L
loratadine
Guest
ok i will hope to go to an american sporting event sometime. but not in the near future, as my aim is too move to new zealand next year, im hoping to go to uni there.
-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
C
Confused
Guest
USA Rugger. Thanks. You say it much better than I do.
I know this is a rugby board. We are here because we like rugby. Those of us Americans who are on this board obviously have some type of appreciation for your traditionally non-American sports.
I don't like the stereotypical way sports like "Gridiron" are portrayed by some people. Especially folks who don't even watch it.
I will defend gridiron to the death!!!!!
I know this is a rugby board. We are here because we like rugby. Those of us Americans who are on this board obviously have some type of appreciation for your traditionally non-American sports.
I don't like the stereotypical way sports like "Gridiron" are portrayed by some people. Especially folks who don't even watch it.
I will defend gridiron to the death!!!!!
S
sanzar
Guest
lol, when I watched it I noticed that and assumed you just had to do your best to bash people over without the use of your arms!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>
I have checked it out on fox sports, but it's just one of those sports I'll never be able to get excited about I think... As I said, for me all motor sports just seem to come down to the machine more than the man, and when I look at it all I see is people speeding in cars but never actually getting anywhere...
R
Ripper
Guest
Been a Rams fan since 98, so in other words, the Pre Kurt Warner therefore pre Superbowl Rams.
and I'd rather have a whinging, coach who while inept does have his moments over a straight dumbass who gets caught scalping SB tickets in Mike Tice.
C
Confused
Guest
You have a point there. How dumb could Mike Tice be? Almost as dumb as Leonard Little
U
USArugger
Guest
OK,
So Mike Tice might not be the absolute brightest bulb on the tree, but at least he's not a completely arrogant prick.
L
Los Lover
Guest
rugby 2005 is way cool
(on topic......so f*** off)
(on topic......so f*** off)
R
Ripper
Guest
Why can't the Vikings eat cereal?
Because every time they get near a bowl, they choke.
L
Los Lover
Guest
rugby 2005 is cool
U
USArugger
Guest
Actually, rugby 2005 pretty much sucks. The more I play it, the more it sucks. Then I picked up NCAA 2006 and it made it even more apparent how bad rugby 2005 sucks. It is sad to see the disparity in the effort put forward to make these two games. NCAA 2006 is a great game, with good graphics, gameplay, and difficulty settings. Tackles are still sometimes a little bit crazy, but guys don't generally get knocked back 10 yards when they get hit. Camera angles are good. They added another career type mode (Heisman Mode) which is pretty cool. Overall, NCAA is an excellent game that can keep you busy again and again.
So why can't they do this in rugby? Why can't I create my own team and put me and all my buddies on it? Why can't I put Edinburgh in the Super-12 if I want to? NCAA will let me put Harvard or Princeton in the Big Ten if I want to. It's a frickin' game, let us do what we want with it... Why can't I just make my own guy and guide him through a career like in Heisman mode? I know the answer..., because Rugby 2005 is a piece of shoddy work.
L
Los Lover
Guest
what is it with americans and irony?
nah jokes, no worries..
anyway, I play rugby tournos with my mate, on the same team, versus pumped up teams (S12 and world cups) - 80 created players poured into the opposition teams, triple stars etc etc...We play on a projector/screen and it can be tough and exciting...I've found the better you get at the game, the more fun it is woth challenging ai (i'e wingers with pace 100, agility 99 etc..)
Thus game gets set up for proper play much like PES with its name changing etc....(I am talking console versions here of course).
Once the limited use of grubbers, pre-passes, extremity tackle brush offs, and the odd fend...and yes, right analogue step of the fb mastered etc.....with a 2nd player controlling different lines and adding to the chance of a broken defensive line etc...it is a good game.
So maybe I wasn't being ironic after all. lol!
The game is cool for me.....could be much better...but could be a hell of a lot worse..I like it more than sjnrl and that was alright.
As I've said before, I think it is a set-up dependant game.....and maybe the game lacks options for a usa rugby fan...i.e. many of the leagies may be irrelevant. It is currently the best game/sim of rugby available and rugby is the national game, so for me it is a no-brainer.
Do you play as usa in the game?
U
USArugger
Guest
So it has to be an American thing....
I would say that "Irony" would be a very loose interpretation of the term. Sarcasm is more like it.
I play as different teams. There aren't a lot of good options for the USA except for RWC. How about a California team in the World League or something? What I try to do is put some US players on my WL team when I buy new players.
However, most of the time I like to do whatever is on TV at the time (Super 12/Lions tour) so I don't play with the USA as much as I would if, for example, I could make a Lions tour of US, Canada, Argentina or something. Or maybe create your own tour and I could be the USA and tour Canada, Argentina, and Japan or something.
