P
Parore
Guest
I dont know if its any worth reading your comments anymore. You do so much sucking up its not funny.
-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
K
knowsleyroader
Guest
ROFL ok.
I think most who know me on here know I certainly dont suck up to anyone. It happens to be my opinion. Have you played RC2006 ?
Believe it or not I happen to be a big rugby league fan and nothing would have given me greater pleasure than to have seen RL2 knock seven shades out of RC2006. Sadly this very much isnt the case.
Feel free to ignore my posts from now on. I will certainly ignore yours.
I think most who know me on here know I certainly dont suck up to anyone. It happens to be my opinion. Have you played RC2006 ?
Believe it or not I happen to be a big rugby league fan and nothing would have given me greater pleasure than to have seen RL2 knock seven shades out of RC2006. Sadly this very much isnt the case.
Feel free to ignore my posts from now on. I will certainly ignore yours.
C
C A Iversen
Guest
Originally posted by kinkon89+Dec 13 2005, 09:17 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (kinkon89 @ Dec 13 2005, 09:17 PM)</div>im 8.9!?!?!@Dec 13 2005, 05:44 PM
Yeah, I mean they both have had a similar level of pre-match hype on this forum. Both with that "This is a 9/10 game" sort of slant to it.
I feel from what I have heard Rugby League 2 is more like a 6.5/10 and significantly less good than we heard, although still somewhat playable.
I predict that Rugby Challenge 2006 will end up not being as good as what we have heard either, although the reviews so far sound so incredibly detailed and positive, I think it's fall from grace will be limited to it being about a 8.0/10.
I can't help it, I'm addicted to judging everything out of 10!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ak47, your an 8.2
esoj your a 6.9
Ceejay your a 8.6
Locksley your a 9.2
Ride The Cliche 7.4
Jacko 4.9
Kaftka 9.8
Kinkon 89 8.9
Knowsley Roader 7.9
Saint Helens 6.9
Los Lover 0.1 (but on his day 9.9)
Sambad5 7.6
Sanzar 8.0
Someone just shoot me...............
wats wrong with 9.0!?!?!
well i'll rate you a 0.1!!!! [/b]
But Kinkon, your very name is Kinkon 8.9!
Oh ****, no it's not.....9.0 it is!!!
C
CeeJay
Guest
Well, theres one thing I think RL2 and RL1 has on all the other rugby games, its that they are always difficult, you can never garuantee victory, in WRC and R2006, i just could not lose and therefore stopped playing. Now, RC2006 or Rugby 2006 may well crap allover RL2 but if Ive mastered in a week and cant even get a challenge out of it, whats the use? From what ive heard, RC2006 will be awome, but it needs to hav a difficulty level that can go the distance.
Knowlsleyroader, youve played it havent you? What do you think? did you speak with any of the swordfish guys about this?
Knowlsleyroader, youve played it havent you? What do you think? did you speak with any of the swordfish guys about this?
K
knowsleyroader
Guest
To be honest the difficulty level is probably one of the things that myself and lox cant really comment on as we only had a limited amount of time with the game. Obviously over time games get easier and we didnt play it enough that we got to the point where we could have found the difficulty was wanting.
However even during our short stint we did find that the game varied quite considerably in that one game you would whack the opposition and then you couldnt seem to do it next time around.
I think that is one of the very best if not the best point about RL1 is that you get a different challenge from game to game and you can always up the difficulty in such a way to challenge yourself even if it means adjusting stats.
I didnt find this with RL2 however and the AI had great difficulty scoring against me even with the poor defending control. It simply bored me was the fact where RL1 and I commented on this straight away is one of the most excisting sports games Ive played.
