Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ak47" data-source="post: 49337">to be honost with all the 1st RC2006 threads saying it was gods gift blah blah, was prolly over the topit is good, but not groundbreaking..............its better than EA05, so at the time of locks n co&#039;s playtime it was the best.although i gotto admit, i have only had 1 nights playthis means the followingit could get amazingly better as i walk the learning curveit could get shickoingly worse as i wlak the learning curvewhat i do know and will confirm, the rucks/mauls are the best since rugby2001, or JLRthe kicking game is the bestthe fake player names are the worst implemented in any unliscenced game.....my take is UBISOFT had alot more red-tape procedures, and didnt want them to go near the line, with likensss and similar names.........otherwsie its UBISOFT v EA in court, which would be a heavyweight ***le fight within the legal system.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ak47, post: 49337"] to be honost with all the 1st RC2006 threads saying it was gods gift blah blah, was prolly over the top it is good, but not groundbreaking..............its better than EA05, so at the time of locks n co's playtime it was the best. although i gotto admit, i have only had 1 nights play this means the following it could get amazingly better as i walk the learning curve it could get shickoingly worse as i wlak the learning curve what i do know and will confirm, the rucks/mauls are the best since rugby2001, or JLR the kicking game is the best the fake player names are the worst implemented in any unliscenced game..... my take is UBISOFT had alot more red-tape procedures, and didnt want them to go near the line, with likensss and similar names.........otherwsie its UBISOFT v EA in court, which would be a heavyweight ***le fight within the legal system. [/QUOTE]

Verification