Wayback Wednesday: NBA ShootOut (aka Total NBA ’96)

This is Wayback Wednesday, your midweek blast from the past! From retrospectives of basketball games and their interesting features, to republished articles and looking at NBA history through the lens of the virtual hardwood, Wednesdays at the NLSC are for going back in time. This week, I’m taking a look back at NBA ShootOut, also known as Total NBA ’96.

With NBA 2K’s dominance over the virtual hardwood going back to the seventh generation consoles, it’s easy to forget that NBA Live was once the name in sim basketball video games. Its predecessor, the NBA Playoff series, had some strong competition in the form of Tecmo Super NBA Basketball, but the revamp with NBA Live 95 firmly established EA Sports as the top brand in the genre. NBA Live 96 was a strong follow-up, particularly on PC. Of course, other companies were still willingly throwing their hat into the ring with alternatives to compete with NBA Live.

I’ve enjoyed finally getting my hands on several of those alternatives in recent years. That includes Sony Computer Entertainment Europe’s NBA ShootOut, titled Total NBA ’96 in PAL regions. Although it was never the top dog in the genre, it did tip off a series of games that competed with NBA Live, and later NBA 2K, right through to the 2004 season. As with many of the alternatives to the two biggest brands, the NBA ShootOut series ultimately fell short of truly challenging them, but it had a handful of interesting ideas from the very first release. Let’s take a look back…way back…

As I’ve mentioned before, as a young basketball fan and gamer back in the 90s, I was playing NBA Live and NBA Jam. They were widely considered the premiere sim and arcade hoops titles of the day, which sometimes made it difficult for me to appreciate their contemporaries. Nowadays, I can go back and play those competing games with more of an open mind when it comes to their style and approach. With that being said, I still believe that those early NBA Live and NBA Jam titles are the gold standard for their era. As such, they remain the yardstick whenever I play and evaluate other titles from that generation, from gameplay and modes to features and design principles.

To that point, while on the surface NBA ShootOut did an admirable job of matching the PlayStation version of NBA Live 96 in terms of modes and features, they’re not as deep or well-designed. Like NBA Live 96, you’ll find a Season mode, a standalone Playoffs mode, and the ability to trade players. However, in NBA ShootOut’s Season mode, we can’t select a shorter schedule; only different quarter lengths. Furthermore, although you can glance ahead in the calendar, you can’t simulate any games. You can make trades for both your team and the CPU-controlled teams as in the Season modes of early NBA Live, and of course proceed to the Playoffs when the season is finished.

Similarly, the standalone Playoffs mode is also lacking compared to NBA Live 96. We can choose the quarter length and format (single game, 3-5-5-5, or 5-7-7-7), as well as the number of starting teams; a nifty idea that allows one to jump straight into the second round or Conference Finals. The catch is that we can only choose from the sixteen teams from the 1995 Playoffs with the same seeding, and electing to start in a later round further restricts our choice to the teams that advanced. Although this is an interesting alternative to the usual approach, the inability to change the brackets and teams is restrictive, thus limiting its appeal if you’re not a fan of any of those teams.

Funnily enough, while you can’t change the selection of teams or the brackets in NBA ShootOut’s Playoffs mode, you can keep making trades between them. This obviously isn’t accurate, but in all fairness, it is the kind of exception that can be made in video games. Still, as a sim title, it does lose points for authenticity here. The trade function is straightforward, allowing one-for-one deals. Players are in the same order as they appear in the lineup screen: point guard, small forward, centre, shooting guard, and then power forward, followed by the bench players. It’s a little confusing not pairing the guards and forwards, and the way the roster is displayed feels rather disorganised.

There’s also no way to alter the default lineups outside of trading players back and forth between teams, and any changes to the rosters made outside of the Season or Playoffs modes won’t be saved. Gameplay options are limited to a Simulation or Arcade setting (though there doesn’t seem to be any real difference between them), three difficulty levels (Rookie, Veteran, All-Star), CPU Assistance, and a couple of presentation options. There are seven different camera angles, but they can only be selected during gameplay. A number of basketball video games have taken a similar approach to the camera settings though, right up to seventh gen titles like NBA 07.

Because NBA ShootOut was released in March 1996, it wasn’t affected by the brief lockout of 1995, and includes a couple of deals that you won’t find in NBA Live 96 PC. Comparing the rosters to the 1996 season transactions listing over on Basketball Reference, they were finalised around late January, as the most recent move that’s accounted for is the Kenny Anderson for Kendall Gill swap between the New Jersey Nets and Charlotte Hornets. Strangely, the East and West All-Stars aren’t included, which also means that the All-Star Game isn’t part of Season mode. It’s an unusual omission, as the All-Star teams were generally at least available for exhibition play.