Dont know about anyone else but I always hold my breath while im sprinting for the line without even thinking about it
P
Paddy
Guest
talking about difficulty, i cant belive NO sport game has a 'random' difficulty choice
this will be great as crap teams will have a easy difficulty and good teams have high, but then again the good teams will have a easy difficulty when their in a form slump etc etc
this will be great as crap teams will have a easy difficulty and good teams have high, but then again the good teams will have a easy difficulty when their in a form slump etc etc
K
knowsleyroader
Guest
Each team should have a form rating that fluctuates depending on how the team are doing. It should then directly affect the stats of the players. This way it will likely affect everyone but the best players could still have a very good game against you and maybe pull the team through the slump and start things on the up.
E
esoj
Guest
lol since i read this after my birthday officaly finished i will let it slide. I work for sidhe anywayOriginally posted by C A Iversen@Dec 13 2005, 08:28 PM
I'm not trying to knock esoj personally, I just feel that there were people of his sympathetic nature in the testing room giving the feedback in a "hugs first" style.
knowsley how can you say you like rl 1 more that was so arcadey and non-league like. it was unbelievably easy to score tries even on legend difficulty. rl 2 is a challenge to score and if this isn't your style and you prefer the acrade style of the first one then so be it. since we are in the whole comparison thing i think rl 2 is like blic it feels like your playing cricket while cricket 2005 seems like an arcade game that is out of it's depth
rc2006 and rugby 2006 may well be better than rl 2 and i hope they are but until then imo anyway rl 2 is the best there is and not rl 1. comparing to other sports games is fair enough i guess but you havee to compare to similar type of sports games and pes 5 will basically thrash everything proabbly even the much hyped by knowsleyroader rc 2006. but thats just it isn't pes 5 is the fifth version and fifa its 5th or 6 compared to version 2 of rugby league and of the swordfish series. rugby league though imo is a lot further a long than when the likes of fifa started out.
K
knowsleyroader
Guest
When the likes of fifa started out we were in a different world.Originally posted by esoj+Dec 14 2005, 12:02 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (esoj @ Dec 14 2005, 12:02 AM)</div>lol since i read this after my birthday officaly finished i will let it slide. I work for sidhe anyway@Dec 13 2005, 08:28 PM
I'm not trying to knock esoj personally, I just feel that there were people of his sympathetic nature in the testing room giving the feedback in a "hugs first" style.
knowsley how can you say you like rl 1 more that was so arcadey and non-league like. it was unbelievably easy to score tries even on legend difficulty. rl 2 is a challenge to score and if this isn't your style and you prefer the acrade style of the first one then so be it. since we are in the whole comparison thing i think rl 2 is like blic it feels like your playing cricket while cricket 2005 seems like an arcade game that is out of it's depth
rc2006 and rugby 2006 may well be better than rl 2 and i hope they are but until then imo anyway rl 2 is the best there is and not rl 1. comparing to other sports games is fair enough i guess but you havee to compare to similar type of sports games and pes 5 will basically thrash everything proabbly even the much hyped by knowsleyroader rc 2006. but thats just it isn't pes 5 is the fifth version and fifa its 5th or 6 compared to version 2 of rugby league and of the swordfish series. rugby league though imo is a lot further a long than when the likes of fifa started out. [/b]
Are you suggesting that the RL franchise should have started out with 3d isometric graphics ?
My opinion is of course only that and no kind of definitive " This is how things are " to anyone but in my view RL2 has took a step back from RL1 in many ways.
The difficulty certainly isnt as challenging in my opinon. The kicking and ball physics arnt as good. The grubber kicks in my opinion are no where near as useful. The bounce of the ball far flatter than before. The control is no where near as good as RL1. Serious problems in the franchise with frequency and severity of injuries. Far too many random knock ons. Wingers stood in touch. I could go on and on.
Its not that I like an arcade fest of a rugby leauge game in fact I will agree that you are right in that RL1 is a bit arcady but in no way do I feel this has been resolved in RL2. They have taken a different tact and in my opinion it hasnt come anywhere close to working.
Give me a more simulation RL game anyday over an arcady option but RL2 im afraid doesnt satisfy my needs.