I play quite a bit with Scotland. I had to win Tri-nations as every country.
I also don't have anyone to play against/with which makes it infinitely more boring. Nobody who lives close by likes it. When I do play, I am playing Georgia against All-Blacks or something just to have a decent game with someone who can't play.
When my brother visits (a couple times a year) we play cooperatively and it is quite a challenge.
The create player option is OK, but it just takes too much time and effort to try to create a whole side. A lot easier on other games. Can you just change the names of current players? I have not even tried that. That would make "creating" a team simpler.
Bottom line is that the game is second-rate. The best rugby game out there, but it is still second rate. If it takes so much effort to make the game playable, something is wrong.
I play as different teams. There aren't a lot of good options for the USA except for RWC. How about a California team in the World League or something? What I try to do is put some US players on my WL team when I buy new players.
However, most of the time I like to do whatever is on TV at the time (Super 12/Lions tour) so I don't play with the USA as much as I would if, for example, I could make a Lions tour of US, Canada, Argentina or something. Or maybe create your own tour and I could be the USA and tour Canada, Argentina, and Japan or something.
I play quite a bit with Scotland. I had to win Tri-nations as every country.
I also don't have anyone to play against/with which makes it infinitely more boring. Nobody who lives close by likes it. When I do play, I am playing Georgia against All-Blacks or something just to have a decent game with someone who can't play.
When my brother visits (a couple times a year) we play cooperatively and it is quite a challenge.
The create player option is OK, but it just takes too much time and effort to try to create a whole side. A lot easier on other games. Can you just change the names of current players? I have not even tried that. That would make "creating" a team simpler.
Bottom line is that the game is second-rate. The best rugby game out there, but it is still second rate. If it takes so much effort to make the game playable, something is wrong.
C
captainamerica
Guest
that's one of my big beefs with the game (and I do like the game, and still play it).
I'd like more of a challenge, and as Los attests - creating players with better stats adds to the game. BUT IT TAKES AGES.
I haven't created one player yet -- I get bored right after the eyebrow option. And the 4 body types just sucks.
E
esoj
Guest
sure is. makes a great coaster.
C
C A Iversen
Guest
Rugby 2005 neither sucks nor rules, its just the best ps2/xbox rugby game out there. It's great fun if your really into the sport which I am, so for me it's about 8.1/10 , but for the not so rabid rugby fan it's probably a mere 6.8/10.
Am I near to the truth?
Am I near to the truth?
C
Confused
Guest
Maybe it is because I am not a huge rugby fan. For the USA, I think I'm a pretty big fan. I stay up until 0400 to watch SUper 12 matches, I play rugby, and I really like the sport. However, if it is on at the same time as Gridiron or NASCAR, I am not watching it.
The game is OK. There are NSCAR games and Gridiron games that I don't necessarily like very much either. Rugby 2005 has limited continued playability. There are just not enough options.
A career mode would do wonders. If you could play SUper 12 year after year and keep on building your team by signing players or getting new guys it would be more fun for longer. WL is the closest thing, but it gets boring as soon as you have all the best players.
The game is OK. There are NSCAR games and Gridiron games that I don't necessarily like very much either. Rugby 2005 has limited continued playability. There are just not enough options.
A career mode would do wonders. If you could play SUper 12 year after year and keep on building your team by signing players or getting new guys it would be more fun for longer. WL is the closest thing, but it gets boring as soon as you have all the best players.
L
Los Lover
Guest
absolutely bang on.Originally posted by C A Iversen@Aug 23 2005, 02:45 PM
Rugby 2005 neither sucks nor rules, its just the best ps2/xbox rugby game out there. It's great fun if your really into the sport which I am, so for me it's about 8.1/10 , but for the not so rabid rugby fan it's probably a mere 6.8/10.
Am I near to the truth?
S
sambãd5
Guest
i keep thinking to myself, gezz it would be so awesome if there was massive indept stuff in the game, cool as rucks, npc, good as fends and side steps, good as graphics, it being the slightest bit of a challenge, and all these cool things that the game has the potential of having. but then i say, na the ability of ps2's or xboxes wont let this able to happen.
and then i look at madden.
if this game was supercharged, it would be one of the great games of all time. i dont know how ea sleep at night knowing that they made a potentially awsome game half assed
and then i look at madden.
if this game was supercharged, it would be one of the great games of all time. i dont know how ea sleep at night knowing that they made a potentially awsome game half assed
L
Los Lover
Guest
actually, and I am not being cheeky at all, just offering a philosophical viewpoint and trying to be logical here:Originally posted by USArugger@Aug 23 2005, 04:02 AM
So it has to be an American thing....I would say that "Irony" would be a very loose interpretation of the term. Sarcasm is more like it.
