's stretching it) can't be called a basketball game.
This year I actually prefer Live 2005 over ESPN NBA 2K5.
Alanb
>
> More importantly, the GAMEPLAY is simply fantastic. I have never played
> a basketball game before that made me feel so much like I was actually
> playing a simulation of the NBA game. Almost all prior renditions have
> had way too many fastbreaks and way too much scoring. ESPN NBA 2k5,
> however, is realistic on all accounts, even with the default settings.
> DL updated rosters from OperationSports.com and use the available slider
> settings there and you will find the experience to be simply amazing.
>
I don't know, I haven't been able to fix (through slider adjustments) the
problem of fouls. Any basketball game that has two or four fouls a game per
team (and that's stretching it) can't be called a basketball game.
This year I actually prefer Live 2005 over ESPN NBA 2K5.
Alanb
dementia
October 18, 2004 6:19:27 PM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
"Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
news:wdwcd.255307$MQ5.83308@attbi_s52...
>
> >
> > More importantly, the GAMEPLAY is simply fantastic. I have never played
> > a basketball game before that made me feel so much like I was actually
> > playing a simulation of the NBA game. Almost all prior renditions have
> > had way too many fastbreaks and way too much scoring. ESPN NBA 2k5,
> > however, is realistic on all accounts, even with the default settings.
> > DL updated rosters from OperationSports.com and use the available slider
> > settings there and you will find the experience to be simply amazing.
> >
>
> I don't know, I haven't been able to fix (through slider adjustments) the
> problem of fouls. Any basketball game that has two or four fouls a game
per
> team (and that's stretching it) can't be called a basketball game.
>
> This year I actually prefer Live 2005 over ESPN NBA 2K5.
Live edges out ESPN in everyway, cept GRAPHICS.
ESPN's graphics are top notch.
"Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
news:wdwcd.255307$MQ5.83308@attbi_s52...
>
> >
> > More importantly, the GAMEPLAY is simply fantastic. I have never played
> > a basketball game before that made me feel so much like I was actually
> > playing a simulation of the NBA game. Almost all prior renditions have
> > had way too many fastbreaks and way too much scoring. ESPN NBA 2k5,
> > however, is realistic on all accounts, even with the default settings.
> > DL updated rosters from OperationSports.com and use the available slider
> > settings there and you will find the experience to be simply amazing.
> >
>
> I don't know, I haven't been able to fix (through slider adjustments) the
> problem of fouls. Any basketball game that has two or four fouls a game
per
> team (and that's stretching it) can't be called a basketball game.
>
> This year I actually prefer Live 2005 over ESPN NBA 2K5.
Live edges out ESPN in everyway, cept GRAPHICS.
ESPN's graphics are top notch.
Related resources
- ESPN NFL 2k5 Franchise Help - Forum
- Buggy ESPN MLB 2k5 - Forum
- ESPN MLB 2K5 Cheats? - Forum
- ESPN MLB 2K5 - System Settings Save - Forum
- ESPN MLB 2K5 questions - Forum
Anonymous
October 19, 2004 12:45:21 AM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
In article <5aCdnRsycdyzlOncRVn-pw@suscom.com>, bkr.me@u says...
>
>
>"Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
>news:wdwcd.255307$MQ5.83308@attbi_s52...
>>
>> >
>> > More importantly, the GAMEPLAY is simply fantastic. I have never played
>> > a basketball game before that made me feel so much like I was actually
>> > playing a simulation of the NBA game. Almost all prior renditions have
>> > had way too many fastbreaks and way too much scoring. ESPN NBA 2k5,
>> > however, is realistic on all accounts, even with the default settings.
>> > DL updated rosters from OperationSports.com and use the available slider
>> > settings there and you will find the experience to be simply amazing.
>> >
>>
>> I don't know, I haven't been able to fix (through slider adjustments) the
>> problem of fouls. Any basketball game that has two or four fouls a game
>per
>> team (and that's stretching it) can't be called a basketball game.
>>
>> This year I actually prefer Live 2005 over ESPN NBA 2K5.
>
>Live edges out ESPN in everyway, cept GRAPHICS.
>ESPN's graphics are top notch.
>
ESPN edges out Live in the area of price too.
In article <5aCdnRsycdyzlOncRVn-pw@suscom.com>, bkr.me@u says...
>
>
>"Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
>news:wdwcd.255307$MQ5.83308@attbi_s52...
>>
>> >
>> > More importantly, the GAMEPLAY is simply fantastic. I have never played
>> > a basketball game before that made me feel so much like I was actually
>> > playing a simulation of the NBA game. Almost all prior renditions have
>> > had way too many fastbreaks and way too much scoring. ESPN NBA 2k5,
>> > however, is realistic on all accounts, even with the default settings.
>> > DL updated rosters from OperationSports.com and use the available slider
>> > settings there and you will find the experience to be simply amazing.
>> >
>>
>> I don't know, I haven't been able to fix (through slider adjustments) the
>> problem of fouls. Any basketball game that has two or four fouls a game
>per
>> team (and that's stretching it) can't be called a basketball game.
>>
>> This year I actually prefer Live 2005 over ESPN NBA 2K5.
>
>Live edges out ESPN in everyway, cept GRAPHICS.
>ESPN's graphics are top notch.
>
ESPN edges out Live in the area of price too.
dementia
October 19, 2004 12:45:22 AM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
"MS#1Fanboy-JoJo" <jojo@cox.net> wrote in message
news:BXVcd.4955$SW3.3898@fed1read01...
> In article <5aCdnRsycdyzlOncRVn-pw@suscom.com>, bkr.me@u says...
> >
> >
> >"Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
> >news:wdwcd.255307$MQ5.83308@attbi_s52...
> >>
> >> >
> >> > More importantly, the GAMEPLAY is simply fantastic. I have never
played
> >> > a basketball game before that made me feel so much like I was
actually
> >> > playing a simulation of the NBA game. Almost all prior renditions
have
> >> > had way too many fastbreaks and way too much scoring. ESPN NBA 2k5,
> >> > however, is realistic on all accounts, even with the default
settings.
> >> > DL updated rosters from OperationSports.com and use the available
slider
> >> > settings there and you will find the experience to be simply amazing.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I don't know, I haven't been able to fix (through slider adjustments)
the
> >> problem of fouls. Any basketball game that has two or four fouls a
game
> >per
> >> team (and that's stretching it) can't be called a basketball game.
> >>
> >> This year I actually prefer Live 2005 over ESPN NBA 2K5.
> >
> >Live edges out ESPN in everyway, cept GRAPHICS.
> >ESPN's graphics are top notch.
> >
>
> ESPN edges out Live in the area of price too.
hence the reason I own ESPN and not LIVE.
I can't see paying $50 for a game that is slightly better over a $20 game
that has much better graphics and presentation.
"MS#1Fanboy-JoJo" <jojo@cox.net> wrote in message
news:BXVcd.4955$SW3.3898@fed1read01...
> In article <5aCdnRsycdyzlOncRVn-pw@suscom.com>, bkr.me@u says...
> >
> >
> >"Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
> >news:wdwcd.255307$MQ5.83308@attbi_s52...
> >>
> >> >
> >> > More importantly, the GAMEPLAY is simply fantastic. I have never
played
> >> > a basketball game before that made me feel so much like I was
actually
> >> > playing a simulation of the NBA game. Almost all prior renditions
have
> >> > had way too many fastbreaks and way too much scoring. ESPN NBA 2k5,
> >> > however, is realistic on all accounts, even with the default
settings.
> >> > DL updated rosters from OperationSports.com and use the available
slider
> >> > settings there and you will find the experience to be simply amazing.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I don't know, I haven't been able to fix (through slider adjustments)
the
> >> problem of fouls. Any basketball game that has two or four fouls a
game
> >per
> >> team (and that's stretching it) can't be called a basketball game.
> >>
> >> This year I actually prefer Live 2005 over ESPN NBA 2K5.
> >
> >Live edges out ESPN in everyway, cept GRAPHICS.
> >ESPN's graphics are top notch.
> >
>
> ESPN edges out Live in the area of price too.
hence the reason I own ESPN and not LIVE.
I can't see paying $50 for a game that is slightly better over a $20 game
that has much better graphics and presentation.
Anonymous
October 19, 2004 12:45:23 AM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
"dementia" <bkr.me@u> wrote in message
news:t5udnQO1qoF3qOncRVn-qg@suscom.com...
>
> "MS#1Fanboy-JoJo" <jojo@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:BXVcd.4955$SW3.3898@fed1read01...
>> In article <5aCdnRsycdyzlOncRVn-pw@suscom.com>, bkr.me@u says...
>> >
>> >
>> >"Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
>> >news:wdwcd.255307$MQ5.83308@attbi_s52...
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > More importantly, the GAMEPLAY is simply fantastic. I have never
> played
>> >> > a basketball game before that made me feel so much like I was
> actually
>> >> > playing a simulation of the NBA game. Almost all prior renditions
> have
>> >> > had way too many fastbreaks and way too much scoring. ESPN NBA 2k5,
>> >> > however, is realistic on all accounts, even with the default
> settings.
>> >> > DL updated rosters from OperationSports.com and use the available
> slider
>> >> > settings there and you will find the experience to be simply
>> >> > amazing.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> I don't know, I haven't been able to fix (through slider adjustments)
> the
>> >> problem of fouls. Any basketball game that has two or four fouls a
> game
>> >per
>> >> team (and that's stretching it) can't be called a basketball game.
>> >>
>> >> This year I actually prefer Live 2005 over ESPN NBA 2K5.
>> >
>> >Live edges out ESPN in everyway, cept GRAPHICS.
>> >ESPN's graphics are top notch.
>> >
>>
>> ESPN edges out Live in the area of price too.
>
> hence the reason I own ESPN and not LIVE.
> I can't see paying $50 for a game that is slightly better over a $20 game
> that has much better graphics and presentation.
>
>
Where have you seen Live for $50? I picked it up for $35 at Best Buy and it
is no more than 39.99 anywhere else.