NBA ShootOut features 12-man rosters with no inactive list, though this wasn’t too uncommon in 90s games. As you’d expect, Michael Jordan and Charles Barkley are missing, but so is Shaquille O’Neal, as he was exclusive to NBA Live at that time. They’re replaced in the starting lineup by Steve Kerr, A.C. Green, and Jon Koncak respectively, though interestingly there’s also a Roster Player standing in for each of them on their teams’ bench: identical bald white players with beards for Chuck and Shaq, and a white player with black hair for MJ. There’s no Free Agents Pool or Create-a-Player, which isn’t surprising since roster customisation can’t be saved.

In short, NBA ShootOut accounts for many of the same basic features as NBA Live 96, albeit with less depth and some questionable changes; a common mistake during that era. It could be argued that there was logic to taking a different approach here and there, but many games made changes that were illogical! The result was modes that were even more barebones and less customisable, with unnecessarily janky design. Again, this is an issue with NBA ShootOut, but as it allows gamers to play through a full season and Playoffs, jump straight into the postseason, and (temporarily) modify the default rosters, it does actually boast more depth than some of its contemporaries.

Of course, even though NBA Live’s modes and features were consistently the best back then, they were still quite limited compared to games that would come along in the not too distant future. With that in mind, many basketball gamers could accept modes that were shallower and oddly-designed, as long as they found the gameplay enjoyable. To that end, the on-court experience in NBA ShootOut isn’t unappealing, though as with its modes and features, it is marred by questionable design choices. I know a couple of people who enjoyed the game, and contemporary reviews tended to be positive. I can see why, but to me it falls short of NBA Live 96’s gameplay as well.

Let’s begin with some positives, though. Its boxy player models may look primitive today, and they’re undoubtedly too thin, but those polygons were nevertheless a step up as we entered the 3D era. The animations are more lifelike and the textures more detailed compared to the sprites of the 16-bit games. Even though many players share the same basic face – albeit with different hair and beards, plus the occasional unique detail such as Dennis Rodman’s colourful (and changing) hair – their features are more distinguishable than NBA Live’s heads. Jerseys and courts are also more detailed than in NBA Live 96, though there are errors such as the Supersonics’ jerseys being black.

Automatic replays from a variety of angles are available on dunks, but can be turned off if desired. The game also beat NBA Live to the punch with in-game commentary courtesy of Mark Van Gelder, who later lent his voice to a couple of NBA 2K titles. His commentary is mostly limited to reactions to baskets and defensive stops, but the players are referred to by their nicknames (if they have one) whenever they score. As basic as this presentation is – even compared to games that would come along in just a few years – it’s still impressive for the time, and it’s nice to hear speech outside of just having the PA announcer shout “THREE!” on a three-pointer (iconic as that may be).

Unfortunately for NBA ShootOut, those are the only major advantages that it has over NBA Live 96, and arguably NBA in the Zone for that matter. That’s not to say that the gameplay is in any way utterly terrible. You can pick it up fairly easily, and while I’d say it’s a bit more sim than other hybrid titles, the quick pace and slightly exaggerated dunks compared to NBA Live 96 do result in a more casual style. Once again though, like the modes and features, gameplay in NBA ShootOut suffers from odd design choices. This begins with the controls. While the layout and functions are generally familiar, there is a slightly unusual approach that can end up hampering the action.

The face buttons are divided into two shoot buttons and two pass buttons. Square will perform dunks and layups inside and a quick set shot on the perimeter, while triangle is used to shoot jumpers. Circle is the regular pass button, while X is more of a lead pass button, suitable for long outlets and fast breaks. There are a couple of issues with this approach. First of all, it defies the more common layout of using X for a regular pass and Square for shoot. It doesn’t feel as natural, meaning your muscle memory will likely lead to turnovers as you accidentally attempt full court inbounds passes. It’s also easy enough to mix up the shoot buttons, though it’s usually not quite as costly.

That brings us to the second problem. Even putting aside user error, having two shoot and pass buttons isn’t as effective as it should be. It’s obviously ahead of its time in some respects, but the gameplay is still too simple to really justify having multiple buttons for shooting and passing, rather than just one apiece that trigger contextually-appropriate animations. It doesn’t help that switch on defense is mapped to the long pass button while the regular pass button doubles as steal, with the jumpshot button being used for block/rebound. You can adjust to the controls and they are responsive, but in my view they’re still clunky; an ultimately unnecessary change with no benefit.