I play as different teams. There aren't a lot of good options for the USA except for RWC. How about a California team in the World League or something? What I try to do is put some US players on my WL team when I buy new players.
However, most of the time I like to do whatever is on TV at the time (Super 12/Lions tour) so I don't play with the USA as much as I would if, for example, I could make a Lions tour of US, Canada, Argentina or something. Or maybe create your own tour and I could be the USA and tour Canada, Argentina, and Japan or something.
I play quite a bit with Scotland. I had to win Tri-nations as every country.
I also don't have anyone to play against/with which makes it infinitely more boring. Nobody who lives close by likes it. When I do play, I am playing Georgia against All-Blacks or something just to have a decent game with someone who can't play.
When my brother visits (a couple times a year) we play cooperatively and it is quite a challenge.
The create player option is OK, but it just takes too much time and effort to try to create a whole side. A lot easier on other games. Can you just change the names of current players? I have not even tried that. That would make "creating" a team simpler.
Bottom line is that the game is second-rate. The best rugby game out there, but it is still second rate. If it takes so much effort to make the game playable, something is wrong.
- There are tips on doing the created players really fast (many I have made - do a search)
- It makes the game twice as good with the cpu able to score occasional long range tries etc and beat you 32-29 and other such scorelines...the game with 80 players created and pumped into the elite teams makes the game TWICE as good.
e.g Sivivatu (created) won the super 12 game for the chiefs against me the other night (I was hurricanes), when he broke the line (stepping out of a tackle) and then broke into an alarming speed before righr analogue steeping my fullback's CALM and measured tackle with superb timing and then running straight at pace for the corner.....I made it almost forty metres down field to catch him only to have him chuch an overhead ball to Randle on the cut, who dove it down betwwen the sticks...GAME OVER. When's the last time your normal teams did anything like that to you?
And yet, after all this, you say:
"The create player option is OK, but it just takes too much time and effort to try to create a whole side. A lot easier on other games. Can you just change the names of current players? I have not even tried that. That would make "creating" a team simpler.
Bottom line is that the game is second-rate. The best rugby game out there, but it is still second rate. If it takes so much effort to make the game playable, something is wrong.""
Dude....
You play all these games with a miserable time being had...probabaly all up for hours and hours and hours...and yet, after one hour's, maybe two most if you are co-ordinated enough, you could have had a great game all that time!!!! That is so unbelieveably ironic. There - there's your irony anyway.
You can slightly change the physical style of a player while KEEPINGALL THE STATS the same...overwrite a player who exists and then add him elsewhere with a sluightly different look...remeber they can look however really - it is for GAMEPLAY ffs!!
It doesn't take time and effort, it take about five minutes experimentation and nous and insight, and then you are away laughing and creating players at an alarming rate......if you play world cup...top up - England, NZ, OZ, SA, FRANCE (but don't change the team you play AS)...for super 12 (except your team if it is oneof these) you pump up Brumbies, Crusaders, Stormers, Bulls, Highlanders, Blues (but bench created playesr If I play WITH the blus who are my team obviously).
The game is the challenging.....yet, you will still beat weak opposition...LIKE real life. Players will pop balls on you (virtually), step, dominate, turn you, etc etc....it id tough.
here is an example of one of those teams so you get a feel for what I mean....the game gives unusual abilities to great playesr in the game that are almost uncreatable (this is a feel thing and cannot be explained sorry - I have played hundreds of games of it)...so leave these players in there.
Brumbies:
Young
Paul
Woodman (ENG)
Samo (created - massive, black, bad, quick as hell too)
Johnson (ENG)
Betsen (France)
Smith
Fava (created player - big. bad, will cut you in half)
Gregan ©
Larkham
Afoaminga (created player - all 90s and 100s etc)
Giteau
Mortlock
Freshoosi (18 year old all 100s flyer that will leave you in the dust if you end up on the back foot.
Gerrard (created - all high 80s and 90s)...try smoking him at the back easily.
EG - in our 2 player tournamant the other day my mate and I were 4 - ZIP with bonus points etc in S12 - and then lost three on the trot.
We also lost the final -
16-13 to the Crusaders....
who scored their match-winning try?
Created Tuiali'i went over the fullback and to the corner over thirty metres...ya know? Like real life......Like Rugby 2005.
2 hours of self-modding and hundreds of hours of mostly enjoyable gaming...compared to no effort and listless hours of boredom. Is it really even an option?