"dementia" <bkr.me@u> wrote in message
news:t5udnQO1qoF3qOncRVn-qg@suscom.com...
>
> "MS#1Fanboy-JoJo" <jojo@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:BXVcd.4955$SW3.3898@fed1read01...
>> In article <5aCdnRsycdyzlOncRVn-pw@suscom.com>, bkr.me@u says...
>> >
>> >
>> >"Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
>> >news:wdwcd.255307$MQ5.83308@attbi_s52...
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > More importantly, the GAMEPLAY is simply fantastic. I have never
> played
>> >> > a basketball game before that made me feel so much like I was
> actually
>> >> > playing a simulation of the NBA game. Almost all prior renditions
> have
>> >> > had way too many fastbreaks and way too much scoring. ESPN NBA 2k5,
>> >> > however, is realistic on all accounts, even with the default
> settings.
>> >> > DL updated rosters from OperationSports.com and use the available
> slider
>> >> > settings there and you will find the experience to be simply
>> >> > amazing.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> I don't know, I haven't been able to fix (through slider adjustments)
> the
>> >> problem of fouls. Any basketball game that has two or four fouls a
> game
>> >per
>> >> team (and that's stretching it) can't be called a basketball game.
>> >>
>> >> This year I actually prefer Live 2005 over ESPN NBA 2K5.
>> >
>> >Live edges out ESPN in everyway, cept GRAPHICS.
>> >ESPN's graphics are top notch.
>> >
>>
>> ESPN edges out Live in the area of price too.
>
> hence the reason I own ESPN and not LIVE.
> I can't see paying $50 for a game that is slightly better over a $20 game
> that has much better graphics and presentation.
>
>
Where have you seen Live for $50? I picked it up for $35 at Best Buy and it
is no more than 39.99 anywhere else.
Anonymous
October 19, 2004 2:20:20 AM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
"dementia" <bkr.me@u> wrote in message news:<5aCdnRsycdyzlOncRVn-pw@suscom.com>...
> Live edges out ESPN in everyway, cept GRAPHICS.
> ESPN's graphics are top notch.
Espn still has much better gameplay if you want to play a more
realistic game of basketball The only problem with ESPN is that it is
getting a little stale and it needs more than just roster updates to
differentiate the newest version from the previous ones.
"dementia" <bkr.me@u> wrote in message news:<5aCdnRsycdyzlOncRVn-pw@suscom.com>...
> Live edges out ESPN in everyway, cept GRAPHICS.
> ESPN's graphics are top notch.
Espn still has much better gameplay if you want to play a more
realistic game of basketball The only problem with ESPN is that it is
getting a little stale and it needs more than just roster updates to
differentiate the newest version from the previous ones.
Anonymous
October 19, 2004 4:19:26 AM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
>> ESPN edges out Live in the area of price too.
>
> hence the reason I own ESPN and not LIVE.
> I can't see paying $50 for a game that is slightly better over a $20 game
> that has much better graphics and presentation.
>
>
Live 2005 goes for 35-39 bucks. For the twenty extra bucks, I think Live
2005 is still the better buy.
Alanb
>> ESPN edges out Live in the area of price too.
>
> hence the reason I own ESPN and not LIVE.
> I can't see paying $50 for a game that is slightly better over a $20 game
> that has much better graphics and presentation.
>
>
Live 2005 goes for 35-39 bucks. For the twenty extra bucks, I think Live
2005 is still the better buy.
Alanb
Anonymous
October 19, 2004 4:29:31 AM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
"brun132001" <brun132001@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> Espn still has much better gameplay if you want to play a more
> realistic game of basketball The only problem with ESPN is that it is
> getting a little stale and it needs more than just roster updates to
> differentiate the newest version from the previous ones.
They can also fix the piss poor way to shoot free throws as well.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
"brun132001" <brun132001@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> Espn still has much better gameplay if you want to play a more
> realistic game of basketball The only problem with ESPN is that it is
> getting a little stale and it needs more than just roster updates to
> differentiate the newest version from the previous ones.
They can also fix the piss poor way to shoot free throws as well.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
dementia
October 19, 2004 11:25:56 AM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
"Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:NMednWNewdFH3uncRVn-jg@comcast.com...
>
> "dementia" <bkr.me@u> wrote in message
> news:t5udnQO1qoF3qOncRVn-qg@suscom.com...
> >
> > "MS#1Fanboy-JoJo" <jojo@cox.net> wrote in message
> > news:BXVcd.4955$SW3.3898@fed1read01...
> >> In article <5aCdnRsycdyzlOncRVn-pw@suscom.com>, bkr.me@u says...
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >"Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
> >> >news:wdwcd.255307$MQ5.83308@attbi_s52...
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > More importantly, the GAMEPLAY is simply fantastic. I have never
> > played
> >> >> > a basketball game before that made me feel so much like I was
> > actually
> >> >> > playing a simulation of the NBA game. Almost all prior renditions
> > have
> >> >> > had way too many fastbreaks and way too much scoring. ESPN NBA
2k5,
> >> >> > however, is realistic on all accounts, even with the default
> > settings.
> >> >> > DL updated rosters from OperationSports.com and use the available
> > slider
> >> >> > settings there and you will find the experience to be simply
> >> >> > amazing.
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> I don't know, I haven't been able to fix (through slider
adjustments)
> > the
> >> >> problem of fouls. Any basketball game that has two or four fouls a
> > game
> >> >per
> >> >> team (and that's stretching it) can't be called a basketball game.
> >> >>
> >> >> This year I actually prefer Live 2005 over ESPN NBA 2K5.
> >> >
> >> >Live edges out ESPN in everyway, cept GRAPHICS.
> >> >ESPN's graphics are top notch.
> >> >
> >>
> >> ESPN edges out Live in the area of price too.
> >
> > hence the reason I own ESPN and not LIVE.
> > I can't see paying $50 for a game that is slightly better over a $20
game
> > that has much better graphics and presentation.
> >
> >
>
> Where have you seen Live for $50?
"ass"umed.
I borrowed my nephews version, I never looked it up while shopping.
I just saw the 3 for 2 deal advertised for EA titles, so I am going to pick
it up this week.
> I picked it up for $35 at Best Buy and it
> is no more than 39.99 anywhere else.
>
>
"Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:NMednWNewdFH3uncRVn-jg@comcast.com...
>
> "dementia" <bkr.me@u> wrote in message
> news:t5udnQO1qoF3qOncRVn-qg@suscom.com...
> >
> > "MS#1Fanboy-JoJo" <jojo@cox.net> wrote in message
> > news:BXVcd.4955$SW3.3898@fed1read01...
> >> In article <5aCdnRsycdyzlOncRVn-pw@suscom.com>, bkr.me@u says...
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >"Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
> >> >news:wdwcd.255307$MQ5.83308@attbi_s52...
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > More importantly, the GAMEPLAY is simply fantastic. I have never
> > played
> >> >> > a basketball game before that made me feel so much like I was
> > actually
> >> >> > playing a simulation of the NBA game. Almost all prior renditions
> > have
> >> >> > had way too many fastbreaks and way too much scoring. ESPN NBA
2k5,
> >> >> > however, is realistic on all accounts, even with the default
> > settings.
> >> >> > DL updated rosters from OperationSports.com and use the available
> > slider
> >> >> > settings there and you will find the experience to be simply
> >> >> > amazing.
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> I don't know, I haven't been able to fix (through slider
adjustments)
> > the
> >> >> problem of fouls. Any basketball game that has two or four fouls a
> > game
> >> >per
> >> >> team (and that's stretching it) can't be called a basketball game.
> >> >>
> >> >> This year I actually prefer Live 2005 over ESPN NBA 2K5.
> >> >
> >> >Live edges out ESPN in everyway, cept GRAPHICS.
> >> >ESPN's graphics are top notch.
> >> >
> >>
> >> ESPN edges out Live in the area of price too.
> >
> > hence the reason I own ESPN and not LIVE.
> > I can't see paying $50 for a game that is slightly better over a $20
game
> > that has much better graphics and presentation.
> >
> >
>
> Where have you seen Live for $50?
"ass"umed.
I borrowed my nephews version, I never looked it up while shopping.
I just saw the 3 for 2 deal advertised for EA titles, so I am going to pick
it up this week.
> I picked it up for $35 at Best Buy and it
> is no more than 39.99 anywhere else.
>
>
dementia
October 19, 2004 11:27:50 AM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
"brun132001" <brun132001@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6042241d.0410182120.210aff13@posting.google.com...
> "dementia" <bkr.me@u> wrote in message
news:<5aCdnRsycdyzlOncRVn-pw@suscom.com>...
>
> > Live edges out ESPN in everyway, cept GRAPHICS.
> > ESPN's graphics are top notch.
>
> Espn still has much better gameplay if you want to play a more
> realistic game of basketball
Like most ESPN games, I strongly dislike the AI.
The only place I see ESPN topping EA is with graphics and presentation.
"brun132001" <brun132001@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6042241d.0410182120.210aff13@posting.google.com...
> "dementia" <bkr.me@u> wrote in message
news:<5aCdnRsycdyzlOncRVn-pw@suscom.com>...
>
> > Live edges out ESPN in everyway, cept GRAPHICS.
> > ESPN's graphics are top notch.
>
> Espn still has much better gameplay if you want to play a more
> realistic game of basketball
Like most ESPN games, I strongly dislike the AI.
The only place I see ESPN topping EA is with graphics and presentation.
Anonymous
October 19, 2004 4:35:39 PM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
>
> hence the reason I own ESPN and not LIVE.
> I can't see paying $50 for a game that is slightly better over a $20 game
> that has much better graphics and presentation.
There isnt anything slightly about it. I played about 5 games of ESPN
and just couldnt get into it, I wanted to becasue it looks great!
Just wasnt any fun, I started up Live and fell in love. THis
game(with the proper sliders from Op SPorts) makes this game as
reaslistic as it gets. Im very addicted at this point, thats too bad
becasue in a week ill be moving on to GTA SA!
