Rugby...CHALLENGE??

[CeeJay]

For me RC dosent play like rugby, and R06 does IMO. Granted easy and pro are arnt much of a challenge, but elite is great, especially internationls. As long as each of us has a game of rugby that we are enjoying then it dosent matter which one, we wont change each others minds.

 

[sanzar]

Originally posted by thomashenry+Feb 23 2006, 08:14 PM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-sanzar

@Feb 23 2006, 10:12 AM
But hey, if you think that sevens is more fun than real rugby then be my guest.

No, I think real rugby is more fun than sevens. I also think that RC2006 is far better than R06.
[/b]

Yet RC06 is basically sevens...

If I were a reviewer in a mag, RC2006 would score 6/10, and R06 would score 3/10.[/b]

That's wonderfull, but can you actually give us balanced reviews of both detailing why? I have, but I seriously doubt you could with any shred of credibility... you're like knowsley when talking about RL2, so emotional that you simply cannot see the wood for the tree's.

P.S Don't you find it ironic that REAL game reviewers have given the games opposite scores to yours? OPSM in Australia gave RC 06 4/10 and gave Rugby 06 7/10 . I guess that's why they're paid to do it and you're not.

 

[thomashenry]

Yet RC06 is basically sevens...[/b]

RC2006 plays nothing like sevens. I don't know where you are getting that idea from. To me it suggests you have barely played RC2006. I would accept the suggestion that RC2006 plays a little bit like Rugby League. Not sevens though.

That's wonderfull, but can you actually give us balanced reviews of both detailing why? I have, but I seriously doubt you could with any shred of credibility... you're like knowsley when talking about RL2, so emotional that you simply cannot see the wood for the tree's.[/b]

I do not consider spending up to two hours writing detailed reviews of both games to be a good use of my free time. Therefore, I shall not do so. I've not been 'emotional' at all in my comments about the games - I think one is ok, and one is crap. If you think the saying a game is crap is 'emotional', then wait till you get a girlfriend on her period..

P.S Don't you find it ironic that REAL game reviewers have given the games opposite scores to yours? OPSM in Australia gave RC 06 4/10 and gave Rugby 06 7/10 . I guess that's why they're paid to do it and you're not.[/b]

'REAL' game reviewers are rarely fans of Rugby. 'REAL' game reviewers usually only play a game for a short amount of time before writing a review. 'REAL' game reviewers, more often that not, are not particularly good journalists. The reason I am not paid to be a games reviewer is that I have no interest in doing such a job - the money is absolutely terrible, and the career prospects appalling.

Magazine scores for Rugby games are all but meaningless. Any one person's opinion on here counts for more than a magazine score IMO.

 

[sanzar]

Originally posted by thomashenry@Feb 24 2006, 12:26 AM
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE

Yet RC06 is basically sevens...

RC2006 plays nothing like sevens. I don't know where you are getting that idea from. To me it suggests you have barely played RC2006. I would accept the suggestion that RC2006 plays a little bit like Rugby League. Not sevens though.
[/b][/quote]
I played it solidly for 3 weeks and all my success on it came from me just throwing the ball back and forth and never kicking it, so therefore it's like a game of sevens. It's rediculous, I'm able to have 80%+ possesion rating against the AB's on IC just by not kicking!

 

[thomashenry]

Originally posted by sanzar+Feb 24 2006, 01:35 AM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-thomashenry

@Feb 24 2006, 12:26 AM
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE

<div class='quotemain'>Yet RC06 is basically sevens...

RC2006 plays nothing like sevens. I don't know where you are getting that idea from. To me it suggests you have barely played RC2006. I would accept the suggestion that RC2006 plays a little bit like Rugby League. Not sevens though.
[/b][/quote]
I played it solidly for 3 weeks and all my success on it came from me just throwing the ball back and forth and never kicking it, so therefore it's like a game of sevens. It's rediculous, I'm able to have 80%+ possesion rating against the AB's on IC just by not kicking! [/b][/quote]
What can I say... when I play the game it doesn't play like that. Please don't get the idea I think RC2006 is full-on GOOD... I think its ok, nothing more. I just think R'06 is very poor.

As a two player game, Jonahs will never never be beaten!

 

[fhfanshaw]

Got RC2006 played it for a week (PS2). Was so unimpressed that I took it back and part exchanged it for EA06.

As far as I am concerned RC2006 was a waste of money.

