Jonah's

[sanzar]

Originally posted by knowsleyroader+Jan 1 2006, 07:52 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (knowsleyroader @ Jan 1 2006, 07:52 PM)</div>

Originally posted by sanzar@Jan 1 2006, 12:34 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-C A Iversen

@Jan 1 2006, 02:56 AM
Now Sanzar! Surely you mean a two thirds finished game.

It was sub-par, not shite. 

Well yeah, maybe two thirds finished... I mean, they did have the basics of a good game in there, but the lack of offloads in the game, the lack of control over players (or rather constantly interupted control), the useless nature of steps and palms, the ineffective nature of any kicks when anywhere near a defending player, the inability to alter stadium conditions, the lack of any option to play as the host nation on the Lions tour as well as other things really turned me off this game...

2005 goes down as a crying shame in my book as the engine was fantastic. I remember when I first played it and the tackling was just WOW ! As far as rugby games go it was the only one that made my jaw drop. Although after extended play there were some faults that ruined what could have been an amazing game. [/b]

Yeah, that pretty much sums up how I feel as well to be honest. I was absolutely blown away by the game at first, but the more you play, the more flaws became apparent and the AI was just so easy! Seriously, it was so hard not to exploit the 2nd five gap... and I just got tired of scoring the EXACT same try over and over... you can't chip, grubber, cross kick or anything of the sort under the slightest bit of pressure, and IF you managed to get a grubber away the ball physics would often send it off in some bizaar direction!
But I agree the engine is otherwise good... they just need to completely scrap the way the animations work, because the way it is in 2005 you only control you player for half the game, the rest of the time they are automatically playing out tackles, kicks rucks etc..

 

[locksley]

Originally posted by sanzar@Jan 1 2006, 11:59 PM
But I agree the engine is otherwise good... they just need to completely scrap the way the animations work, because the way it is in 2005 you only control you player for half the game, the rest of the time they are automatically playing out tackles, kicks rucks etc..

I'd agree with that. But I find it ironic that you've brought up that issue about Rugby 2005, when you love RL2, and you have nowhere near as much control over the player on that game as you do in Rugby 2005.

 

[sanzar]

Originally posted by locksley+Jan 1 2006, 11:22 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locksley @ Jan 1 2006, 11:22 PM)</div>

<!--QuoteBegin-sanzar

@Jan 1 2006, 11:59 PM


But I agree the engine is otherwise good... they just need to completely scrap the way the animations work, because the way it is in 2005 you only control you player for half the game, the rest of the time they are automatically playing out tackles, kicks rucks etc..

I'd agree with that. But I find it ironic that you've brought up that issue about Rugby 2005, when you love RL2, and you have nowhere near as much control over the player on that game as you do in Rugby 2005. [/b]

I love RL2, but I do take issue with control in that as well, but that said it's different to the problem in Rugby 2005 though... in RL2 control is stiff and needs to be more fluid, but you are moving the player most of the time yourself nevertheless despite the fight against momentum. In Rugby 2005 however, you lose control COMPLETELY and have to sit there and watch while the computer completes the animations, and it happens ALL the time!

 

[locksley]

Originally posted by sanzar+Jan 2 2006, 01:00 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (sanzar @ Jan 2 2006, 01:00 AM)</div>

Originally posted by locksley@Jan 1 2006, 11:22 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-sanzar

@Jan 1 2006, 11:59 PM


But I agree the engine is otherwise good... they just need to completely scrap the way the animations work, because the way it is in 2005 you only control you player for half the game, the rest of the time they are automatically playing out tackles, kicks rucks etc..

I'd agree with that. But I find it ironic that you've brought up that issue about Rugby 2005, when you love RL2, and you have nowhere near as much control over the player on that game as you do in Rugby 2005.