You have to make your game better if it is easily done...the gamehas created player. Therefore...the game is made to be that good, you just refuse to invest in it. I hopr you do - you might find the odd team gives you a spanking and rejuvanates your interest in the game.
C
captainamerica
Guest
Key phrase, Los, is time to invest versus time to play. And why didn't EA get the stats right in the first place? A question like that ****** me off.Originally posted by Los Lover@Aug 23 2005, 04:16 PM
actually, and I am not being cheeky at all, just offering a philosophical viewpoint and trying to be logical here:
- There are tips on doing the created players really fast (many I have made - do a search)
- It makes the game twice as good with the cpu able to score occasional long range tries etc and beat you 32-29 and other such scorelines...the game with 80 players created and pumped into the elite teams makes the game TWICE as good.
e.g Sivivatu (created) won the super 12 game for the chiefs against me the other night (I was hurricanes), when he broke the line (stepping out of a tackle) and then broke into an alarming speed before righr analogue steeping my fullback's CALM and measured tackle with superb timing and then running straight at pace for the corner.....I made it almost forty metres down field to catch him only to have him chuch an overhead ball to Randle on the cut, who dove it down betwwen the sticks...GAME OVER. When's the last time your normal teams did anything like that to you?
And yet, after all this, you say:
"The create player option is OK, but it just takes too much time and effort to try to create a whole side. A lot easier on other games. Can you just change the names of current players? I have not even tried that. That would make "creating" a team simpler.
Bottom line is that the game is second-rate. The best rugby game out there, but it is still second rate. If it takes so much effort to make the game playable, something is wrong.""
Dude....
You play all these games with a miserable time being had...probabaly all up for hours and hours and hours...and yet, after one hour's, maybe two most if you are co-ordinated enough, you could have had a great game all that time!!!! That is so unbelieveably ironic. There - there's your irony anyway.
You can slightly change the physical style of a player while KEEPINGALL THE STATS the same...overwrite a player who exists and then add him elsewhere with a sluightly different look...remeber they can look however really - it is for GAMEPLAY ffs!!Please see what I am saying here.
It doesn't take time and effort, it take about five minutes experimentation and nous and insight, and then you are away laughing and creating players at an alarming rate......if you play world cup...top up - England, NZ, OZ, SA, FRANCE (but don't change the team you play AS)...for super 12 (except your team if it is oneof these) you pump up Brumbies, Crusaders, Stormers, Bulls, Highlanders, Blues (but bench created playesr If I play WITH the blus who are my team obviously).
The game is the challenging.....yet, you will still beat weak opposition...LIKE real life. Players will pop balls on you (virtually), step, dominate, turn you, etc etc....it id tough.
here is an example of one of those teams so you get a feel for what I mean....the game gives unusual abilities to great playesr in the game that are almost uncreatable (this is a feel thing and cannot be explained sorry - I have played hundreds of games of it)...so leave these players in there.
Brumbies:
Young
Paul
Woodman (ENG)
Samo (created - massive, black, bad, quick as hell too)
Johnson (ENG)
Betsen (France)
Smith
Fava (created player - big. bad, will cut you in half)
Gregan ©
Larkham
Afoaminga (created player - all 90s and 100s etc)
Giteau
Mortlock
Freshoosi (18 year old all 100s flyer that will leave you in the dust if you end up on the back foot.
Gerrard (created - all high 80s and 90s)...try smoking him at the back easily.
EG - in our 2 player tournamant the other day my mate and I were 4 - ZIP with bonus points etc in S12 - and then lost three on the trot.
We also lost the final -
16-13 to the Crusaders....
who scored their match-winning try?
Created Tuiali'i went over the fullback and to the corner over thirty metres...ya know? Like real life......Like Rugby 2005.
2 hours of self-modding and hundreds of hours of mostly enjoyable gaming...compared to no effort and listless hours of boredom. Is it really even an option?
You have to make your game better if it is easily done...the gamehas created player. Therefore...the game is made to be that good, you just refuse to invest in it. I hopr you do - you might find the odd team gives you a spanking and rejuvanates your interest in the game.
I know for certain I can make the game way more of a challenge, and I very well might attempt again to start changing stats, but, dude my head hurts thinking about it.
And Confused:
I'd rather watch Test Rugby than anything. Unless it's the Rams in the playoffs or superbowl (then I'll watch Rugby in the commercial breaks).
This fall, with the fall tests and the football season potentially coinciding, if the rugby is on anywhere and it's free (I have no cable), then I'm there and watching.
That you'd rather watch NASCAR though blows my mind, but I'll chalk it up to different tastes. Severely different tastes.
