Welcome to another edition of The Friday Five! Every Friday I cover a topic related to basketball gaming, either as a list of five items, or a Top 5 countdown. The topics for these lists and countdowns include everything from fun facts and recollections to commentary and critique. This week’s Five is a list of five controversial concepts in basketball video games that were ultimately abandoned.

Basketball video games have come a long way, thanks to evolving technology and innovative ideas. Of course, not all ideas pan out, and some definitely aren’t in the best interests of consumers. It’s one thing when a change to a gameplay mechanic or mode doesn’t resonate with gamers, or result in the improvements that were intended. However, when the overall experience is harmed by a controversial approach that’s sorely lacking in goodwill – such as pushy recurrent revenue mechanics – it can easily overshadow a game’s better qualities.

In the best case scenario, such concepts will prove to be so controversial that they’ll be abandoned or at least heavily revamped in the following game, if not sooner via a patch. The annual basketball titles obviously have a built-in audience, and with NBA 2K essentially having a monopoly on the sim genre right now, there’s a lot of freedom to push their luck. Nevertheless, controversial concepts do invite significant backlash, so they will be abandoned if they threaten to damage a company’s reputation; or more accurately, their profits. That said, while they may not be motivated by altruism, it’s always welcome when companies walk back on controversial concepts like these five.

1. Paying For Haircuts

Let’s tip things off with one of the most controversial concepts in the past decade or so: the need to pay for haircuts at the Neighborhood barber in NBA 2K18. While The Neighborhood in general could qualify as one of the more controversial concepts in basketball gaming, charging for haircuts in its first iteration drew a lot of negative attention. Virtual Currency had already been creeping into more and more aspects of player customisation over the years, but it’s safe to say that having to pay to change your hairstyle, facial hair, or the colour of either, was absolutely a step too far. Some of the styles were quite expensive, and the backlash was immediate and forceful.

Well, for the most part. Some people defended the idea, because of course they did. NBA 2K could boot up to a photo of a shoe and require 1000 VC to get through to the main menu, and some gamers would still defend it while calling anyone who dares to complain spoiled. Anyway, the argument in favour of charging for haircuts was that we’re always clamouring for realism, and since The Neighborhood is an immersive world, paying a barber is quite realistic. The realism argument falls flat when you consider that the prices of some haircuts were more than a game’s salary! 2K nerfed all styles to 100 VC in NBA 2K18, then abandoned the idea in NBA 2K19 onwards.

2. Subscriptions For Roster Updates

Dynamic DNA was a great idea for NBA Live, but charging for it wasn’t! Well, to be precise, you didn’t have to pay for Dynamic DNA and roster updates in NBA Live 09 and NBA Live 10…assuming that you bought the games new. All brand new copies of those games came with a subscription to the updates powered by Synergy Sports, which could be redeemed at no extra cost. If you bought them second-hand though, you were out of luck unless that copy happened to include a code that hadn’t yet been redeemed. That’s not impossible, but it is highly unlikely. Also, even though it wasn’t an issue for anyone who got either game at launch, the idea was still controversial.

More and more games were trying ideas like this, and obviously battle passes and the like trace their roots back to those experiments. Those concepts arguably aren’t as controversial nowadays – or at least, they’ve become so common that gamers are just accepting of them – but in 2008, there was more resistance. Granted, not everyone understood that all new copies came with a free subscription, but even those who did still found EA’s attempt to cash in on the second-hand market to be rather gauche. It became a moot point after the cancellation of NBA Elite 11, as EA gave everyone a year’s worth of free updates for NBA Live 10, and abandoned the subscription model.

3. Rookieville

I realise that I’ve mentioned Rookieville in multiple articles, and even dedicated an entire Monday Tip-Off to criticising it. It’s worth bringing up whenever we talk about questionable concepts though, since not only was it controversial, but one of the worst and mostly poorly-thought out ideas in the history of the NBA 2K series! For those who don’t play MyCAREER or skipped it in the Next Gen version of NBA 2K21, after completing the story and making it to the NBA, we gained access to the mode’s open world environment. Before we could see The City however, we had to prove our worth at the Rookieville docks in order to earn entry, as well as gain a Park affiliation.

That meant playing online games to increase your rep in one of the most literal cases of gatekeeping in NBA 2K to date! Apologists sneered that it wasn’t difficult, nor did it take very long to get to The City, but that wasn’t the point. If you weren’t interested in online play, it was a chore. Also, since the goal was for everyone to get in, it was ultimately pointless! The biggest problem was that it relied on other gamers being there to challenge, which was less likely the longer the game was out. The result was a CPU opponent being patched in, and NBA 2K22 abandoned the idea. That no devs foresaw this issue – and even went on to call it a “good experiment” – is worrisome.

4. Contracts in Card Collecting Modes

Apart from pushy recurrent revenue mechanics, the use of contracts is one of the more controversial concepts in card collecting/team building modes such as MyTEAM and Ultimate Team. In theory, they added balance to the game, and encouraged the use of a variety of cards. As far as the online modes of play were concerned, it’s an idea that had merit. Unfortunately, it was simply just a nuisance in the single player modes of Ultimate Team and MyTEAM. Shills argued that it was just the done thing, and that a surplus of contracts could be maintained without buying them. Mind you, that makes them pointless busywork, and keeping them “just because” is not a compelling reason.

NBA Live was the first game to drop contracts, as Ultimate Team in NBA Live 19 allowed unlimited use for all regular cards, with special limited-use cards similar to the Free Agents in MyTEAM. NBA Live 19 LUT had a few other shortcomings, but removing contracts was a good decision. MyTEAM at long last followed suit in NBA 2K23, instead providing incentive to dip into our collections via seasonal objectives and challenges. The goodwill of the move is somewhat undermined by other changes in recent years, from Original Owner cards to the temporary removal of the Auction House, but at least we have more freedom to use any players that we’ve acquired.

5. Buying Clothes to Earn Endorsement VC

We’re going back to NBA 2K18 for this one. The endorsements system also tried to take full advantage of the new Neighborhood setting, with certain brands asking that you wear a t-shirt with their logo during Playground games. Concepts like that can be fun in theory, but it’s always controversial when you force gamers into playing modes they’re not interested in. That isn’t even the most controversial part, however. The t-shirt in question actually had to be purchased before it could be worn. If you forgot to wear it out of the store, you’d also have to return to your MyCOURT, go to the closet, scroll through the clothing options, select it, and then finally head to The Playground.

Putting aside the tedium of the closet system – again, fun idea in theory, annoying in practice – the fact that you were expected to buy a branded shirt in order to fulfil your endorsement deal was utterly ridiculous. Not only do players get a lot of merchandise for free thanks to their endorsements, but if they have to wear something specific for a commercial or otherwise be a walking billboard, the brand is going to furnish them with that clothing! To that end, the “it’s realistic” argument that the apologists tried with haircuts doesn’t work here, either. Admittedly you were reimbursed for the purchase once you’d fulfilled your obligations, but it was still a ridiculous approach.

Which of these controversial concepts do you recall? Were you particularly bothered by them, or perhaps another idea by EA Sports or Visual Concepts that caused a stir? Have your say in the comments, and as always, feel free to take the discussion to the NLSC Forum! That’s all for this week, so thanks for checking in, have a great weekend, and please join me again next Friday for another Five.