And I thought rugby 2004 was bad...........

Discussion in 'Rugby Video Games & Apps' started by NZL Fan, May 28, 2004.

  1. NZL Fan

    NZL Fan Guest

    Hired WCR out last night and after 30 minutes I was disgusted by it - so much in fact that I reckon the hirage cost of $8NZL was too much!!

    Hate to say it (and I thought I never would) but RUGBY 2004 has more going for it then this poorly created piece of least that kept me amused for a few hours..........

    This game is obviously aimed at 5 - 8 year olds, and should come with the required warning.

    Don't get me wrong, I went into this knowing it was ARCADE based and with minimal expectations, but it didn't even meet these. Even so you'd expect a game with the word "rugby" in it to have at least some resemblance of the game. In fact if I got 30 frozen peas and rolled them along a table it would be more fun, and have more in common with the game of rugby.

    Where do I start with this dud. The camera angles all have major drawbacks in their use and make it so frustating to play. Half the time you have no idea where you are trying to land the ball when kicking because it is out of screen. Whats with the goal kicking camera??? Not having it behind the kicker (so you can tell where he is pointing it) is appalling!!

    The big tackle makes the game a farce (losing it everytime.........), as it is way too easy to do and really just encourages the player to not even bother with normal tackling. Button Bashing!!!!!!!!! (enough said). Lineouts are a lottery (tic tac toe is more involving). Animations!!!!!! Its like playing with the loony tunes characters!!, and whats with the breaks players make only to suddenly "reappear" back into the tacklers arms (who you beat to make the break in the first place). The referee animation especially makes me want to cringe.......

    Sound!! Where is it??? when you make a big run you could hear a pin drop, maybe the crowd were as bored as I was playing the game.

    Worst of all is the gameplay. Forwards have no real purpose in the game, and tactics involve throwing to the wingers (from side to side) until you eventually score. The old trick of denying the player any ball to make it harder on higher levels is also evident (yawn).

    In the end if RUGBY 2004 was a 3/10 then this has to be a 2/10. Both are complete rot with RUGBY 2004 scoring one better due to having the licenses.

    Who would be a rugby union video game player with this selection of tripe on the market?? [​IMG]
  2. Forum Ad Advertisement

  3. umosay

    umosay Guest

    a valid opinion, obviously not your kind of game
  4. -JJ-

    -JJ- Guest

    All I can suggest is play it more, and with friends. I remember one other person who had the first really negative review and then after several days turned around and thought it was not that bad.

    Big tackle does have its limitations, if you're playing multiplayer, and they have an agile fast player, and you try to use big tackle, they can run around it.
  5. robbinho

    robbinho Guest

    True there are some issues in the game, but to say it's worse than R2004 is pretty harsh, mate.

    At least in WCR you have some control over rucks and mauls, you areable to break tackles, and it generally, for me anyway, feels a lot more like a game of rugby that you have some control over.

    I'd agree with JJ, play it more with some mates, over a few beers, and it's a lot more enjoyable. If you all know that the big bosh is going to turn the ball over, it makes it more interesting as you find ways to avoid it, so when you do clean someone out, it's all the more satisfying.
  6. I third JJ's comment after u play it some more especilly with some mates the game becomes really awesome
  7. robbinho

    robbinho Guest

    There really is nothing better than watching your mate run from under his own posts, right the way to your line, about to score in the corner in the last seconds to win the game, and you absolutely smash him and hoof the ball into the second tier at Twickenham! You've never heard such a string of profanities. [​IMG]
  8. exactly thats why its a cool game to play
  9. sanzar

    sanzar Guest

    It really depends. I actually played Rugby 2004 more than I did WCR... not because WCR is ****, but because it's so incredibly limited! I know they were going for the arcade feel, but theres no depth whatsoever in WCR! And it also suffers from the same problem as all other rugby games (union that is), that being that as soon as you up the difficulty you have almost no chance of winning a ruck! That almost completely turned me off the game, because IMO thats just lazy programming.
    The only up side is it has a slick passing system and very continuous action. However, this is almost completely nullified by the fact that scrums and rucks are all based around button bashing... that, and the fact that in every lineout you have a one in 3 chance of losing every time regardless of whose throw it is...
    Rugby 2004, while it took forever to load and had very stagnant gameplay, actually gave you more of a feeling that you were playing "rugby". You had the option to callapse scrums, line outs were stolen on precision timing (instead of just pick the same spot as your mate to jump) and position, you had 7 different options of where to go off the ruck, you had set plays of srums and line outs and you could cheat in rucks................. unfortunately though the gameplay itself was so hard to control and slow that none of this made it the slightest bit fun to play.