 

[knowsleyroader]

Originally posted by sanzar+Feb 24 2006, 12:07 AM-->

Originally posted by thomashenry@Feb 23 2006, 08:14 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-sanzar

@Feb 23 2006, 10:12 AM
But hey, if you think that sevens is more fun than real rugby then be my guest.

No, I think real rugby is more fun than sevens. I also think that RC2006 is far better than R06.

Yet RC06 is basically sevens...

If I were a reviewer in a mag, RC2006 would score 6/10, and R06 would score 3/10.[/b]

That's wonderfull, but can you actually give us balanced reviews of both detailing why? I have, but I seriously doubt you could with any shred of credibility... you're like knowsley when talking about RL2, so emotional that you simply cannot see the wood for the tree's.

P.S Don't you find it ironic that REAL game reviewers have given the games opposite scores to yours? OPSM in Australia gave RC 06 4/10 and gave Rugby 06 7/10 . I guess that's why they're paid to do it and you're not. [/b]

What on earth are you talking about ? I stand by every comment I made about RL2. Emotion has nothing to do with it. IMO RL2 is a very poor game.

 

[thomashenry]

Originally posted by fhfanshaw@Mar 14 2006, 09:29 AM
Got RC2006 played it for a week (PS2). Was so unimpressed that I took it back and part exchanged it for EA06.

As far as I am concerned RC2006 was a waste of money.

Excactly what I tihnk about R06. Complete crap, and I was stupid enough to get a coffee stain on the manual, so I couldn't get a refund at GAME. :rahh: Now I'm stuck with it.

 

[sanzar]

Originally posted by knowsleyroader+Mar 16 2006, 02:20 AM-->

Originally posted by sanzar@Feb 24 2006, 12:07 AM

Originally posted by thomashenry@Feb 23 2006, 08:14 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-sanzar

@Feb 23 2006, 10:12 AM
But hey, if you think that sevens is more fun than real rugby then be my guest.

No, I think real rugby is more fun than sevens. I also think that RC2006 is far better than R06.

Yet RC06 is basically sevens...

If I were a reviewer in a mag, RC2006 would score 6/10, and R06 would score 3/10.

That's wonderfull, but can you actually give us balanced reviews of both detailing why? I have, but I seriously doubt you could with any shred of credibility... you're like knowsley when talking about RL2, so emotional that you simply cannot see the wood for the tree's.

P.S Don't you find it ironic that REAL game reviewers have given the games opposite scores to yours? OPSM in Australia gave RC 06 4/10 and gave Rugby 06 7/10 . I guess that's why they're paid to do it and you're not. [/b]

What on earth are you talking about ? I stand by every comment I made about RL2. Emotion has nothing to do with it. IMO RL2 is a very poor game. [/b]

Jeez this is a message out of the blue! Personally I don't like RL2 much anymore either to be honest, now that I have Rugby 06... but it was still the game I was playing in waiting for EA Rugby 06 after the waste of money that was RC06. Seriously, I find RL2 unplayable now, but I still enjoyed it a HECK of a lot more than the ridiculously easy RC. I seriously can't figure out how you guys rated that game so highly when it plays NOTHING like a real game of rugby?!?! I know you loathed league, but at least it resembled the real sport in parts! Personally I would have enjoyed RC06 more if they just went the whole hog and made it a 7's game... because that's how it plays anyway, why not free up more room and just make it into a fully fledged 7's sim? At least that way people like me who were expecting a RUGBY game wouldn't have had any illusions.

 

[ak47]

RC>RL2

RL2 is the worst of the bunch by a mile

whether it plays like its counterpart or not

RC was more fun to play

Like BLIC is more fun than anyother cricket game...........yet is far from a reflection of the sport.

I havent played any other sports game since EA06.......including PES...and i dont feel the need to........

 

[kaftka]

sanzar.... In my opinion Rugby 06 is waaaaay easier than RC2006. I'm finding myself making up a load of rules to stick by during matches now so that I don't whitewash the opposition....

 

[sanzar]

Originally posted by kaftka@Mar 16 2006, 11:01 AM
sanzar.... In my opinion Rugby 06 is waaaaay easier than RC2006. I'm finding myself making up a load of rules to stick by during matches now so that I don't whitewash the opposition....

