BuzzerBeater Forums

Yeah, if I want to play awesome video games, there are loads out there better than this.

I play this because of its basketball management simulation concepts, of which there are some serious flaws.

I spend a lot of time observing strategies of my opponents, short and long term. That and figuring out the financial side would take enough time if more "simulation" elements were put in place.

Having to lose games because I need to play a player out of position just annoys me, as well as many others.

Managers should be rewarded for their knowledge of the game (basketball tactics, economic strategy and even developing relationships) and how they apply that knowledge, not for things that are unrelated.

I shouldn't need to do it because it isn't realistic, not in the slightest.

How we can play and can't play should be subjected to the elements of actual basketball management. There are many ways to make training realistic and still good quality video gaming.

Could you imagine playing Blake Griffin at pg or sg, just to increase his passing, handling or outside shooting? Not gonna happen.

There are way better examples than Blake Griffin. I just so happen to like how he plays.

Patrick Ewing would be a good example. Or Tony Parker at center...

...and both must get exactly 48 minutes or more or training effectiveness is severely depleted.

Haha!

Could you imagine playing Blake Griffin at pg or sg, just to increase his passing, handling or outside shooting? Not gonna happen.

The counter-example is could you imagine some team in the fourth division drafting a player like Blake Griffin and not only being able to train him to his full potential, but also never have to worry about him attempting to force his way into a bigger club? A fourth division team, in any quasi-realistic simulation, basically would only be able to field a roster of local semi-pro players who have no room to grow, and there would never be any way to progress up the pyramid.

There are times when realism must be sacrificed for game design purposes. Requiring a player to play a certain position to receive training is surely not realistic, but it makes it possible for teams who are not rolling around in money to train essentially as effectively as those who are, once they get the right trainees. Having it the other way would mean that top teams would simply continue to run their main lineups and still be able to train up high caliber future players, and there would be almost no way to progress in the game.

Last edited by GM-hrudey at 4/9/2012 11:24:53 AM

Yes, there are many times when realism must be sacrificed. But it isn't a necessity to have it in particular areas or particular ways, as there are other games that don't.

I'm looking around at other games to see if I can get a more realistic experience. It's a shame because there are lots of things that I do like about this game.

Again, same argument... There are things that are unrealistic, but they don't HAVE to be like that. There are changes that can be made to make it closer to simulation. These changes could still have you logging on incessantly if you wished and would not ruin gameplay.