NBA 2k8 Trailer and Pics

This game has been pretty hush hush for a while, but pictures that look close to 100% and a gameplay trailer just surfaced. It looks....well take a look for yourself</p>

Trailer:</p>

http://www.gamespot.com/video/939852/61780...icial-trailer-1</p>

Pics:</p>

</p>

Make sure you scroll to the right to see the horizontal images in their entirety

Wow that looks impressive. The animation is so fluid and life like. I cant wait to see what they added to the association mode.

Some things I noticed.

The animated crowd is going to be a lot better. Starting with personalized jerseys for them instead of those dumb generic ones.</p>

The player celebrations looked more authentic, not player wise but team wise. Chest bumps, high fives and all.</p>

</p>

Graphics look pretty good, however, we know that 2k8 won't beat out live when it comes to graphics but it's much more fun to play and alot more realistic.

I play association, and I hear there might be more updates tonight on gamespot.com.</p>

Three team trades were huge last year. I'd like to see more trade slots (instead of just 3), BUYOUTS, trading during the draft, and being able to hold onto draft rights.</p>

I also want the free agent list to be revamped. Take out bums like Paul Shirley, JR Bremer, and Chris Taft, and lets get Hassan Adams and Pops Mensah-Bonsu in the game (biased)</p>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GArenas)</div><div class='quotemain'>alot more realistic.</div>

Uh........no?</p>

I bought Live 07 for xbox. Really gave it an honest look. I was impressed by the presentation, the ability to 're-do' the draft, and including players like David Noel and Kelina Azibuke (oh yeah add those guys to my list of FA)</p>

But the gameplay...its just not how the game of basketball is played. It's too quick; the movement is too sporadic. All the players are too skinny and flail all over the place. If I had to sum it up: its halfcourt-fastbreak game, if that makes sense.</p>

I also don't like EA's gimmicks. Superstar moves? Really? It seems that executing them would always get the ball in the hoop (I'm talking about the fake-pass pull up 3). I like 2k because the good players have good skills, the good players are not privy to secret moves that no one else has. They are good because they are just naturally good, if that makes sense.</p>

Now both games are using 'hotspot' type systems this year. But there is an important difference that speaks a lot to quality of gameplay. The Live version, if i'm not mistaken, has places on the court that allows certain players a boost in their ratings. The 2k game merely reports where good players are there best. </p>

2k's new defensive control is also a huge innovative step. For both games, defense was determined by steal and block ratings (And a general awareness). But neither of these describe a lock-down defender. 2k's feature is a button, that when pressed, helps keep the defender infront of the ball handler. How well a defender is, the shorter amount of time it'll take this function to work once the button is pressed. </p>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GMJigga)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GArenas)</div><div class='quotemain'> alot more realistic.</div>

Uh........no?</p>

I bought Live 07 for xbox. Really gave it an honest look. I was impressed by the presentation, the ability to 're-do' the draft, and including players like David Noel and Kelina Azibuke (oh yeah add those guys to my list of FA)</p>

But the gameplay...its just not how the game of basketball is played. It's too quick; the movement is too sporadic. All the players are too skinny and flail all over the place. If I had to sum it up: its halfcourt-fastbreak game, if that makes sense.</p>

I also don't like EA's gimmicks. Superstar moves? Really? It seems that executing them would always get the ball in the hoop (I'm talking about the fake-pass pull up 3). I like 2k because the good players have good skills, the good players are not privy to secret moves that no one else has. They are good because they are just naturally good, if that makes sense.</p>

Now both games are using 'hotspot' type systems this year. But there is an important difference that speaks a lot to quality of gameplay. The Live version, if i'm not mistaken, has places on the court that allows certain players a boost in their ratings. The 2k game merely reports where good players are there best. </p>

2k's new defensive control is also a huge innovative step. For both games, defense was determined by steal and block ratings (And a general awareness). But neither of these describe a lock-down defender. 2k's feature is a button, that when pressed, helps keep the defender infront of the ball handler. How well a defender is, the shorter amount of time it'll take this function to work once the button is pressed. </p>

</div></p>

</p>

I phrased that in-correctly, I meant to say 2k7 was much more realistic, I only played Live 07 once in a video game store and thought it was a step back. I couldn't believe what I was seeing when Brendan Haywood delivired a 360 dunk....2k7 is much better I've been playing it on my Xbox for a good 6 months now. Also, I fixed the phrasing of my last post to clear up the confusion.</p>

</p>

Oh word. I think this year is important for both franchises. Live continues to bring presentation to the user in ways 2k doesn't think about (push-association, FA mini games). 2k on the other hand, looks to finally increase their presentation graphically. They also now include wristbands in the accessories, for what its worth.

2k really needs to add restricted free agency, player and team options, and bird rights into their financial system. That is the one that that really makes me mad.