    Rugby League I think deserves the title of best Rugby game to date, as it has that arcade feel, while being inovative and reasonably deep in what you can do in the game. Some of the gameplay mechanics may not be as slick as WCR (like passing), but overall it has alot more to offer and the tackling system is awsome! And most of all: It actually feels like the sport it's depicting!
  10. robbinho

    robbinho Guest

    You make a good point about R2004, it did have so many options that were really good ideas, like cheating in the rucks etc, but they were onlt great as ideas, becasue the rest of the gameplay was so poor, and positive effect was completely lost. I'm not a hugely serious gamer, so all i want is to be able to put a game on for 10 minutes, play a quick game and then do something else, which is probably why i see wcr as being a hell of a lot better than rugby '04.
  11. Nothing deserves to be compared to Rugby 2004!
  12. -JJ-

    -JJ- Guest

    That's exactly the same with me.

    If WCR had more game modes (including Super 12), and some more in depth gameplay, it would be great.
  13. NZL Fan

    NZL Fan Guest

    I think the key comment in all this is that this game is playable AGAINST YOUR MATES, but as a single player is a real dud..............

    To me a video game (unless otherwise labelled, ie. 'multiplayer only' etc) has to be a good single player first and foremost, and a good multiplayer second. Pro evolution 3 (I know that I do harp on about this game) is a superb single player, and an excellent multiplayer. SJRL is a solid single player and multiplayer with mates.

    Single play is where this game falls over very quickly, and if you compare single player rugby 2004 to WCR then I'd have to say that rugby 2004 is better (though still absolute crud).

    Because the developers have described this game as "arcade" doesn't mean it shouldn't resemble the sport it is representing - to me "arcade" can be used as a convenient excuse for shoddy programming, poor animations and crappy AI. SJRL is "arcade" but is 10 times better looking, and playable, then this effort............
  14. You have valid points. I must say that I'm also dissapointed with the game. After the long wait to finally get the game (in NZ) it's noway near as good as I have expected. There are so many BAD things with this game e.g.

    sprinting - how come players run out of gas after a 30-40m dash with a clear run to the line only to be caught from behind????????? I know it's Arcade, but this (amongst many other things) is ridiculous.

    tackling - this is ****. Firstly the big tackle ALWAYS has the same outcome - bad programming. Secondly, why is it that all (normal tackles) are chest-height rather than waist or leg height????? Unlike SJRL the tackling is not enjoyable.

    Camera Views - ahhhhhhhhh. What a nightmare - you can't see where your kicks go to (in general play). It's hard to see the oppositions fullback which hinders your ability to choose the line you run when you are on attack. Also, when kicking for goal it is so hard to know where you are aiming. Why the f*** is the camera not behind the goal kicker - stupidity.

    General Comments/ Complaints - NO OFFLOADING and NO TACKLE-BREAKING ABILITY - should BOTH be there, no questions - even Rugby 2004 had these. Commentry is dull and repetitive.

    But, on the POSITIVE side, the lineouts are great as is the passing. I also like the grubber kick and the try scoring animations especially when grounding the ball when sliding to catch a grubber.

    Overall I think the developers should have put more effort into this. I understand that the licences were out of the question, but the gameplay, while much better than Rugby 2004, is very shallow is gets very boring and repetitive quickly.
  15. rugby 2004 is much worse than wcr imho
  16. Wally

    Wally Guest

    I went on a Wallaby tour of America last night and all the games were played in the UK.
  17. hahahahhah...more stadia u suggest..
    does anyone remember jonah lomu rugby???its the greatest rugby game EVER....
    if u put aside the shocking graphics....and the limited game modes and options....the game play is sublime....and is easily the best multi-playing in rugby gaming
    i would buy a ps2 just to play lomu with faster loading times [​IMG]
  18. sanzar

    sanzar Guest

    JLR was a great game, but it's seriously romanticised by so many people... I wouldn't touch it nowadays because WCR does everything (almost) that JLR did and it's still not as good as NRL.
  19. agreed.sidhes first attempt at a video game was really good and next years release should be better much better
  20. Gay-Guy

    Gay-Guy Guest

    I thought WCR was bad for 3 weeks. Then I took the time to learn how to play it properly (especially against other mates). Despite its faults it is actually a very good game once you delve a bit deeper. It DOES have just have to learn how to create it (just like we did with JLR after people said it was shallow initially). Unlike R2004, SJRL, and R2001 you have more freedom of movement to create the game more depth. The other games make you look like you are stuck in a matrix, unable to do things that you can see would be possible normally.
  21. smith:""
Enjoyed this thread? Register to post your reply - click here!

Share This Page