I love RL2, but I do take issue with control in that as well, but that said it's different to the problem in Rugby 2005 though... in RL2 control is stiff and needs to be more fluid, but you are moving the player most of the time yourself nevertheless despite the fight against momentum. In Rugby 2005 however, you lose control COMPLETELY and have to sit there and watch while the computer completes the animations, and it happens ALL the time! [/b]

Just out of interest, what do you think of Rugby 2005 control wise when you have the ball in hand and just run with it?

 

[sanzar]

Originally posted by locksley+Jan 2 2006, 09:45 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locksley @ Jan 2 2006, 09:45 AM)</div>

Originally posted by sanzar@Jan 2 2006, 01:00 AM

Originally posted by locksley@Jan 1 2006, 11:22 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-sanzar

@Jan 1 2006, 11:59 PM


But I agree the engine is otherwise good... they just need to completely scrap the way the animations work, because the way it is in 2005 you only control you player for half the game, the rest of the time they are automatically playing out tackles, kicks rucks etc..

I'd agree with that. But I find it ironic that you've brought up that issue about Rugby 2005, when you love RL2, and you have nowhere near as much control over the player on that game as you do in Rugby 2005.

I love RL2, but I do take issue with control in that as well, but that said it's different to the problem in Rugby 2005 though... in RL2 control is stiff and needs to be more fluid, but you are moving the player most of the time yourself nevertheless despite the fight against momentum. In Rugby 2005 however, you lose control COMPLETELY and have to sit there and watch while the computer completes the animations, and it happens ALL the time!

Just out of interest, what do you think of Rugby 2005 control wise when you have the ball in hand and just run with it? [/b]

I think it's fantastic! But that's the problem, you have this great fluid control over the ball carrier, then all of a sudden you get near a defending player and well before you've even reached him you lose control, or you try and do a grubber on the fly and you're player suddenly loses all momentum and takes 10 seconds to finish the kick, in which time he is usually smashed! It's so irritating it's maddening!
All you can really do in Rugby 2005 is run and pass... you can punt if you want to, but you can't really step, palm, chip, grubber or anything, so all your tries end up with you getting the ball to your fastes player...
That's why I agree with knowsley that the game is a crying shame, because they weren't far off, but faults they had in the game when it was released were so annoying it became unplayable for me.

 

[blaze]

btw guys, I know that swordfish were the ones involved with Jonah's but you can't call WCR an updated Jonah Lomu's Rugby.

Thanks to the guys that explained about why they just can't use the same engine from Jonah's due to the change in platform.

Hopefully Rugby Challenge lives up to the hype.

 

[locksley]

Originally posted by sanzar+Jan 2 2006, 10:52 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (sanzar @ Jan 2 2006, 10:52 AM)</div>

Originally posted by locksley@Jan 2 2006, 09:45 AM

Originally posted by sanzar@Jan 2 2006, 01:00 AM

Originally posted by locksley@Jan 1 2006, 11:22 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-sanzar

@Jan 1 2006, 11:59 PM


But I agree the engine is otherwise good... they just need to completely scrap the way the animations work, because the way it is in 2005 you only control you player for half the game, the rest of the time they are automatically playing out tackles, kicks rucks etc..

I'd agree with that. But I find it ironic that you've brought up that issue about Rugby 2005, when you love RL2, and you have nowhere near as much control over the player on that game as you do in Rugby 2005.

I love RL2, but I do take issue with control in that as well, but that said it's different to the problem in Rugby 2005 though... in RL2 control is stiff and needs to be more fluid, but you are moving the player most of the time yourself nevertheless despite the fight against momentum. In Rugby 2005 however, you lose control COMPLETELY and have to sit there and watch while the computer completes the animations, and it happens ALL the time!

Just out of interest, what do you think of Rugby 2005 control wise when you have the ball in hand and just run with it?

