• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

my experience of Sideview

M

Mr. Laxative

Guest
Yeah it's alright. There are some problems like all views but it can work. Long kicks but the possibility of directing them correctly. Probs include inability to see fullback like side but if u use radar u'll soon get a fel for where fullback is so u wont need it. This angle is a lot like madden broadcast which i have a lot of difficulty with on this game I don't.
 
B

bushdoc

Guest
I just tried the broadcast view and it wasnt to bad, it made tackling easier but yeah its tricky to see ahead of yourself, as you say the radar might help.
 
M

Mr. Laxative

Guest
Does make a few things easier. I'm starting to use it more now, but in big matches like WC Final aginst teams such as England I swithc back to my favourite - Clasic 2.
 
M

Mr. Laxative

Guest
Just played Ten Nations Oz (me) .v. Wales at cardiff with broadcast. I won the game 53-10. Broadcast makes it easy to penetrate gaps.
 
M

Mr. Laxative

Guest
I don't use the offside line to show me if i'm offside or not, but because I am now stuck on Broadcast i use the line to tell which team has the ball. If I did not have this option I might not be on broadcast coz i want 2 know which team has ball at ruck otherwise things get confusing.
 
L

Los Lover

Guest
From just reading this entire thread - I see I was justified in my assertions about side view all along.

Silence to the cretenous fools who opposed me! And silence to the cretenous fools who still remain ignorant of feeling the angles and sensing the gaps...instead of having them signposting in painful slowmotion and gittery, creaky graphics on the classic views.....in this case, ignorance is not bliss.

Remember the force and ****? I guess what I'm saying (and I'm no fanatic about the series - I'm just making a point all can understand), is that Luke Skywalker would have been a good gamer - b/c you have to FEEL the force...

"Your eyes betray you....."

<
 
A

ak47

Guest
Originally posted by Los Lover@Mar 30 2005, 02:30 PM
From just reading this entire thread - I see I was justified in my assertions about side view all along.

Silence to the cretenous fools who opposed me! And silence to the cretenous fools who still remain ignorant of feeling the angles and sensing the gaps...instead of having them signposting in painful slowmotion and gittery, creaky graphics on the classic views.....in this case, ignorance is not bliss.

Remember the force and ****? I guess what I'm saying (and I'm no fanatic about the series - I'm just making a point all can understand), is that Luke Skywalker would have been a good gamer - b/c you have to FEEL the force...

"Your eyes betray you....."

<
good call los

looks like these punks are fed up with the cheap seats!

i havent even looked at the other camera angles
<
<
<


side view is the ONLY view for rugby/soccer games

using classic cam in rugby games is like using square leg cam in cricket hahahaha

u might aswell stick with the telecast u been watching for decades in real life
 
L

Los Lover

Guest
Wahoooooooooooooooo!! and that's the truth my man!! Good call too bro!

<


I feel like a drunk cowboy shooting up the bar and everyone knows I'm allowed to cos I'm a gunslinger and I'm friggin' armed with the truth...

wahoooooooooooooooooooooooo!!
side view! side view! side view!
<
 
S

sanzar

Guest
In all seriousness though, side view is useless and so is classic... All the camera angles in this game suck ass. Someone needs to send HB a copy of NRL so they can see how views are supposed to be done.
 
K

kinkon89

Guest
umm in rugby league their view was okay because the players were small

in rugby 2005 the players a life size and much realistic
 
S

sanzar

Guest
Originally posted by kinkon89@Mar 30 2005, 05:43 PM
umm in rugby league their view was okay because the players were small

in rugby 2005 the players a life size and much realistic
no, in NRL the view was closer to the ground and also at an angle that let you see further down the pitch... BTW, while the detail wasn't great, the players were to scale in NRL.
 
L

Los Lover

Guest
Originally posted by sanzar+Mar 30 2005, 06:55 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (sanzar @ Mar 30 2005, 06:55 PM)</div>
<!--QuoteBegin-kinkon89
@Mar 30 2005, 05:43 PM
umm in rugby league their view was okay because the players were small

in rugby 2005 the players a life size and much realistic
no, in NRL the view was closer to the ground and also at an angle that let you see further down the pitch... BTW, while the detail wasn't great, the players were to scale in NRL. [/b]
Um...dude.....the thread is called "my experience of SIDE-VIEW"......OK?

You are not talking about side-view which was basically exactly the same in side view but worse than Rugby 2005.....
You are discussing, by the sounds of it, an up and down view.....
<


Plse close the door on the way out.
 
S

sanzar

Guest
Originally posted by Los Lover+Mar 31 2005, 04:32 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Los Lover @ Mar 31 2005, 04:32 PM)</div>
Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2005, 06:55 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-kinkon89
@Mar 30 2005, 05:43 PM
umm in rugby league their view was okay because the players were small

in rugby 2005 the players a life size and much realistic

no, in NRL the view was closer to the ground and also at an angle that let you see further down the pitch... BTW, while the detail wasn't great, the players were to scale in NRL.
Um...dude.....the thread is called "my experience of SIDE-VIEW"......OK?

You are not talking about side-view which was basically exactly the same in side view but worse than Rugby 2005.....
You are discussing, by the sounds of it, an up and down view.....
<


Plse close the door on the way out. [/b]
Either one was different, the side view in NRL allowed you to everything and was also at a lower anlge aswell...
 

Latest posts

Top