>
> hence the reason I own ESPN and not LIVE.
> I can't see paying $50 for a game that is slightly better over a $20 game
> that has much better graphics and presentation.
There isnt anything slightly about it. I played about 5 games of ESPN
and just couldnt get into it, I wanted to becasue it looks great!
Just wasnt any fun, I started up Live and fell in love. THis
game(with the proper sliders from Op SPorts) makes this game as
reaslistic as it gets. Im very addicted at this point, thats too bad
becasue in a week ill be moving on to GTA SA!
Anonymous
October 19, 2004 6:57:07 PM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
"Miles Noe" <davis25@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3bd85e77.0410191135.1caa66fb@posting.google.com...
>>
>> hence the reason I own ESPN and not LIVE.
>> I can't see paying $50 for a game that is slightly better over a $20 game
>> that has much better graphics and presentation.
>
> There isnt anything slightly about it. I played about 5 games of ESPN
> and just couldnt get into it, I wanted to becasue it looks great!
> Just wasnt any fun, I started up Live and fell in love. THis
> game(with the proper sliders from Op SPorts) makes this game as
> reaslistic as it gets. Im very addicted at this point, thats too bad
> becasue in a week ill be moving on to GTA SA!
GTA:SA is the reason I didn't buy Live on release in the first place, I
knew I would just get side tracked so I will just wait and pick it up for a
reasonable price.
"Miles Noe" <davis25@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3bd85e77.0410191135.1caa66fb@posting.google.com...
>>
>> hence the reason I own ESPN and not LIVE.
>> I can't see paying $50 for a game that is slightly better over a $20 game
>> that has much better graphics and presentation.
>
> There isnt anything slightly about it. I played about 5 games of ESPN
> and just couldnt get into it, I wanted to becasue it looks great!
> Just wasnt any fun, I started up Live and fell in love. THis
> game(with the proper sliders from Op SPorts) makes this game as
> reaslistic as it gets. Im very addicted at this point, thats too bad
> becasue in a week ill be moving on to GTA SA!
GTA:SA is the reason I didn't buy Live on release in the first place, I
knew I would just get side tracked so I will just wait and pick it up for a
reasonable price.
Anonymous
October 19, 2004 7:24:14 PM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
In article <t5udnQO1qoF3qOncRVn-qg@suscom.com>, bkr.me@u says...
>
>
>"MS#1Fanboy-JoJo" <jojo@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:BXVcd.4955$SW3.3898@fed1read01...
>> In article <5aCdnRsycdyzlOncRVn-pw@suscom.com>, bkr.me@u says...
>> >
>> >
>> >"Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
>> >news:wdwcd.255307$MQ5.83308@attbi_s52...
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > More importantly, the GAMEPLAY is simply fantastic. I have never
>played
>> >> > a basketball game before that made me feel so much like I was
>actually
>> >> > playing a simulation of the NBA game. Almost all prior renditions
>have
>> >> > had way too many fastbreaks and way too much scoring. ESPN NBA 2k5,
>> >> > however, is realistic on all accounts, even with the default
>settings.
>> >> > DL updated rosters from OperationSports.com and use the available
>slider
>> >> > settings there and you will find the experience to be simply amazing.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> I don't know, I haven't been able to fix (through slider adjustments)
>the
>> >> problem of fouls. Any basketball game that has two or four fouls a
>game
>> >per
>> >> team (and that's stretching it) can't be called a basketball game.
>> >>
>> >> This year I actually prefer Live 2005 over ESPN NBA 2K5.
>> >
>> >Live edges out ESPN in everyway, cept GRAPHICS.
>> >ESPN's graphics are top notch.
>> >
>>
>> ESPN edges out Live in the area of price too.
>
>hence the reason I own ESPN and not LIVE.
>I can't see paying $50 for a game that is slightly better over a $20 game
>that has much better graphics and presentation.
>
>
I sure hope some of these quality corporations take Segas and Codemasters lead
and start coming out with $20 and $30 games too.
In article <t5udnQO1qoF3qOncRVn-qg@suscom.com>, bkr.me@u says...
>
>
>"MS#1Fanboy-JoJo" <jojo@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:BXVcd.4955$SW3.3898@fed1read01...
>> In article <5aCdnRsycdyzlOncRVn-pw@suscom.com>, bkr.me@u says...
>> >
>> >
>> >"Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
>> >news:wdwcd.255307$MQ5.83308@attbi_s52...
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > More importantly, the GAMEPLAY is simply fantastic. I have never
>played
>> >> > a basketball game before that made me feel so much like I was
>actually
>> >> > playing a simulation of the NBA game. Almost all prior renditions
>have
>> >> > had way too many fastbreaks and way too much scoring. ESPN NBA 2k5,
>> >> > however, is realistic on all accounts, even with the default
>settings.
>> >> > DL updated rosters from OperationSports.com and use the available
>slider
>> >> > settings there and you will find the experience to be simply amazing.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> I don't know, I haven't been able to fix (through slider adjustments)
>the
>> >> problem of fouls. Any basketball game that has two or four fouls a
>game
>> >per
>> >> team (and that's stretching it) can't be called a basketball game.
>> >>
>> >> This year I actually prefer Live 2005 over ESPN NBA 2K5.
>> >
>> >Live edges out ESPN in everyway, cept GRAPHICS.
>> >ESPN's graphics are top notch.
>> >
>>
>> ESPN edges out Live in the area of price too.
>
>hence the reason I own ESPN and not LIVE.
>I can't see paying $50 for a game that is slightly better over a $20 game
>that has much better graphics and presentation.
>
>
I sure hope some of these quality corporations take Segas and Codemasters lead
and start coming out with $20 and $30 games too.
Anonymous
October 19, 2004 8:17:54 PM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
"dementia" <bkr.me@u> wrote in message news:<puCdnZ2BiKSpZ-ncRVn-rg@suscom.com>...
> "brun132001" <brun132001@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:6042241d.0410182120.210aff13@posting.google.com...
> > "dementia" <bkr.me@u> wrote in message
> news:<5aCdnRsycdyzlOncRVn-pw@suscom.com>...
> >
> > > Live edges out ESPN in everyway, cept GRAPHICS.
> > > ESPN's graphics are top notch.
> >
> > Espn still has much better gameplay if you want to play a more
> > realistic game of basketball
>
> Like most ESPN games, I strongly dislike the AI.
> The only place I see ESPN topping EA is with graphics and presentation.
I haven't tried this year's NBA live yet, but it had much more
primitive AI in the last few years compared to ESPN. For a long time,
the shot fake was way too effective for players with high offensive
awareness ratings. You can pretty much get a layup everytime if you
fake with an all star level player. Also, in last year's version, you
can score almost everytime by using the jump hop.
ESPN is more frustrating to learn for NBA Live fans, because you can't
going to get a layup every time in ESPN. However, ESPN is the better
game once you learn how to play it, ESPN's gameplay is simply much
deeper than NBA Live's. EGM and Game informer both praise NBA live's
improvements and pointed out ESPN's lack of improvements but they
still say that gameplay in ESPN is better.
"dementia" <bkr.me@u> wrote in message news:<puCdnZ2BiKSpZ-ncRVn-rg@suscom.com>...
> "brun132001" <brun132001@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:6042241d.0410182120.210aff13@posting.google.com...
> > "dementia" <bkr.me@u> wrote in message
> news:<5aCdnRsycdyzlOncRVn-pw@suscom.com>...
> >
> > > Live edges out ESPN in everyway, cept GRAPHICS.
> > > ESPN's graphics are top notch.
> >
> > Espn still has much better gameplay if you want to play a more
> > realistic game of basketball
>
> Like most ESPN games, I strongly dislike the AI.
> The only place I see ESPN topping EA is with graphics and presentation.
I haven't tried this year's NBA live yet, but it had much more
primitive AI in the last few years compared to ESPN. For a long time,
the shot fake was way too effective for players with high offensive
awareness ratings. You can pretty much get a layup everytime if you
fake with an all star level player. Also, in last year's version, you
can score almost everytime by using the jump hop.
ESPN is more frustrating to learn for NBA Live fans, because you can't
going to get a layup every time in ESPN. However, ESPN is the better
game once you learn how to play it, ESPN's gameplay is simply much
deeper than NBA Live's. EGM and Game informer both praise NBA live's
improvements and pointed out ESPN's lack of improvements but they
still say that gameplay in ESPN is better.
Anonymous
October 19, 2004 8:19:34 PM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
"John Lemings" <lmngs@msn.com> wrote in message news:<4174c043_4@127.0.0.1>...
> "brun132001" <brun132001@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> > Espn still has much better gameplay if you want to play a more
> > realistic game of basketball The only problem with ESPN is that it is
> > getting a little stale and it needs more than just roster updates to
> > differentiate the newest version from the previous ones.
>
> They can also fix the piss poor way to shoot free throws as well.
>
Yeah, last year's free throw method was pretty terrible. It was hard
to be accurate even with 90% shooters. The method that was used in
previous editions was way too easy, but last year's method was the
exact opposite. I hope they change the free throws shooting method.
"John Lemings" <lmngs@msn.com> wrote in message news:<4174c043_4@127.0.0.1>...
> "brun132001" <brun132001@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> > Espn still has much better gameplay if you want to play a more
> > realistic game of basketball The only problem with ESPN is that it is
> > getting a little stale and it needs more than just roster updates to
> > differentiate the newest version from the previous ones.
>
> They can also fix the piss poor way to shoot free throws as well.
>
Yeah, last year's free throw method was pretty terrible. It was hard
to be accurate even with 90% shooters. The method that was used in
previous editions was way too easy, but last year's method was the
exact opposite. I hope they change the free throws shooting method.
Anonymous
October 19, 2004 8:23:32 PM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
"Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message news:<h4Zcd.281776$3l3.106027@attbi_s03>...
> >> ESPN edges out Live in the area of price too.
> >
> > hence the reason I own ESPN and not LIVE.