I also certainly havent gone out of my way to hype RC2006 its just the way I saw it and I think you will find that Lox and SHRLFC both thought pretty much the same thing as me that it was a very, very good game. Correct me if im wrong you guys.
R
Ripper
Guest
Who the hell are you?
Whats the bet your one of those on the SIDHE riding Mario's jock all day.
E
esoj
Guest
you seem to talk rc2006 up a lot but maybe thats just me. I guess we will have to agree to disagree on rl 2 as I like it more than the first one but you disagree and prefer the arcade style of the first 1. rl 2 does have bugs for sure but I know rugby 2005 has a lot more and has a crap franchise system in comparision to rl 2. I do hope rc2006 lives up to the mark you Locksley and SHRLFC have set for it otherwise the fall could be worse than that of rl 2. rugby 2006 i really don't hold much hope for but hopefully the rumoured demo comes out before release and that maybe due to the competition of swordfish and sidhe they rasie their gameOriginally posted by knowsleyroader+Dec 14 2005, 05:18 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (knowsleyroader @ Dec 14 2005, 05:18 AM)</div>When the likes of fifa started out we were in a different world.@Dec 13 2005, 08:28 PM
I'm not trying to knock esoj personally, I just feel that there were people of his sympathetic nature in the testing room giving the feedback in a "hugs first" style.
lol since i read this after my birthday officaly finished i will let it slide. I work for sidhe anyway
knowsley how can you say you like rl 1 more that was so arcadey and non-league like. it was unbelievably easy to score tries even on legend difficulty. rl 2 is a challenge to score and if this isn't your style and you prefer the acrade style of the first one then so be it. since we are in the whole comparison thing i think rl 2 is like blic it feels like your playing cricket while cricket 2005 seems like an arcade game that is out of it's depth
rc2006 and rugby 2006 may well be better than rl 2 and i hope they are but until then imo anyway rl 2 is the best there is and not rl 1. comparing to other sports games is fair enough i guess but you havee to compare to similar type of sports games and pes 5 will basically thrash everything proabbly even the much hyped by knowsleyroader rc 2006. but thats just it isn't pes 5 is the fifth version and fifa its 5th or 6 compared to version 2 of rugby league and of the swordfish series. rugby league though imo is a lot further a long than when the likes of fifa started out.
Are you suggesting that the RL franchise should have started out with 3d isometric graphics ?
My opinion is of course only that and no kind of definitive " This is how things are " to anyone but in my view RL2 has took a step back from RL1 in many ways.
The difficulty certainly isnt as challenging in my opinon. The kicking and ball physics arnt as good. The grubber kicks in my opinion are no where near as useful. The bounce of the ball far flatter than before. The control is no where near as good as RL1. Serious problems in the franchise with frequency and severity of injuries. Far too many random knock ons. Wingers stood in touch. I could go on and on.
Its not that I like an arcade fest of a rugby leauge game in fact I will agree that you are right in that RL1 is a bit arcady but in no way do I feel this has been resolved in RL2. They have taken a different tact and in my opinion it hasnt come anywhere close to working.
Give me a more simulation RL game anyday over an arcady option but RL2 im afraid doesnt satisfy my needs.
I also certainly havent gone out of my way to hype RC2006 its just the way I saw it and I think you will find that Lox and SHRLFC both thought pretty much the same thing as me that it was a very, very good game. Correct me if im wrong you guys. [/b]
C
CeeJay
Guest
Ha Ha, esoj, there is no way that rugby 2005 has more bugs than RL2! I dont think any other modern sports game would. If we made lists of the bugs from both games im sure RL2 would be well ahead. I think RL2 is better than rugby 2005, but not in the bug department.
Knowlseyroader, how long did you play RL2 for , and what difficulty did u get up to?
I think RL2 is better than RL1 in the end, its just very sad that alot of what made RL1 popular is gone, and RL2 is so much more frustrating than RL1. I find myself so often staring at he screen shaking my head and saying things like, unbelievable, ridiculous, and bulls**t! but then when somehting good happens, im up and out of my chair, saying come and hav a look at this try! so its both good and bad.
