Scope for a league game

[Monkey]

I was just playin the league game and i thought, i dont know how accurately u can recreate rugby league in a comp game. i know we all want a sequel (and no doubt there will be), but how can we make it better. i dont mean features, teams, graphics etc. i mean more realistic. the breaks seem to happen too much. i dont think theres enough difference in the stats either. me mate commented that the game was to fast and i do still think it is. i think arl 96 was pretty much perfect for speed, gave u time to see where u wanted to put a kick (before u go into matrix mode). just a few idea's. i want it to feel like a real match (like PES3, sorry to bring it up again).

 

[The Engineers Room]

Definately slow down the game more when kicking. Being able to really place kicks.

 

[Weasels Ripped My Flesh]

yeah, there needs to be a way so you can pass to your kicker and fullback more easily, and have the kicker possitioned better for the 4th and 5th tackles - it sucks to have your halfback catch the ball on the 5th but he's allready started running at the opposition and by the time you get matrix mode on he's dead. :?

 

[Dragon]

Personally i think the main problem is the passing system. Its pretty shocking. You cant really string a backine move together, with different angled runners. The ball ends up going about 10 mtres backwards most of the time, and players dont really run onto the ball execpt from a pass from dummy half.

Its quite hard to complete a set of six. If sidhe can get the basics right, and i mean the basics, then all will be well. You have to look at what rugby league is as a game. Its about completing your set, booting the ball, and defending like hell to force an error. In this game, you cant really build any momentum. Leave the fancy stuff till last, get the poassing and kicking engines right and you have a great game. Offloads should be tweaked, and thats about it.

Anyway... just my thoughts, im sure sidhe have taken all this into account.

 

[KimmorleyKiller]

i think u should be able 2 have set moves like inside balls and such and flick passes in normal play. i think 2 build up the atmosphere there should be team songs when u run on 2 the field and and croud chants and stuff

 

[Monkey]

fair point KK, but all that is extra stuff, i'm talking about the basics, realistic sets of six, without scoring. repeat sets. driving with players hangin off you then stopping, simple stuff like that.

 

[Erhan]

Monkey, what your saying has validity, but not everyone wants to play that tactical. It won't appeal to everyone and isn't viable. Also, to have realistics sets, fewer breaks and all that stuff you would need to play an 80 min game to get a proper result as a quick 10 min game would hardly see any points scored. Your evaluation on the passing is spot on though. I just can't get used to it, I'll go as far stating that it's the WORST out of ET's Rugby & ARL 96. Even though this is the case, it's other features make up for it and is still perhaps the most enjoyable out of the three. Things such as backline moves, players in their correct positions are a MUST (I'm sick of seeing Mark O'mealy charging down the sideline & Luke Patten as my dummy half). Flick passes and special moves would add quite a nice touch aswell.

 

[Fairleigh Good!]

I was just playin the league game and i thought, i dont know how accurately u can recreate rugby league in a comp game. i know we all want a sequel (and no doubt there will be), but how can we make it better. i dont mean features, teams, graphics etc. i mean more realistic. the breaks seem to happen too much. i dont think theres enough difference in the stats either. me mate commented that the game was to fast and i do still think it is. i think arl 96 was pretty much perfect for speed, gave u time to see where u wanted to put a kick (before u go into matrix mode). just a few idea's. i want it to feel like a real match (like PES3, sorry to bring it up again).

Of course they do! It is because it is a game, hence you play either 5, 10 or 20 minutes per match. If they had the correct number of breaks in those time frames you would all be on here moaning about how impossible it would be to make a break.

The panning you people are giving the game is ridiculous and largely incorrect. The game on the whole is excellent, sure you can pick faults with it but you can with EVERY other game that comes out. The first release of Pro Evolution Soccer was pretty woeful too. In that game simply changing direction was impossible as the momentum of the players was totally exagerrated meaning nimble players had the turning curve of a Boeing 747! Even when they did turn round they paused for a few seconds just to frustrate you even more!

Another point is that playing Pro Evo is still NOTHING like football. It doesn't feel like football or look like football. Sure it gets better with every release but its still not even close.

You lot should be supporting the game, criticising it constructively rather than moaning about how bad you think it is. The comments about the passing too are laughable, I have no problem at all in passing it along the line and creating realistic looking moves. I have even started to re-create memorable tries from the past. The controls in the game are fantastic.

I bet you are like my kid brother who simply picks it up from dummy half and bombs it sidewards across the pitch at full speed then flings a pass out when you run out of pitch! :lol:

 

[Goleel]

I found on legend that the game is a bit of a grind, but then you get crap penalties for offside or your AI teammates making high tackles and blowing it all. But using my patch (plug plug), with Parra I still haven't beaten the Roosters on legend, those games become real field position battles, same against one of my mates, we play Tigers vs Eels, in two 20 minute games the final score was 1-0 and 2-2 after full time, the first try was finally scored in the 5th minute of golden point in the second game, so I think we could easily go an 80 minute game with a realistic result. By the same token I can play a 20 minute game with those same teams against the AI and win 40-10 or something similar, so its the best of both worlds. The balance of this game is pretty decent, it just needs some of the flaws fixed and some of the systems fine tuned, such as player positioning, passing and kicking.