> > I can't see paying $50 for a game that is slightly better over a $20 game
> > that has much better graphics and presentation.
> >
> >
>
> Live 2005 goes for 35-39 bucks. For the twenty extra bucks, I think Live
> 2005 is still the better buy.
>
> Alanb
Why? What do you like more about Live? Is there anything in Live that
is better than ESPN, other than the all star activities? From what
I've read, I think the 3pt and slam dunk contests in Live are cool but
they are mere diversions. Live would have to offer a better game of
basketball before I'll prefer it over ESPN, and most reviews I've read
suggest that Live still has some catching up to do with regards to
gameplay.
"Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message news:<h4Zcd.281776$3l3.106027@attbi_s03>...
> >> ESPN edges out Live in the area of price too.
> >
> > hence the reason I own ESPN and not LIVE.
> > I can't see paying $50 for a game that is slightly better over a $20 game
> > that has much better graphics and presentation.
> >
> >
>
> Live 2005 goes for 35-39 bucks. For the twenty extra bucks, I think Live
> 2005 is still the better buy.
>
> Alanb
Why? What do you like more about Live? Is there anything in Live that
is better than ESPN, other than the all star activities? From what
I've read, I think the 3pt and slam dunk contests in Live are cool but
they are mere diversions. Live would have to offer a better game of
basketball before I'll prefer it over ESPN, and most reviews I've read
suggest that Live still has some catching up to do with regards to
gameplay.
Anonymous
October 19, 2004 10:53:01 PM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
In article <h4Zcd.281776$3l3.106027@attbi_s03>, master@oforion.net says...
>
>>> ESPN edges out Live in the area of price too.
>>
>> hence the reason I own ESPN and not LIVE.
>> I can't see paying $50 for a game that is slightly better over a $20 game
>> that has much better graphics and presentation.
>>
>>
>
>Live 2005 goes for 35-39 bucks. For the twenty extra bucks, I think Live
>2005 is still the better buy.
>
>Alanb
>
>
Maybe so but I picked up ESPN at Fry's Electronics for $13.50 on the day of
release. Live still might be worth the extra for real basketball freaks but
thats not JoJo.
In article <h4Zcd.281776$3l3.106027@attbi_s03>, master@oforion.net says...
>
>>> ESPN edges out Live in the area of price too.
>>
>> hence the reason I own ESPN and not LIVE.
>> I can't see paying $50 for a game that is slightly better over a $20 game
>> that has much better graphics and presentation.
>>
>>
>
>Live 2005 goes for 35-39 bucks. For the twenty extra bucks, I think Live
>2005 is still the better buy.
>
>Alanb
>
>
Maybe so but I picked up ESPN at Fry's Electronics for $13.50 on the day of
release. Live still might be worth the extra for real basketball freaks but
thats not JoJo.
Anonymous
October 20, 2004 5:47:19 AM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
> Why? What do you like more about Live? Is there anything in Live that
> is better than ESPN, other than the all star activities? From what
> I've read, I think the 3pt and slam dunk contests in Live are cool but
> they are mere diversions. Live would have to offer a better game of
> basketball before I'll prefer it over ESPN, and most reviews I've read
> suggest that Live still has some catching up to do with regards to
> gameplay.
I've never even tried the 3 point and slam dunk competitions and still like
Live better. The big killer for me with ESPN NBA 2K5 is the fact that so
little fouls are called, and slider adjustments do nothing to fix that huge
problem.
Live suffers from too many block shots, but I haven't really tweaked the
sliders enough to see if I can remedy that problem. Give me a choice
between the two and I'll take the excessive blocks over too few fouls.
Another thing that I like about Live is that there are a lot more sliders
that can be adjusted when compared to ESPN's game.
To me, ESPN plays a bit too slow for basketball. There are more slams and
quick breaks in Live, similar to what happens in the real game.
All I can say is that I had ESPN's 2K5 at least two weeks before I got Live
2005. Once I got Live, I haven't touched ESPN's game. I probably should go
back to 2K5, to get a true comparison, but I just can't do it.
Finally, Live seems to be a lot harder. Using All-Star in Live, I get
toasted most of the time; I can't say the same for ESPN.
The foul shot routine in Live is also better, with sliders to adjust how
easy or hard you can make the foul shots. Also-- and this might be the case
with ESPN, too-- it's easier to make foul shots in Live with a better
free-throw shooter.
Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more so than
ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
Alanb
> Why? What do you like more about Live? Is there anything in Live that
> is better than ESPN, other than the all star activities? From what
> I've read, I think the 3pt and slam dunk contests in Live are cool but
> they are mere diversions. Live would have to offer a better game of
> basketball before I'll prefer it over ESPN, and most reviews I've read
> suggest that Live still has some catching up to do with regards to
> gameplay.
I've never even tried the 3 point and slam dunk competitions and still like
Live better. The big killer for me with ESPN NBA 2K5 is the fact that so
little fouls are called, and slider adjustments do nothing to fix that huge
problem.
Live suffers from too many block shots, but I haven't really tweaked the
sliders enough to see if I can remedy that problem. Give me a choice
between the two and I'll take the excessive blocks over too few fouls.
Another thing that I like about Live is that there are a lot more sliders
that can be adjusted when compared to ESPN's game.
To me, ESPN plays a bit too slow for basketball. There are more slams and
quick breaks in Live, similar to what happens in the real game.
All I can say is that I had ESPN's 2K5 at least two weeks before I got Live
2005. Once I got Live, I haven't touched ESPN's game. I probably should go
back to 2K5, to get a true comparison, but I just can't do it.
Finally, Live seems to be a lot harder. Using All-Star in Live, I get
toasted most of the time; I can't say the same for ESPN.
The foul shot routine in Live is also better, with sliders to adjust how
easy or hard you can make the foul shots. Also-- and this might be the case
with ESPN, too-- it's easier to make foul shots in Live with a better
free-throw shooter.
Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more so than
ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
Alanb
Anonymous
October 21, 2004 7:38:35 AM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more so
than
> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
But, worth the $30 more?
--
* Novus_
~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
"Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
news:Hsjdd.287830$3l3.7430@attbi_s03...
>
> > Why? What do you like more about Live? Is there anything in Live that
> > is better than ESPN, other than the all star activities? From what
> > I've read, I think the 3pt and slam dunk contests in Live are cool but
> > they are mere diversions. Live would have to offer a better game of
> > basketball before I'll prefer it over ESPN, and most reviews I've read
> > suggest that Live still has some catching up to do with regards to
> > gameplay.
>
> I've never even tried the 3 point and slam dunk competitions and still
like
> Live better. The big killer for me with ESPN NBA 2K5 is the fact that so
> little fouls are called, and slider adjustments do nothing to fix that
huge
> problem.
>
> Live suffers from too many block shots, but I haven't really tweaked the
> sliders enough to see if I can remedy that problem. Give me a choice
> between the two and I'll take the excessive blocks over too few fouls.
>
> Another thing that I like about Live is that there are a lot more sliders
> that can be adjusted when compared to ESPN's game.
>
> To me, ESPN plays a bit too slow for basketball. There are more slams and
> quick breaks in Live, similar to what happens in the real game.
>
> All I can say is that I had ESPN's 2K5 at least two weeks before I got
Live
> 2005. Once I got Live, I haven't touched ESPN's game. I probably should
go
> back to 2K5, to get a true comparison, but I just can't do it.
>
> Finally, Live seems to be a lot harder. Using All-Star in Live, I get
> toasted most of the time; I can't say the same for ESPN.
>
> The foul shot routine in Live is also better, with sliders to adjust how
> easy or hard you can make the foul shots. Also-- and this might be the
case
> with ESPN, too-- it's easier to make foul shots in Live with a better
> free-throw shooter.
>
> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more so
than
> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
>
> Alanb
>
>
> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more so
than
> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
But, worth the $30 more?
--
* Novus_
~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
"Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
news:Hsjdd.287830$3l3.7430@attbi_s03...
>
> > Why? What do you like more about Live? Is there anything in Live that
> > is better than ESPN, other than the all star activities? From what
> > I've read, I think the 3pt and slam dunk contests in Live are cool but
> > they are mere diversions. Live would have to offer a better game of
> > basketball before I'll prefer it over ESPN, and most reviews I've read
> > suggest that Live still has some catching up to do with regards to
> > gameplay.
>
> I've never even tried the 3 point and slam dunk competitions and still
like
> Live better. The big killer for me with ESPN NBA 2K5 is the fact that so
> little fouls are called, and slider adjustments do nothing to fix that
huge
> problem.
>
> Live suffers from too many block shots, but I haven't really tweaked the
> sliders enough to see if I can remedy that problem. Give me a choice
> between the two and I'll take the excessive blocks over too few fouls.
>
> Another thing that I like about Live is that there are a lot more sliders
> that can be adjusted when compared to ESPN's game.
>
> To me, ESPN plays a bit too slow for basketball. There are more slams and
> quick breaks in Live, similar to what happens in the real game.
>
> All I can say is that I had ESPN's 2K5 at least two weeks before I got
Live
> 2005. Once I got Live, I haven't touched ESPN's game. I probably should
go
> back to 2K5, to get a true comparison, but I just can't do it.
>
> Finally, Live seems to be a lot harder. Using All-Star in Live, I get
> toasted most of the time; I can't say the same for ESPN.
>
> The foul shot routine in Live is also better, with sliders to adjust how
> easy or hard you can make the foul shots. Also-- and this might be the
case
> with ESPN, too-- it's easier to make foul shots in Live with a better
> free-throw shooter.
>
> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more so
than
> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
>
> Alanb
>
>
Anonymous
October 21, 2004 10:32:57 AM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
"Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2tp7c0F22jm7uU1@uni-berlin.de...
>> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more so
> than
>> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
>
>
>
> But, worth the $30 more?
Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
>
> --
>
> * Novus_
> ~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
>
>
> "Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
> news:Hsjdd.287830$3l3.7430@attbi_s03...