I'm really leaning towards Live this year because they were flat out owned last year and there a big enough company to put the money and everything into making it better. The whole play in FIBA and other new features seem really neat while it seems like 2K added a dunk contest and more player emotions and left the gameplay relitively the same.</p>

Will be close.</p>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Universe)</div><div class='quotemain'>

I'm really leaning towards Live this year because they were flat out owned last year and there a big enough company to put the money and everything into making it better. The whole play in FIBA and other new features seem really neat while it seems like 2K added a dunk contest and more player emotions and left the gameplay relitively the same.</p>

Will be close.</p>

</div></p>

Live will not change even thought it is far inferior to 2k. Live has better sales records mostly because of little kids who enjoy doing the highlight plays. </p>

I've always said Live is for kids, 2K is for adults. </p>

</p>

Just watched the trailer and it looks great! I dont think I could ever go back to Live, their gameplay just doesnt deliver the realism that is NBA basketball which 2K does. Some of the things that stand out in the video is AI's drive to the basket which he finishes with a 1 handed layup ( I cant explain it now), I have seen him do that move alot of time so its nice to see. Also Nash's layups look identical to the way he does layups!! 1 last thing was the off-ball battles like when you saw VC trying to get free from T-Mac or Rip trying to get the open shot, very nice.

Team options would be amazing. I agree on the bird rights issue. Right now you can resign your players just as long as you have enough cash to do so. I haven't run into any problems of running into the offseason in debt since I win most of my games and avoid the luxury tax, but having that option to retain your players would be appreciated.

NBA Live 08 is much better. </p>

</p>

</p>

</p>

</p>

Live is good. As I've said before Live has been known for presentation and visuals while 2k has the gameplay. Different strokes for different folks. I think its worth getting through boring menus for gameplay that replicates the NBA, but it's perfectly acceptable for someone to want something a little bit more flashy and visual. But look at that 2k picture of TMac, 2k is catching up quickly and I think its totally possible that people who are in it for graphics could be switching titles this year.

I'll probably get both and see which one is better. Do you think it will matter if it's the 360 or PS3?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticKing)</div><div class='quotemain'>I'll probably get both and see which one is better. Do you think it will matter if it's the 360 or PS3?</div></p>

Not yet it wont.</p>

</p>

woah, live looks REAL...</p>

</p>

i wonder if it actually is going to be like that by the time it comes out?</p>

After playing the NBA Live 08 demo, I think I'm going to have a tough choice this year. Last year, I chose Live and regretted it. The game played and looked like crap. Sure the players looked real, but the movements were terrible. The only time the graphics were worth looking at was when it was standing still. Otherwise, in motion, it was god awful. </p>

This year seems different though. The Live 08 demo is amazing. The graphics are much improved this year. Player movement also looks much more lifelike. Even moreso, players don't slide across the floor anymore. They also added branching animations to Live, ala NBA Street Homecourt. So now, if you're not satisfied with the move you're about to pull, you can ditch that one and try something new. It's pretty slick and works real well. You can also branch animations together more smoothly with this as well.</p>

AI is also very good. The demo involves the Spurs v. Cavs. When I was playing against the Spurs, I was amazed of one thing in particular. Tony Parker. He played like the real life thing. He went to the hoop as opposed to settling for jumpers, and I loved that fact. </p>

So, hopefully a 2K8 demo is realeased here soon enough, otherwise...I might have to do some renting before I make a choice of which to buy. If not that, I'll definitely be monitoring press ratings for each of the games. Regardless though, I can't wait for them to come out, regardless of how tough of the choice will be.</p>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticKing)</div><div class='quotemain'>I'll probably get both and see which one is better. Do you think it will matter if it's the 360 or PS3?</div>With the way EA has made their other two big sports games this year (Madden and NCAA), it will. The features will more than likely be the same, but it'll look and play better on the 360. The reason for this will be because of frame rate. The 360 versions of Madden and NCAA run at 60 frames per second, while the PoS3 only runs at 30. When you look at the games side by side, the difference is noticeable. Not only that, but with the lower framerate, the game is more apt for a slowdown as well.


</p>

is it just me, or do the 2k8 players look like they're wrapped in saran wrap? weird.

Yeah so far 2k has overdid the sweat effect, although in the more recent pictures it looks much better.

Are any of the player ratings out yet?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Moo2K4)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticKing)</div><div class='quotemain'>I'll probably get both and see which one is better. Do you think it will matter if it's the 360 or PS3?</div>With the way EA has made their other two big sports games this year (Madden and NCAA), it will. The features will more than likely be the same, but it'll look and play better on the 360. The reason for this will be because of frame rate. The 360 versions of Madden and NCAA run at 60 frames per second, while the PoS3 only runs at 30. When you look at the games side by side, the difference is noticeable. Not only that, but with the lower framerate, the game is more apt for a slowdown as well.


</div></p>

Thanks for your explanation. Didn't see it until now. </p>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Legacy)</div><div class='quotemain'>Are any of the player ratings out yet?</div>

Nothing official yet</p>

Actually, some of the Warriors' ratings have been shown on a screen shot:</p>

</p>

I personally think that some of those ratings are too high, but that's expected considering 2k's headquarters are located in the area. Baron Davis at 93 is too high, Ellis at 84 is too high, Jackson could drop a point or 2, Biedrins could drop 3 points or so, Barnes should be 74-75, Harrington might be an 80, and if Belinelli is a 78, then Durant and Oden are gonna be in the mid-80's. Ugh, oh well. I will tinker those a little bit.</p>

Monta has D+ potential?

Stephen Jackson has no potential, or does that mean he's done growing. If so, would that mean that Baron Davis hasn't peaked yet? Hmmm

I think Beans should be a little higher and Barnes should lose a few points. Are there any other screen shots of team pages? </p>