Really? I kill the opposition when they're crap teams, but when I play big guns like the Crusaders, Brumbies etc (especially away) I have close encounters and also occasionally lose still! I have NEVER lost to the AI in RC 06... and I played it solidly trying to give it a chance like everyone said.
I don't know, maybe you're better at Rugby 06 than me, but in a 10 minute match in RC 06 on Intensive care I never put less than 30 points on even the best teams. In the last game of it I played I beat England 44-0...

 

[sanzar]

Originally posted by ak47@Mar 16 2006, 09:15 AM
RC>RL2

RL2 is the worst of the bunch by a mile

whether it plays like its counterpart or not

RC was more fun to play

Not for me it wasn't... I actually enjoyed RL2 more than RC despite it's weird mechanics. RC just really gave me the shits and I didn't enjoy it at all... maybe if they made a difficulty level above intensive care, fixed the player movement, tackling system, made the line outs have some sort of deapth (seriously I f***ing hate the line outs in RC! They're a total lottery!), gave you some options at the ruck base and scrum, fixed the rucks etc, then maybe it would have been fun for me...

 

[Inertia]

hehe, i wish people would stop saying the lineouts in RC are a lottery....they are not random at all, it's completely fixed and more often than not the opposition will steal your ball if you play on IC and against a better team. That's not a lottery, the AI purposefully doesn't make it's decision until you have. If it was a lottery you'd at least have a chance of winning 50/50 but it doesn't matter what position you throw the ball or how you "randomise" your throw, if the AI wants it, it gets it. I do agree that the lineouts suck big time though.

 

[knowsleyroader]

Originally posted by sanzar+Mar 16 2006, 09:58 AM-->

Originally posted by knowsleyroader@Mar 16 2006, 02:20 AM

Originally posted by sanzar@Feb 24 2006, 12:07 AM

Originally posted by thomashenry@Feb 23 2006, 08:14 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-sanzar

@Feb 23 2006, 10:12 AM
But hey, if you think that sevens is more fun than real rugby then be my guest.

No, I think real rugby is more fun than sevens. I also think that RC2006 is far better than R06.

Yet RC06 is basically sevens...

If I were a reviewer in a mag, RC2006 would score 6/10, and R06 would score 3/10.

That's wonderfull, but can you actually give us balanced reviews of both detailing why? I have, but I seriously doubt you could with any shred of credibility... you're like knowsley when talking about RL2, so emotional that you simply cannot see the wood for the tree's.

P.S Don't you find it ironic that REAL game reviewers have given the games opposite scores to yours? OPSM in Australia gave RC 06 4/10 and gave Rugby 06 7/10 . I guess that's why they're paid to do it and you're not.

What on earth are you talking about ? I stand by every comment I made about RL2. Emotion has nothing to do with it. IMO RL2 is a very poor game. [/b]

Jeez this is a message out of the blue! Personally I don't like RL2 much anymore either to be honest, now that I have Rugby 06... but it was still the game I was playing in waiting for EA Rugby 06 after the waste of money that was RC06. Seriously, I find RL2 unplayable now, but I still enjoyed it a HECK of a lot more than the ridiculously easy RC. I seriously can't figure out how you guys rated that game so highly when it plays NOTHING like a real game of rugby?!?! I know you loathed league, but at least it resembled the real sport in parts! Personally I would have enjoyed RC06 more if they just went the whole hog and made it a 7's game... because that's how it plays anyway, why not free up more room and just make it into a fully fledged 7's sim? At least that way people like me who were expecting a RUGBY game wouldn't have had any illusions. [/b]

IMO RL2 is unplayable next to RL1, R06 didnt even need to be in the picture. RC06 wipes the floor with RL2 which was simply a buggy, very poorly designed effort.

But again thats just my opinion.

 

[sanzar]

Originally posted by knowsleyroader@Mar 16 2006, 10:16 PM
IMO RL2 is unplayable next to RL1, R06 didnt even need to be in the picture. RC06 wipes the floor with RL2 which was simply a buggy, very poorly designed effort.

But again thats just my opinion.

Fair enough. For me RL2 was playable mostly because of the potential it showed I think... They had all these great idea's, but missed the mark with implementing them, especially with regard to player movement, which is awkward and feels as though you're controlling a car on a race track and not a footy player.

I do think they'll fix movement in the next version, and if they do I'm also hoping they re-do the tackling and offload systems, because they also both need a MAJOR overhall! Also, the need to tweak passing a bit, because the targetting system is still way off IMO.
Of course there is also a list of other things I'd like them to do, but those are the biggest issues... Then comes stuff like defensive structures (up-and-in, slide etc), set plays, off the ball control (maybe with the right analog to bring a player inside you when you've made a half break) etc.