>>
>> > Why? What do you like more about Live? Is there anything in Live that
>> > is better than ESPN, other than the all star activities? From what
>> > I've read, I think the 3pt and slam dunk contests in Live are cool but
>> > they are mere diversions. Live would have to offer a better game of
>> > basketball before I'll prefer it over ESPN, and most reviews I've read
>> > suggest that Live still has some catching up to do with regards to
>> > gameplay.
>>
>> I've never even tried the 3 point and slam dunk competitions and still
> like
>> Live better. The big killer for me with ESPN NBA 2K5 is the fact that so
>> little fouls are called, and slider adjustments do nothing to fix that
> huge
>> problem.
>>
>> Live suffers from too many block shots, but I haven't really tweaked the
>> sliders enough to see if I can remedy that problem. Give me a choice
>> between the two and I'll take the excessive blocks over too few fouls.
>>
>> Another thing that I like about Live is that there are a lot more sliders
>> that can be adjusted when compared to ESPN's game.
>>
>> To me, ESPN plays a bit too slow for basketball. There are more slams
>> and
>> quick breaks in Live, similar to what happens in the real game.
>>
>> All I can say is that I had ESPN's 2K5 at least two weeks before I got
> Live
>> 2005. Once I got Live, I haven't touched ESPN's game. I probably should
> go
>> back to 2K5, to get a true comparison, but I just can't do it.
>>
>> Finally, Live seems to be a lot harder. Using All-Star in Live, I get
>> toasted most of the time; I can't say the same for ESPN.
>>
>> The foul shot routine in Live is also better, with sliders to adjust how
>> easy or hard you can make the foul shots. Also-- and this might be the
> case
>> with ESPN, too-- it's easier to make foul shots in Live with a better
>> free-throw shooter.
>>
>> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more so
> than
>> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
>>
>> Alanb
>>
>>
>
>
"Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2tp7c0F22jm7uU1@uni-berlin.de...
>> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more so
> than
>> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
>
>
>
> But, worth the $30 more?
Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
>
> --
>
> * Novus_
> ~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
>
>
> "Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
> news:Hsjdd.287830$3l3.7430@attbi_s03...
>>
>> > Why? What do you like more about Live? Is there anything in Live that
>> > is better than ESPN, other than the all star activities? From what
>> > I've read, I think the 3pt and slam dunk contests in Live are cool but
>> > they are mere diversions. Live would have to offer a better game of
>> > basketball before I'll prefer it over ESPN, and most reviews I've read
>> > suggest that Live still has some catching up to do with regards to
>> > gameplay.
>>
>> I've never even tried the 3 point and slam dunk competitions and still
> like
>> Live better. The big killer for me with ESPN NBA 2K5 is the fact that so
>> little fouls are called, and slider adjustments do nothing to fix that
> huge
>> problem.
>>
>> Live suffers from too many block shots, but I haven't really tweaked the
>> sliders enough to see if I can remedy that problem. Give me a choice
>> between the two and I'll take the excessive blocks over too few fouls.
>>
>> Another thing that I like about Live is that there are a lot more sliders
>> that can be adjusted when compared to ESPN's game.
>>
>> To me, ESPN plays a bit too slow for basketball. There are more slams
>> and
>> quick breaks in Live, similar to what happens in the real game.
>>
>> All I can say is that I had ESPN's 2K5 at least two weeks before I got
> Live
>> 2005. Once I got Live, I haven't touched ESPN's game. I probably should
> go
>> back to 2K5, to get a true comparison, but I just can't do it.
>>
>> Finally, Live seems to be a lot harder. Using All-Star in Live, I get
>> toasted most of the time; I can't say the same for ESPN.
>>
>> The foul shot routine in Live is also better, with sliders to adjust how
>> easy or hard you can make the foul shots. Also-- and this might be the
> case
>> with ESPN, too-- it's easier to make foul shots in Live with a better
>> free-throw shooter.
>>
>> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more so
> than
>> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
>>
>> Alanb
>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
October 22, 2004 3:14:45 PM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
> > But, worth the $30 more?
>
> Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
--
* Novus_
~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
"Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:UKCdncpFB_njMercRVn-sw@comcast.com...
>
> "Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:2tp7c0F22jm7uU1@uni-berlin.de...
> >> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more so
> > than
> >> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
> >
> >
> >
> > But, worth the $30 more?
>
> Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
>
> >
> > --
> >
> > * Novus_
> > ~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
> >
> >
> > "Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
> > news:Hsjdd.287830$3l3.7430@attbi_s03...
> >>
> >> > Why? What do you like more about Live? Is there anything in Live
that
> >> > is better than ESPN, other than the all star activities? From what
> >> > I've read, I think the 3pt and slam dunk contests in Live are cool
but
> >> > they are mere diversions. Live would have to offer a better game of
> >> > basketball before I'll prefer it over ESPN, and most reviews I've
read
> >> > suggest that Live still has some catching up to do with regards to
> >> > gameplay.
> >>
> >> I've never even tried the 3 point and slam dunk competitions and still
> > like
> >> Live better. The big killer for me with ESPN NBA 2K5 is the fact that
so
> >> little fouls are called, and slider adjustments do nothing to fix that
> > huge
> >> problem.
> >>
> >> Live suffers from too many block shots, but I haven't really tweaked
the
> >> sliders enough to see if I can remedy that problem. Give me a choice
> >> between the two and I'll take the excessive blocks over too few fouls.
> >>
> >> Another thing that I like about Live is that there are a lot more
sliders
> >> that can be adjusted when compared to ESPN's game.
> >>
> >> To me, ESPN plays a bit too slow for basketball. There are more slams
> >> and
> >> quick breaks in Live, similar to what happens in the real game.
> >>
> >> All I can say is that I had ESPN's 2K5 at least two weeks before I got
> > Live
> >> 2005. Once I got Live, I haven't touched ESPN's game. I probably
should
> > go
> >> back to 2K5, to get a true comparison, but I just can't do it.
> >>
> >> Finally, Live seems to be a lot harder. Using All-Star in Live, I get
> >> toasted most of the time; I can't say the same for ESPN.
> >>
> >> The foul shot routine in Live is also better, with sliders to adjust
how
> >> easy or hard you can make the foul shots. Also-- and this might be the
> > case
> >> with ESPN, too-- it's easier to make foul shots in Live with a better
> >> free-throw shooter.
> >>
> >> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more so
> > than
> >> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
> >>
> >> Alanb
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
> > But, worth the $30 more?
>
> Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
--
* Novus_
~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
"Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:UKCdncpFB_njMercRVn-sw@comcast.com...
>
> "Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:2tp7c0F22jm7uU1@uni-berlin.de...
> >> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more so
> > than
> >> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
> >
> >
> >
> > But, worth the $30 more?
>
> Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
>
> >
> > --
> >
> > * Novus_
> > ~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
> >
> >
> > "Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
> > news:Hsjdd.287830$3l3.7430@attbi_s03...
> >>
> >> > Why? What do you like more about Live? Is there anything in Live
that
> >> > is better than ESPN, other than the all star activities? From what
> >> > I've read, I think the 3pt and slam dunk contests in Live are cool
but
> >> > they are mere diversions. Live would have to offer a better game of
> >> > basketball before I'll prefer it over ESPN, and most reviews I've
read
> >> > suggest that Live still has some catching up to do with regards to
> >> > gameplay.
> >>
> >> I've never even tried the 3 point and slam dunk competitions and still
> > like
> >> Live better. The big killer for me with ESPN NBA 2K5 is the fact that
so
> >> little fouls are called, and slider adjustments do nothing to fix that
> > huge
> >> problem.
> >>
> >> Live suffers from too many block shots, but I haven't really tweaked
the
> >> sliders enough to see if I can remedy that problem. Give me a choice
> >> between the two and I'll take the excessive blocks over too few fouls.
> >>
> >> Another thing that I like about Live is that there are a lot more
sliders
> >> that can be adjusted when compared to ESPN's game.
> >>
> >> To me, ESPN plays a bit too slow for basketball. There are more slams
> >> and
> >> quick breaks in Live, similar to what happens in the real game.
> >>
> >> All I can say is that I had ESPN's 2K5 at least two weeks before I got
> > Live
> >> 2005. Once I got Live, I haven't touched ESPN's game. I probably
should
> > go
> >> back to 2K5, to get a true comparison, but I just can't do it.
> >>
> >> Finally, Live seems to be a lot harder. Using All-Star in Live, I get
> >> toasted most of the time; I can't say the same for ESPN.
> >>
> >> The foul shot routine in Live is also better, with sliders to adjust
how
> >> easy or hard you can make the foul shots. Also-- and this might be the
> > case
> >> with ESPN, too-- it's easier to make foul shots in Live with a better
> >> free-throw shooter.
> >>
> >> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more so
> > than
> >> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
> >>
> >> Alanb
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
Anonymous
October 22, 2004 3:16:18 PM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
> > > But, worth the $30 more?
> >
> > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
>
>
> Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
Found the answer. $40 at Wal-Mart.
Okay, so is NBA Live worth $20 more?
--
* Novus_
~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
"Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2tsmf7F22oi4eU1@uni-berlin.de...
> > > But, worth the $30 more?
> >
> > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
>
>
> Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
>
> --
>
> * Novus_
> ~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
>
>
> "Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:UKCdncpFB_njMercRVn-sw@comcast.com...
> >
> > "Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:2tp7c0F22jm7uU1@uni-berlin.de...
> > >> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more
so
> > > than
> > >> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > But, worth the $30 more?
> >
> > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
> >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > * Novus_
> > > ~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
> > >
> > >
> > > "Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
> > > news:Hsjdd.287830$3l3.7430@attbi_s03...
> > >>
> > >> > Why? What do you like more about Live? Is there anything in Live
> that
> > >> > is better than ESPN, other than the all star activities? From what
> > >> > I've read, I think the 3pt and slam dunk contests in Live are cool
> but
> > >> > they are mere diversions. Live would have to offer a better game
of
> > >> > basketball before I'll prefer it over ESPN, and most reviews I've
> read
> > >> > suggest that Live still has some catching up to do with regards to
> > >> > gameplay.