Knowlseyroader, how long did you play RL2 for , and what difficulty did u get up to?
I think RL2 is better than RL1 in the end, its just very sad that alot of what made RL1 popular is gone, and RL2 is so much more frustrating than RL1. I find myself so often staring at he screen shaking my head and saying things like, unbelievable, ridiculous, and bulls**t! but then when somehting good happens, im up and out of my chair, saying come and hav a look at this try! so its both good and bad.
E
esoj
Guest
come on rugby 2005 was utter crap but was an improvement from rugby 2004 which was just crap. rugby league 2 has gone a long way further forward than rugby 2005 did in the rugby gaming genre. rugby league 2 has some bugs but I think rugby 2005 has more and the game is impossible to play comapred to rl 2 which is very playable despite the bugs
C
CeeJay
Guest
Youre right rugby 2005 was crap, and RL2 is way more playable, but rugby 2005 suxed because it just didnt play enough like rugby, not so much because of bugs. I also agree that RL2 is quite playable even with all the bugs, but the bug count still goes to RL2 hands down!
Dont make me make a list!!
Dont make me make a list!!
E
esoj
Guest
I don't know i think it would be pretty close in the bug count. rugby 2005 did have quite a lot. but it's not worth going there as opinions will be different on to what is a bug in both games and what is simply game design error.
C
CeeJay
Guest
I think a bug is anything thats not supposed to happen, so for eg, the bad side steps and stuff in rugby 2005 arnet bugs, thats just how they were made (and badly) players performin the fend animation when there is no one to fend is a bug, as im sure it was never intended to happen. Thats wat i think, wat about you?
E
esoj
Guest
bug is something that happens that shouldn't happen at all or something that functions correctly functions incorrectly. but it's is pointless anyway as your opinion on rl 2 will always be different from mine anyway. so I think ulitmately we will end up going no where.
P
Parore
Guest
RL1 now that was a huge bug. Remember the Demo they put out for RL1 in 2002? Now that was really bad.
Sidhe have moved on from that and have developed something that can compete with EA Sports and better their games. I do not like Sidhe and how they approach making games with their delays and selecting cheerleaders to test their games but they are the only ones thats saw a market for Rugby League and on top of that made a game thats really enjoyable to play. RL2 for me is 70% near perfection.
All games have bugs and little things that need to be improved and thats why none of them get 10/10 in reviews from places like gamespot. I never once read a post by Mario or his cheerleaders about "How good the game was" and I think its silly if you fell into that trap thinking this is the "Game that ends all games" like they said RL1 would. And thats where the problem of your higher expectations come from and you should trust your instincts and block out everyone elses opinions until you play the game yourself.
Sidhe have moved on from that and have developed something that can compete with EA Sports and better their games. I do not like Sidhe and how they approach making games with their delays and selecting cheerleaders to test their games but they are the only ones thats saw a market for Rugby League and on top of that made a game thats really enjoyable to play. RL2 for me is 70% near perfection.
All games have bugs and little things that need to be improved and thats why none of them get 10/10 in reviews from places like gamespot. I never once read a post by Mario or his cheerleaders about "How good the game was" and I think its silly if you fell into that trap thinking this is the "Game that ends all games" like they said RL1 would. And thats where the problem of your higher expectations come from and you should trust your instincts and block out everyone elses opinions until you play the game yourself.
C
CeeJay
Guest
Our opinions arent that different, mines just a little harsher than yours.
Well, that demo relase was so bad, It could hav cost them all their sales, but, we were all happy to see that RL1 had improved from that significantly.
Well, that demo relase was so bad, It could hav cost them all their sales, but, we were all happy to see that RL1 had improved from that significantly.
E
esoj
Guest
yeah perhaps and very true that demo releasee before rl 1 was bit of a shocker.
