With Michael Jordan and Magic Johnson returning to the NBA, it seems fitting that EA Sports has managed to get another NBA Live out the door (of course, neither superstar is in the game; Magic came back too late, and Jordan presumably has some sort of deal precluding him from being put into one of these things. Ditto for Sir Charles Barkley, though Dennis Rodman is resplendent with his ever-changing hair color). Basketball's popularity was flattening out until Jordan returned; with Magic back, it's likely to explode. EA Sports could capitalize on that renewed interest in the game by releasing the most mediocre game, due in part to the fact that they have no competition when it comes to full-court, five-on-five, graphic-based basketball games.
NBA Live '96 is far from mediocre in most respects, especially when you first try it out. The high-resolution graphics, all digital sound with a funky hip-hop theme song, the presence of all of the NBA players and teams (minus the above- mentioned stars, but including the expansion teams) and full-motion video intros promise a lot more than the game ends up delivering. Once you're past first impressions, you start noticing a bunch of glaring inadequacies in the game. There are some gamers who won't agree and will probably find this the finest basketball game out there, but anyone who finds NBA Live 95 incredibly playable may want to consider reinstalling that classic (unless you, like me, have had it installed since the day you purchased it).
In many ways NBA Live '96 is worlds better than '95, but many of the so-called improvements and enhancements do more to hinder the gameplay than strengthen it. But part of the fault lies with the game of basketball itself. It's an incredibly difficult game to simulate, in part because of its speed and dependence on vision, during plays such as passing (how can you possibly keep track of the players even with multiple camera angles?), driving to the basket and making a proper defense. You could go on and on, and quite honestly NBA Live '96 has managed to simulate a number of these things quite well.
There are no faults with most of the presentation. There are certain things that remain consistent across the entire EA Sports line, and NBA Live '96 continues the tradition of having the best-looking menu system and interface out there, superb sound effects and music, a no-hassle install and plenty of colorful background and player images. Unfortunately, the player photos are carry-overs from the previous game, so certain players will still be wearing the wrong uniforms even if they're in their second (or third) year with a team (check out Cedric Ceballos of the Lakers, still in his Phoenix Suns jersey from 1993-4).
The gameplay graphics are generally something of a mixed bag. The courts look fantastic, and feature near-exact replicas of all of the floor textures and graphics (check out Charlotte and Boston in particular, the former being hideous and the latter classic). The players, however, look incredibly primitive, as this game, like NHL '96, is still using bitmaps for their representation instead of polygons. The result? Massive pixelation at close-up, with each player, even in high-resolution mode. This only comes into play if you choose one of the up-close camera angles, and most players won't be doing that in anything but replay mode, since they're useless during play; but it's still a major annoyance.
EA Sports has taken two steps forward and one back in the area of playability. The step backward û and unfortunately, it's what renders the game nearly unplayable û is the floating camera. NBA Live 96 uses the same Virtual Stadium technology FIFA '96 and NHL '96 use; whereas it works in those two games (less so in NHL than in FIFA), it makes NBA Live '96 incredibly difficult and headache-inducing. It causes the player to lose track of the ball and his bearings on the court regularly, as the camera doesn't pan as quickly as the ball can be thrown.
Isn't it also about time someone told the guys who make these things that there is no good reason to have multiple camera angles available during play? Switching on-the-fly may look good on the box copy or a sell sheet, but is a complete waste of effort where players are concerned, because most of the angles are useless and provide more of a hindrance to play than a benefit. A baseline camera is wonderful when you decide to use the new instant replay feature and watch a particularly nasty block by Shaquille O'Neal, but it makes shooting that three a wee-bit difficult since you can't actually see where you are on the court because of the extreme angle. If the multiple angles are there to make the game look more like a television broadcast than a game, then it's time to fire the cameraman, because no one would move a camera as much as you see it moved here. Pass the Dramamine. An option for a fixed camera would have been most welcome.
One enormous problem with the game is that the designers failed to deliver one of the promised new features û the player draft. It says it'll be there on the box (twice). Allegedly, what's referred to is the free-agent pool of players you can draw from in order to make additions to your team. This is fine, but when you think of a draft feature in any sports game, visions of a pool of players where each team chooses one player per round, moves on to the next and so on is what fills the mind. If the free-agent pool is the designers' idea of a draft, it's back to the drawing board for that feature. Either yank it or make it work the way it's supposed to.
Other aspects of the team management are incredibly weak. While you can now create your own players (a welcome edition), you cannot edit existing players or teams. This causes a problem when you trade players and add someone to your team who shares a jersey number with another player. You get to have two of them running around with the same number (something NBA officials would be ecstatic about).
Perhaps the greatest failing of the game is that it doesn't manage to improve upon the woeful AI of the first game. In NBA Live '95 this can be forgiven, because at the time it was the only game in town; but since the AI is equally as bad in '96, you have to start wondering what the design priorities were during development.
How is it bad? The computer passes up shots unguarded under the basket routinely, and still can't substitute (a guy gets two fouls in the first quarter, sub. Three in the second, sub. Four in the third, sub. Five in the fourth, sub until late in the game. There, problem solved). You have to think that this crucial part of the game received very little attention; the plan must have been graphics, graphics and more graphics. Graphics may sell one version, but if the play is poor, will anyone want the next version (yes, of course, if the graphics are even better)?
Not everything about the game has been downgraded. A number of excellent features have been added, such as the ability to print out or save to disk player statistics. The free-throw interface has received a minor change, one that's for the better when it comes to realism. The two intersecting balls that you have to time perfectly are still present, but there's now a background of fans behind it, which makes it considerably more challenging, even for the best foul shooters. You can now select plays on the fly by pressing the function keys, and you can assign a large number of canned plays to the keys (you can have three different plays active at any time, on both offense and defense). When you enter the play selector, there's a nifty animated version of the play which takes place on the clipboard, featuring little X's and O's. There's no play editor, but there's enough variety to allow the player to actually coach a game rather then be forced to play it with a joystick.
Despite all of the criticisms (and you have to remember that a game has to be pretty good to even warrant this much thought about the various systems present throughout), the game still remains quite entertaining to play and to watch. It just happens to be a little less entertaining than its previous incarnation, which is a great disappointment to anyone who's grown accustomed to the enormous improvements the FIFA series has shown (some are of the opinion that NHL '96 isn't that much better than '95, while others think it's better than a puck in the mouth). Still, if you don't own a basketball game or if the subtleties of basketball do not interest you (better be fast with a joystick), NBA Live '96 will likely be all that you need. Owners of NBA Live 95 are in for a minor quandary û is this actually an improved game or has the series actually taken a step backwards (this is something that IndyCar Racing owners can relate to)? Judge for yourself, because my opinion of the game changes every few minutes. I want to love it, I occasionally do love it and other times I'm horribly frustrated by it. Still, in the end, it probably won't be leaving my hard drive, at least for a while. Whether or not it lasts as long as NBA Live 95 remains to be seen.