> > >>
> > >> I've never even tried the 3 point and slam dunk competitions and
still
> > > like
> > >> Live better. The big killer for me with ESPN NBA 2K5 is the fact
that
> so
> > >> little fouls are called, and slider adjustments do nothing to fix
that
> > > huge
> > >> problem.
> > >>
> > >> Live suffers from too many block shots, but I haven't really tweaked
> the
> > >> sliders enough to see if I can remedy that problem. Give me a choice
> > >> between the two and I'll take the excessive blocks over too few
fouls.
> > >>
> > >> Another thing that I like about Live is that there are a lot more
> sliders
> > >> that can be adjusted when compared to ESPN's game.
> > >>
> > >> To me, ESPN plays a bit too slow for basketball. There are more
slams
> > >> and
> > >> quick breaks in Live, similar to what happens in the real game.
> > >>
> > >> All I can say is that I had ESPN's 2K5 at least two weeks before I
got
> > > Live
> > >> 2005. Once I got Live, I haven't touched ESPN's game. I probably
> should
> > > go
> > >> back to 2K5, to get a true comparison, but I just can't do it.
> > >>
> > >> Finally, Live seems to be a lot harder. Using All-Star in Live, I
get
> > >> toasted most of the time; I can't say the same for ESPN.
> > >>
> > >> The foul shot routine in Live is also better, with sliders to adjust
> how
> > >> easy or hard you can make the foul shots. Also-- and this might be
the
> > > case
> > >> with ESPN, too-- it's easier to make foul shots in Live with a better
> > >> free-throw shooter.
> > >>
> > >> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more
so
> > > than
> > >> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
> > >>
> > >> Alanb
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> > > But, worth the $30 more?
> >
> > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
>
>
> Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
Found the answer. $40 at Wal-Mart.
Okay, so is NBA Live worth $20 more?
--
* Novus_
~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
"Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2tsmf7F22oi4eU1@uni-berlin.de...
> > > But, worth the $30 more?
> >
> > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
>
>
> Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
>
> --
>
> * Novus_
> ~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
>
>
> "Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:UKCdncpFB_njMercRVn-sw@comcast.com...
> >
> > "Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:2tp7c0F22jm7uU1@uni-berlin.de...
> > >> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more
so
> > > than
> > >> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > But, worth the $30 more?
> >
> > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
> >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > * Novus_
> > > ~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
> > >
> > >
> > > "Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
> > > news:Hsjdd.287830$3l3.7430@attbi_s03...
> > >>
> > >> > Why? What do you like more about Live? Is there anything in Live
> that
> > >> > is better than ESPN, other than the all star activities? From what
> > >> > I've read, I think the 3pt and slam dunk contests in Live are cool
> but
> > >> > they are mere diversions. Live would have to offer a better game
of
> > >> > basketball before I'll prefer it over ESPN, and most reviews I've
> read
> > >> > suggest that Live still has some catching up to do with regards to
> > >> > gameplay.
> > >>
> > >> I've never even tried the 3 point and slam dunk competitions and
still
> > > like
> > >> Live better. The big killer for me with ESPN NBA 2K5 is the fact
that
> so
> > >> little fouls are called, and slider adjustments do nothing to fix
that
> > > huge
> > >> problem.
> > >>
> > >> Live suffers from too many block shots, but I haven't really tweaked
> the
> > >> sliders enough to see if I can remedy that problem. Give me a choice
> > >> between the two and I'll take the excessive blocks over too few
fouls.
> > >>
> > >> Another thing that I like about Live is that there are a lot more
> sliders
> > >> that can be adjusted when compared to ESPN's game.
> > >>
> > >> To me, ESPN plays a bit too slow for basketball. There are more
slams
> > >> and
> > >> quick breaks in Live, similar to what happens in the real game.
> > >>
> > >> All I can say is that I had ESPN's 2K5 at least two weeks before I
got
> > > Live
> > >> 2005. Once I got Live, I haven't touched ESPN's game. I probably
> should
> > > go
> > >> back to 2K5, to get a true comparison, but I just can't do it.
> > >>
> > >> Finally, Live seems to be a lot harder. Using All-Star in Live, I
get
> > >> toasted most of the time; I can't say the same for ESPN.
> > >>
> > >> The foul shot routine in Live is also better, with sliders to adjust
> how
> > >> easy or hard you can make the foul shots. Also-- and this might be
the
> > > case
> > >> with ESPN, too-- it's easier to make foul shots in Live with a better
> > >> free-throw shooter.
> > >>
> > >> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more
so
> > > than
> > >> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
> > >>
> > >> Alanb
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Anonymous
October 22, 2004 8:04:27 PM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
If having the better game is worth 20 dollars more to you, then yes. If you
can live with mediocrity, pocket the 20 bucks.
"Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2tsmi5F2003quU1@uni-berlin.de...
> > > > But, worth the $30 more?
> > >
> > > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
> >
> >
> > Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
>
>
> Found the answer. $40 at Wal-Mart.
>
>
> Okay, so is NBA Live worth $20 more?
>
> --
>
> * Novus_
> ~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
>
>
> "Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:2tsmf7F22oi4eU1@uni-berlin.de...
> > > > But, worth the $30 more?
> > >
> > > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
> >
> >
> > Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
> >
> > --
> >
> > * Novus_
> > ~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
> >
> >
> > "Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:UKCdncpFB_njMercRVn-sw@comcast.com...
> > >
> > > "Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:2tp7c0F22jm7uU1@uni-berlin.de...
> > > >> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more
> so
> > > > than
> > > >> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > But, worth the $30 more?
> > >
> > > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > * Novus_
> > > > ~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
> > > > news:Hsjdd.287830$3l3.7430@attbi_s03...
> > > >>
> > > >> > Why? What do you like more about Live? Is there anything in Live
> > that
> > > >> > is better than ESPN, other than the all star activities? From
what
> > > >> > I've read, I think the 3pt and slam dunk contests in Live are
cool
> > but
> > > >> > they are mere diversions. Live would have to offer a better game
> of
> > > >> > basketball before I'll prefer it over ESPN, and most reviews I've
> > read
> > > >> > suggest that Live still has some catching up to do with regards
to
> > > >> > gameplay.
> > > >>
> > > >> I've never even tried the 3 point and slam dunk competitions and
> still
> > > > like
> > > >> Live better. The big killer for me with ESPN NBA 2K5 is the fact
> that
> > so
> > > >> little fouls are called, and slider adjustments do nothing to fix
> that
> > > > huge
> > > >> problem.
> > > >>
> > > >> Live suffers from too many block shots, but I haven't really
tweaked
> > the
> > > >> sliders enough to see if I can remedy that problem. Give me a
choice
> > > >> between the two and I'll take the excessive blocks over too few
> fouls.
> > > >>
> > > >> Another thing that I like about Live is that there are a lot more
> > sliders
> > > >> that can be adjusted when compared to ESPN's game.
> > > >>
> > > >> To me, ESPN plays a bit too slow for basketball. There are more
> slams
> > > >> and
> > > >> quick breaks in Live, similar to what happens in the real game.
> > > >>
> > > >> All I can say is that I had ESPN's 2K5 at least two weeks before I
> got
> > > > Live
> > > >> 2005. Once I got Live, I haven't touched ESPN's game. I probably
> > should
> > > > go
> > > >> back to 2K5, to get a true comparison, but I just can't do it.
> > > >>
> > > >> Finally, Live seems to be a lot harder. Using All-Star in Live, I
> get
> > > >> toasted most of the time; I can't say the same for ESPN.
> > > >>
> > > >> The foul shot routine in Live is also better, with sliders to
adjust
> > how
> > > >> easy or hard you can make the foul shots. Also-- and this might be
> the
> > > > case
> > > >> with ESPN, too-- it's easier to make foul shots in Live with a
better
> > > >> free-throw shooter.
> > > >>
> > > >> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more
> so
> > > > than
> > > >> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
> > > >>
> > > >> Alanb
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
If having the better game is worth 20 dollars more to you, then yes. If you
can live with mediocrity, pocket the 20 bucks.
"Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2tsmi5F2003quU1@uni-berlin.de...
> > > > But, worth the $30 more?
> > >
> > > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
> >
> >
> > Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
>
>
> Found the answer. $40 at Wal-Mart.
>
>
> Okay, so is NBA Live worth $20 more?
>
> --
>
> * Novus_
> ~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
>
>
> "Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:2tsmf7F22oi4eU1@uni-berlin.de...
> > > > But, worth the $30 more?
> > >
> > > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
> >
> >
> > Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
> >
> > --
> >
> > * Novus_
> > ~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
> >
> >
> > "Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:UKCdncpFB_njMercRVn-sw@comcast.com...
> > >
> > > "Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:2tp7c0F22jm7uU1@uni-berlin.de...
> > > >> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more
> so
> > > > than
> > > >> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > But, worth the $30 more?
> > >
> > > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > * Novus_
> > > > ~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
> > > > news:Hsjdd.287830$3l3.7430@attbi_s03...
> > > >>
> > > >> > Why? What do you like more about Live? Is there anything in Live
> > that
> > > >> > is better than ESPN, other than the all star activities? From
what
> > > >> > I've read, I think the 3pt and slam dunk contests in Live are
cool
> > but
> > > >> > they are mere diversions. Live would have to offer a better game
> of
> > > >> > basketball before I'll prefer it over ESPN, and most reviews I've
> > read
> > > >> > suggest that Live still has some catching up to do with regards
to
> > > >> > gameplay.
> > > >>
> > > >> I've never even tried the 3 point and slam dunk competitions and
> still
> > > > like
> > > >> Live better. The big killer for me with ESPN NBA 2K5 is the fact
> that
> > so
> > > >> little fouls are called, and slider adjustments do nothing to fix
> that
> > > > huge
> > > >> problem.