I think it's fantastic! But that's the problem, you have this great fluid control over the ball carrier, then all of a sudden you get near a defending player and well before you've even reached him you lose control, or you try and do a grubber on the fly and you're player suddenly loses all momentum and takes 10 seconds to finish the kick, in which time he is usually smashed! It's so irritating it's maddening!
All you can really do in Rugby 2005 is run and pass... you can punt if you want to, but you can't really step, palm, chip, grubber or anything, so all your tries end up with you getting the ball to your fastes player...
That's why I agree with knowsley that the game is a crying shame, because they weren't far off, but faults they had in the game when it was released were so annoying it became unplayable for me. [/b]

Well I reckon, if you kept RL2 the way it was, and added Rugby 2005's ball carrier control and defending to it, then the game would be 100% better!

 

[Mr. Laxative]

You know I'd have to agree with that... I mean it isn't uncommon to disagree with you though....





Father....

 

[sanzar]

Originally posted by locksley+Jan 2 2006, 10:23 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locksley @ Jan 2 2006, 10:23 AM)</div>

Originally posted by sanzar@Jan 2 2006, 10:52 AM

Originally posted by locksley@Jan 2 2006, 09:45 AM

Originally posted by sanzar@Jan 2 2006, 01:00 AM

Originally posted by locksley@Jan 1 2006, 11:22 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-sanzar

@Jan 1 2006, 11:59 PM


But I agree the engine is otherwise good... they just need to completely scrap the way the animations work, because the way it is in 2005 you only control you player for half the game, the rest of the time they are automatically playing out tackles, kicks rucks etc..

I'd agree with that. But I find it ironic that you've brought up that issue about Rugby 2005, when you love RL2, and you have nowhere near as much control over the player on that game as you do in Rugby 2005.

I love RL2, but I do take issue with control in that as well, but that said it's different to the problem in Rugby 2005 though... in RL2 control is stiff and needs to be more fluid, but you are moving the player most of the time yourself nevertheless despite the fight against momentum. In Rugby 2005 however, you lose control COMPLETELY and have to sit there and watch while the computer completes the animations, and it happens ALL the time!

Just out of interest, what do you think of Rugby 2005 control wise when you have the ball in hand and just run with it?

I think it's fantastic! But that's the problem, you have this great fluid control over the ball carrier, then all of a sudden you get near a defending player and well before you've even reached him you lose control, or you try and do a grubber on the fly and you're player suddenly loses all momentum and takes 10 seconds to finish the kick, in which time he is usually smashed! It's so irritating it's maddening!
All you can really do in Rugby 2005 is run and pass... you can punt if you want to, but you can't really step, palm, chip, grubber or anything, so all your tries end up with you getting the ball to your fastes player...
That's why I agree with knowsley that the game is a crying shame, because they weren't far off, but faults they had in the game when it was released were so annoying it became unplayable for me.

Well I reckon, if you kept RL2 the way it was, and added Rugby 2005's ball carrier control and defending to it, then the game would be 100% better! [/b]

That would be ideal yes, the tackles were much more realistic in Rugby 2005, but they needed to make it so the animations only interupted control after contact, not before... hopefully the addition of offloads in 06 will fix this, I don't know about the kicking though.

 

[CeeJay]

I think that sums it up quite well sanzar, at least in RL2 you can step and fend and grubber and they work at least some of the time. How many times did you try a grubber in rugby 2005 only to be clobbered from behind abd drop the ball!

WTF with the dummies in RL2 though?? they had them perfect in RL1 (the only rugby game to imlement them well imo.) and now theyre screwed.

 

[knowsleyroader]

Originally posted by CeeJay@Jan 2 2006, 04:40 PM
I think that sums it up quite well sanzar, at least in RL2 you can step and fend and grubber and they work at least some of the time. How many times did you try a grubber in rugby 2005 only to be clobbered from behind abd drop the ball!

WTF with the dummies in RL2 though?? they had them perfect in RL1 (the only rugby game to imlement them well imo.) and now theyre screwed.

I wouldnt say they were well implemented in RL1, but they did work. The fact that the defender did a little jig on the spot and you ran through him says to me the implementation wasnt spot on

Also with the kicking, why did they put a lead weight in the ball for RL2 ?