 

[kaftka]

Originally posted by sanzar+Mar 17 2006, 10:49 AM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-knowsleyroader

@Mar 16 2006, 10:16 PM
IMO RL2 is unplayable next to RL1, R06 didnt even need to be in the picture. RC06 wipes the floor with RL2 which was simply a buggy, very poorly designed effort.

But again thats just my opinion.

Fair enough. For me RL2 was playable mostly because of the potential it showed I think... They had all these great idea's, but missed the mark with implementing them, especially with regard to player movement, which is awkward and feels as though you're controlling a car on a race track and not a footy player.

I do think they'll fix movement in the next version, and if they do I'm also hoping they re-do the tackling and offload systems, because they also both need a MAJOR overhall! Also, the need to tweak passing a bit, because the targetting system is still way off IMO.
Of course there is also a list of other things I'd like them to do, but those are the biggest issues... Then comes stuff like defensive structures (up-and-in, slide etc), set plays, off the ball control (maybe with the right analog to bring a player inside you when you've made a half break) etc. [/b]

*** for tat then. Imo it was the other way around for me. RC2006 had nice ideas, and for the most part worked pretty damn well, but I found RL2 damn near unplayable.

 

[sanzar]

Originally posted by kaftka+Mar 17 2006, 11:22 AM-->

Originally posted by sanzar@Mar 17 2006, 10:49 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-knowsleyroader

@Mar 16 2006, 10:16 PM
IMO RL2 is unplayable next to RL1, R06 didnt even need to be in the picture. RC06 wipes the floor with RL2 which was simply a buggy, very poorly designed effort.

But again thats just my opinion.

Fair enough. For me RL2 was playable mostly because of the potential it showed I think... They had all these great idea's, but missed the mark with implementing them, especially with regard to player movement, which is awkward and feels as though you're controlling a car on a race track and not a footy player.

I do think they'll fix movement in the next version, and if they do I'm also hoping they re-do the tackling and offload systems, because they also both need a MAJOR overhall! Also, the need to tweak passing a bit, because the targetting system is still way off IMO.
Of course there is also a list of other things I'd like them to do, but those are the biggest issues... Then comes stuff like defensive structures (up-and-in, slide etc), set plays, off the ball control (maybe with the right analog to bring a player inside you when you've made a half break) etc.

*** for tat then. Imo it was the other way around for me. RC2006 had nice ideas, and for the most part worked pretty damn well, but I found RL2 damn near unplayable. [/b]

I personally didn't really think RC had many good idea's in all honesty... Line outs had no thought put into them, punting was the same, passing was alright but basically the same as WCR, rucks didn't seem to have any thought put into them, the barge tackle was still easy to exploit despite its tweaking, and there were no tactical in game options like R06 etc... it all seemed really shallow to me.

In RL2 however, they had all these great idea's like having 'total control passing' (which is a bit hit and miss, but definately sets up well for a sequel), one on one strips, attacking shoulder charges, dummy half scoots, an in game video ref, a Franchise Mode that let you go through club and rep stages in real tournaments, Online Play etc... It just sounded brilliant! But maybe that's what the problem was, they tried to do TOO much and the game as a whole ended up suffering for it... so in the end we were left with a game that was graphically gorgeous and had all these great idea's, but was fundamentally flawed in several key area's of their implementation and it ruined the whole game...
But hey, I still reckon it's a GREAT platform for RL3! I just hope they deal with movement, offloading and tackling, as they all need to be totally overhauled! Passing was problematic, but I think it had the right idea and really just needs tweaking.

 

[Mr. Laxative]

i think the lack of tactical 'options' was a good thing, giving you more freedom to create. I make grubbers, switch plays, overlap plays and dummy cut plays all the time. They seem to work much better than EA simply because I control it totally.

 

[sanzar]

Originally posted by Jacko@Mar 17 2006, 03:48 PM
i think the lack of tactical 'options' was a good thing, giving you more freedom to create. I make grubbers, switch plays, overlap plays and dummy cut plays all the time. They seem to work much better than EA simply because I control it totally.

The tactical options in that sense don't go beyond passing left or right or putting a grubber through though do they? Try getting a player to wrap around or come back inside with speed or anything with the tiniest bit of complexity to it and it all falls to peices... But that doesn't really matter for RC, because you can score tries at will simply by chucking the ball back and forth.