> > > >>
> > > >> Live suffers from too many block shots, but I haven't really
tweaked
> > the
> > > >> sliders enough to see if I can remedy that problem. Give me a
choice
> > > >> between the two and I'll take the excessive blocks over too few
> fouls.
> > > >>
> > > >> Another thing that I like about Live is that there are a lot more
> > sliders
> > > >> that can be adjusted when compared to ESPN's game.
> > > >>
> > > >> To me, ESPN plays a bit too slow for basketball. There are more
> slams
> > > >> and
> > > >> quick breaks in Live, similar to what happens in the real game.
> > > >>
> > > >> All I can say is that I had ESPN's 2K5 at least two weeks before I
> got
> > > > Live
> > > >> 2005. Once I got Live, I haven't touched ESPN's game. I probably
> > should
> > > > go
> > > >> back to 2K5, to get a true comparison, but I just can't do it.
> > > >>
> > > >> Finally, Live seems to be a lot harder. Using All-Star in Live, I
> get
> > > >> toasted most of the time; I can't say the same for ESPN.
> > > >>
> > > >> The foul shot routine in Live is also better, with sliders to
adjust
> > how
> > > >> easy or hard you can make the foul shots. Also-- and this might be
> the
> > > > case
> > > >> with ESPN, too-- it's easier to make foul shots in Live with a
better
> > > >> free-throw shooter.
> > > >>
> > > >> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more
> so
> > > > than
> > > >> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
> > > >>
> > > >> Alanb
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Anonymous
October 23, 2004 12:25:01 AM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
"Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<2tsmi5F2003quU1@uni-berlin.de>...
> > > > But, worth the $30 more?
> > >
> > > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
> >
> >
> > Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
>
>
> Found the answer. $40 at Wal-Mart.
>
>
> Okay, so is NBA Live worth $20 more?
Any intelligent basketball fan knows the answer to this question. The
answer is no...just like Madden wasn't worth $30 more than ESPN, but
then again there aren't many intelligent Madden fan.
"Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<2tsmi5F2003quU1@uni-berlin.de>...
> > > > But, worth the $30 more?
> > >
> > > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
> >
> >
> > Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
>
>
> Found the answer. $40 at Wal-Mart.
>
>
> Okay, so is NBA Live worth $20 more?
Any intelligent basketball fan knows the answer to this question. The
answer is no...just like Madden wasn't worth $30 more than ESPN, but
then again there aren't many intelligent Madden fan.
Anonymous
October 23, 2004 1:58:15 AM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
"Robert P Holley" <holleyrp@delanet.com> wrote in message
news:6ed688b3.0410221925.16ea1ad4@posting.google.com...
> "Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:<2tsmi5F2003quU1@uni-berlin.de>...
>> > > > But, worth the $30 more?
>> > >
>> > > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
>> >
>> >
>> > Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
>>
>>
>> Found the answer. $40 at Wal-Mart.
>>
>>
>> Okay, so is NBA Live worth $20 more?
>
> Any intelligent basketball fan knows the answer to this question. The
> answer is no...just like Madden wasn't worth $30 more than ESPN, but
> then again there aren't many intelligent Madden fan.
Gurgle....gurgle
"Robert P Holley" <holleyrp@delanet.com> wrote in message
news:6ed688b3.0410221925.16ea1ad4@posting.google.com...
> "Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:<2tsmi5F2003quU1@uni-berlin.de>...
>> > > > But, worth the $30 more?
>> > >
>> > > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
>> >
>> >
>> > Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
>>
>>
>> Found the answer. $40 at Wal-Mart.
>>
>>
>> Okay, so is NBA Live worth $20 more?
>
> Any intelligent basketball fan knows the answer to this question. The
> answer is no...just like Madden wasn't worth $30 more than ESPN, but
> then again there aren't many intelligent Madden fan.
Gurgle....gurgle
Anonymous
October 23, 2004 1:58:55 AM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
"Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2tsmi5F2003quU1@uni-berlin.de...
>> > > But, worth the $30 more?
>> >
>> > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
>>
>>
>> Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
>
>
> Found the answer. $40 at Wal-Mart.
>
>
> Okay, so is NBA Live worth $20 more?
I got it for $35 at Best Buy and yes it was worth the extra $15 after
playing it for a while.
>
> --
>
> * Novus_
> ~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
>
>
> "Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:2tsmf7F22oi4eU1@uni-berlin.de...
>> > > But, worth the $30 more?
>> >
>> > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
>>
>>
>> Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
>>
>> --
>>
>> * Novus_
>> ~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
>>
>>
>> "Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:UKCdncpFB_njMercRVn-sw@comcast.com...
>> >
>> > "Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> > news:2tp7c0F22jm7uU1@uni-berlin.de...
>> > >> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more
> so
>> > > than
>> > >> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > But, worth the $30 more?
>> >
>> > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
>> >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > >
>> > > * Novus_
>> > > ~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > "Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
>> > > news:Hsjdd.287830$3l3.7430@attbi_s03...
>> > >>
>> > >> > Why? What do you like more about Live? Is there anything in Live
>> that
>> > >> > is better than ESPN, other than the all star activities? From
>> > >> > what
>> > >> > I've read, I think the 3pt and slam dunk contests in Live are cool
>> but
>> > >> > they are mere diversions. Live would have to offer a better game
> of
>> > >> > basketball before I'll prefer it over ESPN, and most reviews I've
>> read
>> > >> > suggest that Live still has some catching up to do with regards to
>> > >> > gameplay.
>> > >>
>> > >> I've never even tried the 3 point and slam dunk competitions and
> still
>> > > like
>> > >> Live better. The big killer for me with ESPN NBA 2K5 is the fact
> that
>> so
>> > >> little fouls are called, and slider adjustments do nothing to fix
> that
>> > > huge
>> > >> problem.
>> > >>
>> > >> Live suffers from too many block shots, but I haven't really tweaked
>> the
>> > >> sliders enough to see if I can remedy that problem. Give me a
>> > >> choice
>> > >> between the two and I'll take the excessive blocks over too few
> fouls.
>> > >>
>> > >> Another thing that I like about Live is that there are a lot more
>> sliders
>> > >> that can be adjusted when compared to ESPN's game.
>> > >>
>> > >> To me, ESPN plays a bit too slow for basketball. There are more
> slams
>> > >> and
>> > >> quick breaks in Live, similar to what happens in the real game.
>> > >>
>> > >> All I can say is that I had ESPN's 2K5 at least two weeks before I
> got
>> > > Live
>> > >> 2005. Once I got Live, I haven't touched ESPN's game. I probably
>> should
>> > > go
>> > >> back to 2K5, to get a true comparison, but I just can't do it.
>> > >>
>> > >> Finally, Live seems to be a lot harder. Using All-Star in Live, I
> get
>> > >> toasted most of the time; I can't say the same for ESPN.
>> > >>
>> > >> The foul shot routine in Live is also better, with sliders to adjust
>> how
>> > >> easy or hard you can make the foul shots. Also-- and this might be
> the
>> > > case
>> > >> with ESPN, too-- it's easier to make foul shots in Live with a
>> > >> better
>> > >> free-throw shooter.
>> > >>
>> > >> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more
> so
>> > > than
>> > >> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
>> > >>
>> > >> Alanb
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
"Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2tsmi5F2003quU1@uni-berlin.de...
>> > > But, worth the $30 more?
>> >
>> > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
>>
>>
>> Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
>
>
> Found the answer. $40 at Wal-Mart.
>
>
> Okay, so is NBA Live worth $20 more?
I got it for $35 at Best Buy and yes it was worth the extra $15 after
playing it for a while.
>
> --
>
> * Novus_
> ~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
>
>
> "Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:2tsmf7F22oi4eU1@uni-berlin.de...
>> > > But, worth the $30 more?
>> >
>> > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
>>
>>
>> Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
>>
>> --
>>
>> * Novus_
>> ~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
>>
>>
>> "Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:UKCdncpFB_njMercRVn-sw@comcast.com...
>> >
>> > "Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> > news:2tp7c0F22jm7uU1@uni-berlin.de...
>> > >> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more
> so
>> > > than
>> > >> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > But, worth the $30 more?
>> >
>> > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
>> >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > >
>> > > * Novus_
>> > > ~ Novus_0@hotmail.com ~
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > "Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
>> > > news:Hsjdd.287830$3l3.7430@attbi_s03...
>> > >>
>> > >> > Why? What do you like more about Live? Is there anything in Live
>> that
>> > >> > is better than ESPN, other than the all star activities? From
>> > >> > what
>> > >> > I've read, I think the 3pt and slam dunk contests in Live are cool
>> but
>> > >> > they are mere diversions. Live would have to offer a better game
> of
>> > >> > basketball before I'll prefer it over ESPN, and most reviews I've
>> read
>> > >> > suggest that Live still has some catching up to do with regards to
>> > >> > gameplay.
>> > >>
>> > >> I've never even tried the 3 point and slam dunk competitions and
> still
>> > > like
>> > >> Live better. The big killer for me with ESPN NBA 2K5 is the fact
> that
>> so
>> > >> little fouls are called, and slider adjustments do nothing to fix
> that
>> > > huge
>> > >> problem.
>> > >>
>> > >> Live suffers from too many block shots, but I haven't really tweaked
>> the
>> > >> sliders enough to see if I can remedy that problem. Give me a
>> > >> choice
>> > >> between the two and I'll take the excessive blocks over too few
> fouls.
>> > >>
>> > >> Another thing that I like about Live is that there are a lot more
>> sliders
>> > >> that can be adjusted when compared to ESPN's game.
>> > >>
>> > >> To me, ESPN plays a bit too slow for basketball. There are more
> slams
>> > >> and
>> > >> quick breaks in Live, similar to what happens in the real game.
>> > >>
>> > >> All I can say is that I had ESPN's 2K5 at least two weeks before I
> got
>> > > Live
>> > >> 2005. Once I got Live, I haven't touched ESPN's game. I probably
>> should
>> > > go
>> > >> back to 2K5, to get a true comparison, but I just can't do it.