NBA ShootOut is another game with separate pause and team management screens, accessed using Start and Select respectively. I’m not fond of this approach at the best of times, but it’s particularly annoying here as you’re actually calling a timeout every time you bring up the team management screen. Once you run out of timeouts – seven in total – you can’t sub or change your strategy, even during dead ball situations! Just to add to the frustration, the game doesn’t display how many timeouts you have left. Additionally, to exit the timeout screen you must press Start to switch to the pause screen, and then press Start again to return to the action, which is one step too many.

Unfortunately, the UI is riddled with issues like this. Changing the gameplay options in the pause menu is straightforward enough, but the instant replay function is really clunky. It doesn’t help that there isn’t an on-screen guide, though the controls are quite limited anyway. The main problem is that changing camera angles requires pressing Start again to pause replay mode and bring up the option to switch views. You can then navigate to the camera views menu to choose a new angle, after which you need to back out and then press Start again to resume the replay. It’s needless back and forth, and it’s very easy to accidentally select the option that returns to gameplay.

Rather strangely, the manual camera that’s available in instant replay can also be selected as a gameplay camera. It’s not advisable unless you’re watching a CPU vs. CPU game though, since you can’t actually control the players when using this angle. This suggests that it was mistakenly included among the gameplay cameras, likely stemming from the clunky interface design. Meanwhile, there’s no way to view team and player statistics during gameplay. As it happens, San Diego Studio’s NBA series – the spiritual successor to NBA ShootOut that includes the aforementioned NBA 07 – was also plagued by design flaws with its UI, from the frontend to in-game menus.

This is as good a time as any to mention that NBA ShootOut was actually the very first game developed by Sony Computer Entertainment Europe, later renamed Team Soho. This London-based studio was founded in 1994 and originally staffed by young developers who were very new to the industry. Therefore, it’s not altogether surprising that they made some rookie mistakes with the design of the UI and other aspects of the game. On top of their inexperience in game development, they may not have been familiar enough with NBA Live to borrow some of the series’ best design ideas. For that matter, I also wonder how familiar they were with the NBA and basketball itself.

Mind you, for a development team lacking in experience and potentially familiarity with the brand leader in the genre – and perhaps even the actual sport – the gameplay in NBA ShootOut could’ve been much worse! The animations are good for the era, with an exciting array of dunks including reverse jams, 360s, and windmills. Blocks and deflections can lead to loose balls and fast breaks. Teammates will automatically leap for alley-oops when in position. There’s a metered sprint control that’s tied to the players’ level of fatigue, though it’s quick to run out and slow to recover. Basic rules are accounted for. Overall, the framework of a decent basketball video game is there.

It’s still fairly unpolished, though. There’s a definite lack of realism as far as the CPU playing strategically and having the correct players take the most shots. You can only switch to the defender closest to the ball, hurting your ability to defend and rebound. Boards can be difficult to secure in the first place owing to the high number of flat-footed rebounds, though in all fairness, this was a common issue in older basketball games. Players remain fatigued for too long, and aren’t fully refreshed by the halftime break. Since the only opportunities to substitute players come via the limited number of timeouts, fatigue and foul trouble are inevitable. The CPU also rarely makes subs.

Even if you remember to use the correct pass button, sometimes all of your teammates will sprint into the frontcourt immediately after your opponent scores, forcing you to make a long, blind inbounds pass that will likely be intercepted. Dunk attempts will result in offensive fouls far too often, with the number of charges rivalling games such as Bulls vs. Blazers and NBA Showdown! Although player movement is quite fluid, collisions stop players in their tracks. Players also often stop to receive passes instead of catching them in stride. Jumpshots and block attempts are floaty and almost in slow motion, and CPU teammates nearly always jump too early on swat attempts.

The result is a noticeable lack of balance to the gameplay. It’s not impossible to play defense – I’ve played games that make defending a far more miserable affair – but the best defensive strategy is to hope for a miss, secure the rebound, and outscore your opponent at the other end. Basically, the game is – appropriately enough, I suppose – a wild shootout! This can be fun, though as with Konami’s NBA in the Zone, the style of play does lead to repetitive action that lends itself better to shorter quarter lengths, with six minute quarters being long enough for both teams to put up over 100 points. The CPU can be cheesy at times, though not to the point of being unfairly unbeatable.

On the bright side, NBA ShootOut features its own version of the T-Meter for free throws, so it seems the developers had some knowledge of or received pointers about a few staple basketball video game mechanics. On the other hand, there’s no way to pump fake! Tapping either shoot button just tosses up a quick shot, leaving out a basic and vital move for eluding defenders. Of course, much like flat-footed rebounds, there were other games back then that didn’t implement pump fakes, or awkwardly assigned them to a separate button. However, well-timed jumpshots are effective, which wasn’t always the case in early basketball titles. You can even knock down some logo threes!