With regards to 2005 control on RL2. If only.

The only thing that worries me about 2006 still is the kicking as I thought it was sure to be fixed in 2005 but it wasnt. Surely they have sorted the animations out, but if they dont read the feedback maybe they didnt see it as a problem ?

Gulp !

 

[C A Iversen]

Kicking only needs two things fixed mainly. Distance and a faster animation. Even if the speed of it looks slightly too fast. Just as long as a defender doesn't stop it most of the time.

Anyway, back on topic. Has anyone out there thought of modding the PC Jonahs a little? I'd be more than keen to play a version with new squads and the british lions in the selectable teams. Maybe new signs at the grounds and renamed grounds.

The more I think of a modded Jonahs, the more I think they should do a 10 year re-release of it with subtle improvements. I know people keep saying RC2006 is it, but there's nothing in this world like being SURE.

 

[mikmo]

Yeah I gotta agree C A, if they re-released Lomu with updated names, squads etc I would 100% buy it... even if it was £20! They could make an absolute killing, and I guess 10 year anniversary would be great time to do it.

If they don't do that, why not just make the code open-source as you say and the geeks will sort out the rest for us!

Mike

 

[Saint N Sinner]

Kinda off topic but I noticed today in Gamestation that Jonah Lomu Rugby was available on Sega Saturn for £1.99. I didn't even know it was available on the Saturn.

 

[Coco]

Excuse me for showing my age (being young that is) but what is a Sega Saturn? Is it some kind of pre-me gaming system?

Coco

 

[Saint N Sinner]

It was released not long after PS1 I believe.

It was good in its time, but it is extremely out dated and has hardly any classic's to carry on with, apart from Sega Rally 2 maybe.

 

[SaintsFan_Webby]

Originally posted by Air Ben@Jan 2 2006, 06:25 PM
It was good in its time

It was crap. Wasn't much of a step up from a Megadrive, and I'd much rather have played Golden Axe, Streets of Rage etc, than any of the second rate **** that got churned out for the Saturn.

 

[knowsleyroader]

Sega Rally on the Saturn was class. Reaaaaaly good !

 

[Bullitt]

Basic stuff about the Saturn

1. The Saturn was out nearly a year longer than the PS1 (1994 release)

2. It was the original platform for Sega Rally, Tomb Raider, Street fighter Alpha and a f*** load of other classics.

3. It wasn't a **** system, but it was technically inferior to the PS1 as it had the same Dual Processor technology as the PS2, thus it underperformed and was an absoloute dog to programme for. Because it was designed for sprite scalling rather than 3D models, only 1 Hitatchi 32-bit SH-2 (28.6MHz) RISC prosessor was originally designed. Once the PSX specs came out, Sega paniced and put in a second chip and had to hope for the best. This ment there has never been another console capible of the 2D visuals like the Saturn (well, until the PS2 and Xbox came along and were 60 odd times as powerful) so many Street Fighter fans bought and chipped their fans for the millions of versions that came out (including myself). Unfortunately, 90% games developers are lazy so they didn't bother to make the effort when it comes to 3D games, Psygnosis (of Wipeout fame) being the worst, most claming the saturn couldn't handle transparent polygons or reduce onscreen pop-up. Talented developers proved them wrong; people such as Travellers Tales with "Sonic R".

4. People didn't buy it because all 'da kidz in da hood' used to only buy anything with a sony badge on it, so that affected the sales charts. The more Sony sold, the more people bought. Basically, the Saturn failed because it wasn't the Burberry of video gaming like the PS1 was.

5. I think JLR appeared on the Saturn first.

 

[Trev@Swordfish]

Originally posted by Air Ben@Jan 3 2006, 05:25 AM
It was released not long after PS1 I believe.

We wrote JLR for PS1, Saturn and PC - as far as I remember they were all released at the same time.

I might be wrong though ... wouldn't be the first time.