>> > >>
>> > >> Finally, Live seems to be a lot harder. Using All-Star in Live, I
> get
>> > >> toasted most of the time; I can't say the same for ESPN.
>> > >>
>> > >> The foul shot routine in Live is also better, with sliders to adjust
>> how
>> > >> easy or hard you can make the foul shots. Also-- and this might be
> the
>> > > case
>> > >> with ESPN, too-- it's easier to make foul shots in Live with a
>> > >> better
>> > >> free-throw shooter.
>> > >>
>> > >> Off the top of my head, this is why I like and enjoy Live 2005 more
> so
>> > > than
>> > >> ESPN's 2K5. Live is the better game, IMHO.
>> > >>
>> > >> Alanb
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
October 23, 2004 8:00:58 AM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
> then again there aren't many intelligent Madden fan.
And there aren't many intelligent fans of those dumb Madden fans, either.
Live 2005, to me, is the better game, and well worth the difference in cost
when compared to ESPN's NBA 2K5. The same goes for Madden 2005. ESPN NFL
had some serious issues.
I don't know if it's related to the cost of the games or not, but both ESPN
games (football and basketball) were not very good this year. I do like the
hockey game, however.
Alanb
> then again there aren't many intelligent Madden fan.
And there aren't many intelligent fans of those dumb Madden fans, either.
Live 2005, to me, is the better game, and well worth the difference in cost
when compared to ESPN's NBA 2K5. The same goes for Madden 2005. ESPN NFL
had some serious issues.
I don't know if it's related to the cost of the games or not, but both ESPN
games (football and basketball) were not very good this year. I do like the
hockey game, however.
Alanb
Anonymous
October 23, 2004 4:59:42 PM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
"Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<1sGdnd5Ck49ES-TcRVn-rg@comcast.com>...
> "Robert P Holley" <holleyrp@delanet.com> wrote in message
> news:6ed688b3.0410221925.16ea1ad4@posting.google.com...
> > "Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:<2tsmi5F2003quU1@uni-berlin.de>...
> >> > > > But, worth the $30 more?
> >> > >
> >> > > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
> >>
> >>
> >> Found the answer. $40 at Wal-Mart.
> >>
> >>
> >> Okay, so is NBA Live worth $20 more?
> >
> > Any intelligent basketball fan knows the answer to this question. The
> > answer is no...just like Madden wasn't worth $30 more than ESPN, but
> > then again there aren't many intelligent Madden fan.
>
> Gurgle....gurgle
Warming up for your date with Skye?
"Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<1sGdnd5Ck49ES-TcRVn-rg@comcast.com>...
> "Robert P Holley" <holleyrp@delanet.com> wrote in message
> news:6ed688b3.0410221925.16ea1ad4@posting.google.com...
> > "Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:<2tsmi5F2003quU1@uni-berlin.de>...
> >> > > > But, worth the $30 more?
> >> > >
> >> > > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
> >>
> >>
> >> Found the answer. $40 at Wal-Mart.
> >>
> >>
> >> Okay, so is NBA Live worth $20 more?
> >
> > Any intelligent basketball fan knows the answer to this question. The
> > answer is no...just like Madden wasn't worth $30 more than ESPN, but
> > then again there aren't many intelligent Madden fan.
>
> Gurgle....gurgle
Warming up for your date with Skye?
Anonymous
October 23, 2004 10:22:41 PM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
In article <2tsmi5F2003quU1@uni-berlin.de>, Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com says...
>
>> > > But, worth the $30 more?
>> >
>> > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
>>
>>
>> Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
>
>
>Found the answer. $40 at Wal-Mart.
>
>
>Okay, so is NBA Live worth $20 more?
'
ESPN has been on sale at several places. I picked it up for $13.50 at Fry's.
In article <2tsmi5F2003quU1@uni-berlin.de>, Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com says...
>
>> > > But, worth the $30 more?
>> >
>> > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
>>
>>
>> Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
>
>
>Found the answer. $40 at Wal-Mart.
>
>
>Okay, so is NBA Live worth $20 more?
'
ESPN has been on sale at several places. I picked it up for $13.50 at Fry's.
Anonymous
October 24, 2004 1:27:52 PM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
"Robert P Holley" <holleyrp@delanet.com> wrote in message
news:6ed688b3.0410231159.7ae96395@posting.google.com...
> "Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:<1sGdnd5Ck49ES-TcRVn-rg@comcast.com>...
>> "Robert P Holley" <holleyrp@delanet.com> wrote in message
>> news:6ed688b3.0410221925.16ea1ad4@posting.google.com...
>> > "Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> > news:<2tsmi5F2003quU1@uni-berlin.de>...
>> >> > > > But, worth the $30 more?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Found the answer. $40 at Wal-Mart.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Okay, so is NBA Live worth $20 more?
>> >
>> > Any intelligent basketball fan knows the answer to this question. The
>> > answer is no...just like Madden wasn't worth $30 more than ESPN, but
>> > then again there aren't many intelligent Madden fan.
>>
>> Gurgle....gurgle
>
> Warming up for your date with Skye?
No, I was so impressed at how clearly your words come out in spite of the
large Sega-sized member in your mouth that tried it myself. Didn't work for
me but I guess your gag reflex is gone.
"Robert P Holley" <holleyrp@delanet.com> wrote in message
news:6ed688b3.0410231159.7ae96395@posting.google.com...
> "Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:<1sGdnd5Ck49ES-TcRVn-rg@comcast.com>...
>> "Robert P Holley" <holleyrp@delanet.com> wrote in message
>> news:6ed688b3.0410221925.16ea1ad4@posting.google.com...
>> > "Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> > news:<2tsmi5F2003quU1@uni-berlin.de>...
>> >> > > > But, worth the $30 more?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Found the answer. $40 at Wal-Mart.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Okay, so is NBA Live worth $20 more?
>> >
>> > Any intelligent basketball fan knows the answer to this question. The
>> > answer is no...just like Madden wasn't worth $30 more than ESPN, but
>> > then again there aren't many intelligent Madden fan.
>>
>> Gurgle....gurgle
>
> Warming up for your date with Skye?
No, I was so impressed at how clearly your words come out in spite of the
large Sega-sized member in your mouth that tried it myself. Didn't work for
me but I guess your gag reflex is gone.
Anonymous
October 25, 2004 5:27:57 AM
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)
In article <T7ydnb-eJ4VnVObcRVn-gA@comcast.com>, Estoscacahuates@comcast.net
says...
>
>
>"Robert P Holley" <holleyrp@delanet.com> wrote in message
>news:6ed688b3.0410231159.7ae96395@posting.google.com...
>> "Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:<1sGdnd5Ck49ES-TcRVn-rg@comcast.com>...
>>> "Robert P Holley" <holleyrp@delanet.com> wrote in message
>>> news:6ed688b3.0410221925.16ea1ad4@posting.google.com...
>>> > "Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> > news:<2tsmi5F2003quU1@uni-berlin.de>...
>>> >> > > > But, worth the $30 more?
>>> >> > >
>>> >> > > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Found the answer. $40 at Wal-Mart.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Okay, so is NBA Live worth $20 more?
>>> >
>>> > Any intelligent basketball fan knows the answer to this question. The
>>> > answer is no...just like Madden wasn't worth $30 more than ESPN, but
>>> > then again there aren't many intelligent Madden fan.
>>>
>>> Gurgle....gurgle
>>
>> Warming up for your date with Skye?
>
>No, I was so impressed at how clearly your words come out in spite of the
>large Sega-sized member in your mouth that tried it myself. Didn't work for
>me but I guess your gag reflex is gone.
>
>
Speaking of Sega-sized.......that new Outrun 2 sure is sweet on the Xbox mag
demo disc.
In article <T7ydnb-eJ4VnVObcRVn-gA@comcast.com>, Estoscacahuates@comcast.net
says...
>
>
>"Robert P Holley" <holleyrp@delanet.com> wrote in message
>news:6ed688b3.0410231159.7ae96395@posting.google.com...
>> "Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:<1sGdnd5Ck49ES-TcRVn-rg@comcast.com>...
>>> "Robert P Holley" <holleyrp@delanet.com> wrote in message
>>> news:6ed688b3.0410221925.16ea1ad4@posting.google.com...
>>> > "Novus_" <Novus_NOSPAM0@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> > news:<2tsmi5F2003quU1@uni-berlin.de>...
>>> >> > > > But, worth the $30 more?
>>> >> > >
>>> >> > > Its not $30 more so that question is irrelevant.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Okay, how much is NBA Live 2005 then?
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Found the answer. $40 at Wal-Mart.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Okay, so is NBA Live worth $20 more?
>>> >
>>> > Any intelligent basketball fan knows the answer to this question. The
>>> > answer is no...just like Madden wasn't worth $30 more than ESPN, but
>>> > then again there aren't many intelligent Madden fan.
>>>
>>> Gurgle....gurgle
>>
>> Warming up for your date with Skye?
>
>No, I was so impressed at how clearly your words come out in spite of the
>large Sega-sized member in your mouth that tried it myself. Didn't work for
>me but I guess your gag reflex is gone.
>
>
Speaking of Sega-sized.......that new Outrun 2 sure is sweet on the Xbox mag
demo disc.
Related resources
- ESPN MLB 2K5 Forum
- ESPN Football 2K5 -- how to get Crib music into menu section Forum
- ESPN NHL 2K5 Strategy Forum
- need help playing ESPN NHL 2K5 Forum
- ESPN NFL 2K5 Forum
- ESPN College Hoops 2K5 Forum
- ESPN NHL 2k5 Final Settings Forum
- ESPN NHL 2k5 Settings........ Forum
- ESPN Basektball 2K5 for sale Forum
- ESPN 2K5 at Best Buy Forum
- ESPN Basketball 2K5 (XBox) Forum
- GrogTN: Any ESPN NHL 2K5 Sliders? Forum
- ESPN 2K5 simulated game boxscores? Forum
- NFL ESPN 2K5 PC? Forum
- ESPN's entire 2K5 line is $19.95!! Forum
- More resources
Read discussions in other Video Games categories
!