Although the features list touts authentic player attributes, there are no visible ratings, only their previous season statistics. The gameplay also makes this a suspect claim, as there’s nowhere near as much player differentiation compared to NBA Live 96. Some players are noticeably quicker and better shooters – particularly from long range – but pretty much everyone can hit midrange jumpers and throw it down, irrespective of their actual shooting touch or propensity to dunk. In that sense, NBA ShootOut is far more like NBA in the Zone or NBA Give ‘n’ Go than NBA Live 96, though its dunks and pace aren’t as exaggerated, and fouls and other infractions are more impactful.

Despite some obvious shortcomings, the gameplay in NBA Shootout nevertheless represents a commendable effort for an inexperienced team making its very first basketball video game. It leaves shovelware such as Kidz Sports Basketball in the dust, and even feels better on the sticks than NBA Live 07; a big budget Triple-A release from a company with considerably more experience in the genre! If you prefer a more casual approach to the sim style and you don’t take it too seriously, the action can certainly be enjoyable once you adjust to the unorthodox controls. With the right peripherals, up to eight players can take part in some up-tempo virtual basketball.

Quirky and rough as it may be, NBA ShootOut is at the very least playable. Once again, given the team’s inexperience, the technology of the era, and the expectations we had for basketball games at the time, it’s nowhere near as disappointing an effort as a title such as NBA Live 07! Even if I’d had a PlayStation in the 90s, I don’t think it would’ve become my game of choice as it still falls short of NBA Live 96 PC. Having warmed up to the sim-arcade hybrid genre through retro gaming though, these days I can appreciate NBA ShootOut for what it is. It doesn’t have quite enough polish to retroactively become a favourite, but I’m nevertheless able to enjoy it in small does.

It helps that NBA ShootOut was committed to being an enthusiastic representation of the NBA and basketball in general. The introduction featuring nondescript 3D players sporting team jerseys as they hit the virtual hardwood, beginning with a tip-off and culminating with a dunk – all backed by a jazzy musical score – is brief, but just the kind of vignette that’d get us fired up to play. The main menu displays a rotation of real highlight clips and team logos, and the music is fun and catchy. Players have real portraits, and arena organ music plays on the pause screen. The in-game atmosphere is great, from the crowd noise to the action replays to the snippets of commentary.

This gives the game a great vibe, and as I’ve said before, vibe is important. It doesn’t completely smooth over all of the game’s rough edges, but it does demonstrate that genuine effort was put into it. It isn’t as mechanically sound as NBA Live 96, but you can make defensive stops and trigger fast breaks that end with a spectacular dunk or fancy layup, knock down some big threes, and pick up satisfying wins, spurred on by the crowd and reactions on commentary. It’s flawed, but it’s capable of being a good time if you can get into the style. I still prefer NBA Live 96 for its depth, realism, and overall polish, but again, I can see why some gamers were fans of NBA ShootOut.

Or, if they were in a PAL region, Total NBA ’96! Regional titles are always rather interesting whether it’s a video game, film, or whatever, especially when there’s no clear reason for the change. However, Total NBA ’96 may be the most 90s moniker a basketball video game has had, so I definitely appreciate that decision! It also resulted in alternate purple cover art featuring a generic 3D rendered player, though it appears that there’s also a version that uses the original cover art with Sam Cassell. He was an unusual choice for a cover player, but it should be noted that basketball game covers weren’t considered anywhere near as big of a deal when NBA ShootOut was released.

Whenever I cover a game like NBA ShootOut, I don’t want to come across as overly critical, or as though I’m applying modern standards to a decades-old title. I also don’t want to fall victim to old biases, or damn a deserving title with faint praise. However, NBA Live was the yardstick for 5-on-5 sim-oriented titles at the time, and at the end of the day, NBA ShootOut doesn’t quite measure up to NBA Live 96. With that being said, it does have a certain charm and some interesting ideas, while also beating EA to the punch on a couple of features such as commentary. Once again, considering that it came from an inexperienced team, it’s a respectable effort despite some notable flaws.

Moreover, it represents something that we’re missing nowadays: competition. Sure, NBA Live was the brand leader in the 90s, and its competitors would’ve done well to take some more cues from it, but at least we had alternatives that were trying different things! It did lead to a market glut that wasn’t sustainable, but I absolutely prefer that to a monopoly. NBA ShootOut – or Total NBA ’96 as you may have known it – was inferior to NBA Live 96 and definitely rough in places, but it found an audience that enjoyed it, and understandably so. Despite my criticisms, I appreciate it for what it is, and that it ultimately tipped off a series that dared to challenge the reigning champion.