 

[PARRA_FAN]

For some reason I cant seem to kick a field goal, I get into a good positon, put a kick over the posts, but nothing happens, it goes dead and its a 20m tap to the opposition.

How do you kick a bloody field goal.

 

[Alan]

For some reason I cant seem to kick a field goal, I get into a good positon, put a kick over the posts, but nothing happens, it goes dead and its a 20m tap to the opposition.

How do you kick a bloody field goal.

You have to do a drop-kick; it's not just a matter of kicking it between the posts. Your game manual clearly explains the controls for this, which vary depending on the platform you use (PC, PS2 or Xbox).

 

[PARRA_FAN]

Thats the kick Ive been using to kick a field goal

 

[Le Rouge]

Thats the kick Ive been using to kick a field goal

You gotta do it fastand as soon as you pass from Dummy Half, and make sure that the player kicking is facing straight before he kicks.

If you hold onto the matrix button too long the player keeps moving off target.

and if you get good at it 40m out is no prob witha a good kicker. and make sure to factor wind into the kicking accuracy ;-)

 

[Dragon]

The first release of Pro Evolution Soccer was pretty woeful too. In that game simply changing direction was impossible as the momentum of the players was totally exagerrated meaning nimble players had the turning curve of a Boeing 747! Even when they did turn round they paused for a few seconds just to frustrate you even more!

Another point is that playing Pro Evo is still NOTHING like football. It doesn't feel like football or look like football. Sure it gets better with every release but its still not even close.

Shoot yourself mate...... you really have no clue do you?

 

[Monkey]

well said dragon.

few points for sh!t helens fan fairleigh good:

1)PES3 is the yardstick by which all sdports games are measured.
2) I am supporting the game, i bought it and i've made 150 or so posts about good and bad things with the game.
3) Your a skints fan so your opinion means fk all.

 

[Fairleigh Good!]

The first release of Pro Evolution Soccer was pretty woeful too. In that game simply changing direction was impossible as the momentum of the players was totally exagerrated meaning nimble players had the turning curve of a Boeing 747! Even when they did turn round they paused for a few seconds just to frustrate you even more!

Another point is that playing Pro Evo is still NOTHING like football. It doesn't feel like football or look like football. Sure it gets better with every release but its still not even close.

Shoot yourself mate...... you really have no clue do you?

Go and get a copy of Pro Evo 1 and try to change direction, its laughably uncontrollable. Sure they have fixed that now, but it still isn't a good reflection of the sport.

 

[ak47]

Go and get a copy of Pro Evo 1 and try to change direction, its laughably uncontrollable. Sure they have fixed that now, but it still isn't a good reflection of the sport.[/quote]\

was the best reflection of soccer in the market back then
nothing was better, so its the #1, the best, the closest you'll get

2 editions later and still leap years in front.

nothing is really close to the reflection of its sport on the first release.
TWPGA2001
Madden 2000
the list goes on
when u look the those titles and compare them to 2004's release, u know how much has changed and how realistic they are now.

 

[Dragon]

Go and get a copy of Pro Evo 1 and try to change direction, its laughably uncontrollable. Sure they have fixed that now, but it still isn't a good reflection of the sport.

Hmmmm, i own PES1 and 3, and i can change player direction to a tea. You just have to come to grip with the physics of the game, which are VERY realitsic.

 

[sunny]

The first Madden was actually Madden '89, which came out on whatever gaming systems were around in 1988. I've never played that version of madden so I cant comment on whether it was or wasn't good, but this rugby league game is about a level with madden 98 or maybe madden 2000 at a stretch (the anomaly in comparison here being that madden 99 was an unmitigated disasater). Still, that is four full years behind. People have come out and made excuses for the manufacturers (it was their first effort, lack of money etc.) but if that is the case, why are they charging a similar price to madden 2004 for their game? That's like charging the same price for a ford laser as you would for a mercedes! Plus the amount of bugs are absolutely inexcusable for any game, or that matter, almost any consumer product. You surely cannot tell me that you would accept a car, or a toaster, or Tv set, or anything that you bought with that many faults!

 

[The Engineers Room]

The first Madden was actually Madden '89, which came out on whatever gaming systems were around in 1988. I've never played that version of madden so I cant comment on whether it was or wasn't good, but this rugby league game is about a level with madden 98 or maybe madden 2000 at a stretch (the anomaly in comparison here being that madden 99 was an unmitigated disasater). Still, that is four full years behind. People have come out and made excuses for the manufacturers (it was their first effort, lack of money etc.) but if that is the case, why are they charging a similar price to madden 2004 for their game? That's like charging the same price for a ford laser as you would for a mercedes! Plus the amount of bugs are absolutely inexcusable for any game, or that matter, almost any consumer product. You surely cannot tell me that you would accept a car, or a toaster, or Tv set, or anything that you bought with that many faults!

I would if it was the only one in the market place and I hadn't seen one for 7 years. Desire is a great bargaining chip.