Scores and Difficulty

Discussion in 'Rugby Video Games & Apps' started by leicester, Jan 13, 2005.

  1. leicester

    leicester Guest

    What are the chances that R2005 will be genuinely difficult to master. I am fed up with generating ridiculous scores or playing matches that are so short as to be boring (you start - you finish - the middle of the game might have been nice). R2004 was too easy too quickly unless you were playing teams that were very low ranking against the top ten. I always liked the feature in R2001 where you could modify the ability of your own team to make a match more challenging. It would be great to see that come back. I don't much care for playing teams that I don't support but I don't want to win by default because I don't support the Cats or Russia.

    I didn't like the way that all tournaments or challenges in WCR default to normal difficulty. I wanted to play these on intensive care for the challenge.

    What are the chances the R2005 will get this element right? Does anybody else feel the same?
  2. Forum Ad Advertisement

  3. Why are you worried about the game being easy if you prefer to play as Leicester? [​IMG] [​IMG]

    No, but seriously, I agree that the balance of difficulty does need to be right. This moust be on both ends of the scale though, where if you are playing as a bigger team the weaker side will still make it difficult for you, but equally if you are a weaker team you need to have the ability to pull off shock results using the right gameplan.
  4. leicester

    leicester Guest

    Very funny. Fair play to the Saints by the way for the result at the weekend. Nice to see Thompson back in form. let's hope he can reproduce that form internationally one again.

    I agree totally that, if you choose to play as a minnow, you should (with skill and a little - a lot -of luck) be able to pull off the occassional shock result - otherwise what is the point of even trying? How could this be managed effectively in R2005?
  5. NZL Fan

    NZL Fan Guest

    A game like PES4 is able to achieve that in the round ball game, so what can we learn from that??

    I'd suggest its the DEFENSE that needs to be spot on for this to occur - or to expand, the ability within the game engine to be able to defend well and through good defense turn possession over.

    This would mean making the big hit at the right time (hopefully resulting in a turnover), defending in numbers, anticipating the opposition attack, fouling as a last resort, going for the intercept etc etc.....

    ......if a player then does that well they should be able to make the most of the few attacking opportunities they might have themselves to get the win....

    However if rugby 2005 has the poor breakdown resolution of rugby 2004 (ie. Make it harder for the minnow team to win by denying them any possession regardless of the situation, tackle, support players etc), then we are again stuck with an extremely boring game......

    dont hold your breath on this one........ [​IMG]
  6. -JJ-

    -JJ- Guest

    Most rugby games main way of increasing the difficulty is to make the ruck harder to win, which is lame.

    For harder difficulties I'd like to see the AI working good backline moves, hard defence, but still have the ability to keep the ball a realistic amount of the time.
  7. ak47

    ak47 Guest

    also maybe extra speed in the CPU

    especially for the crap teams

    i am sick to death of the crap teams being ultra slow

    everyone in world rugby can run as fast as eachother in their respective positions - give or take 1 or 2 seconds over 100m

    so why when u use goergia or italy, or even argentina, why are these teams considerably slower in the backline compared to ur aussies, ab's, and boks

    atleast make it so, when ur controlling an italian winger - u aint chased down by an AB forward - this is a big gripe with most rugby games for me.

    with the exception of a few quick flankers, and slow backs, a forward running down a back is unrealistic - a speed range of 1-100 would negate this, as opposed to a speed range of 1-10.

    make most forwards under 80 for speed - with the exception of the fastest forwards going around, maybe 85 tops for these guys
    make most backs over 80 for speed - with the exception of the slow backs going around, maybe 80 minimum for these guys
  8. Ripper

    Ripper Guest

    Hopefully they'll have sliders so we can fiddle around with certain aspects
  9. ak47

    ak47 Guest

    yes that would be perfect

    sliders for speed, rucks and everything like madden

    this means we can manipulate the gameplay to satisfy ourselves, which would negate any gripes with certain aspects of gameplay

    it would be terrorism act #2 if HB DO NOT PUT THESE IN

    i'd rather sliders than a create-a-player option
  10. umosay

    umosay Guest

    What exactly is a slider? I have a rough idea but never really played Madden
  11. I have no idea what a slider is. Explain.

    Let me just say this, I don't like to fiddle with team strengths etc, seems boring and pointless. I thought the challenge lay in taking a normally crap team and using tactics fitting of them.

    As stated, players around the globe have similar physical attributes, it's just the knowledge of the game that is lacking. As I know everything about rugby, I can therefore takeover as head coach of my Eagles, and make them win properly.
  12. ak47

    ak47 Guest

    its hwere u can adjust certain aspects of gameplay on a scale of 1-100 (approx)

    ie in madden u have

    WR AI catching - turned up max - hell never drop the ball,
    half way - the human will need to catch it manually 50% of the time
    at nil - the human will 100% have to catch it manually.

    QB pass accuray - turned up max he'll never miss the WR

    its so u can find a good mix for your own taste of what u think the default is out by

    similar to Rugby2001 - where the difficulty of teams could be adjusted by a slider.
    only in madden they have these sliders for like 30 different gameplay aspects, from referee leaniancy, to overall speed of CPU and human, to RB ability to WR catching..........even FG kicking can be adjusted if u think the default kicks to short/or long
  13. pip

    pip Guest

    I think its BS that weaker teams constantly struggle in the rucks and scrums in rugby games. And stronger teams always have faster players..... [​IMG]

    And this whole sprint meter thing ****** me off no end. Oh look, Marius Joubert can run at full tilt for only 20 metres... REAL believable that.

    And button bashing... I dont touch WCR, which for me was not much better than R2004, because of the requisite button bashing.
  14. Ripper

    Ripper Guest

    Theres also sliders for various penalties... max out for example on Madden, Pass Interference and virtually every play will be penalised for it, turn it all way the down, you can take to the reciever with a baseball bat and the referee wont even bat an eyelid.
  15. leicester

    leicester Guest

    I am in complete agreement that weaker rugby teams should not automatically be comprised of slower players and that strength of a side should not be determined an often apparently preprogrammed ability to win ball at the breakdown. The difference between a good side and a bad side should be skill of play. I have always felt that, whilst computer AI should account for behaviour of opposing teams in single player mode, player controlled teams should be much more even with a default more difficult level of AI to allow ones winning margin (or losing margin) to be determined by your ability to string together effective moves and adopt a style of play that suits the strengths of your team. I don't want to feel that, if I play as England, I will probably win my rucks or, if I play as Namibia, I am doomed to lose almost every one. I don't want possession / territory stats to be 90% in my favour. Rather, the difference between winning or losing should be reflected by much more subtle shifts in possession / territory unless teams are genuinely hopelessly outclassed (and a lot of that should come down to us, as players).

    I am not a game designer and can't profess to know what possible solutions could be implemented to give me the satisfaction and control that I desire but I suspect THREE things would make for a lot of the difference...

    1. More effective forward play (see separate thread);
    2. The ability to break tackles and make more effective line breaks; and
    3. Much tougher defence (smarter AI and player marking).
  16. If the difficulty again is set at whether or not you can win the ball at the ruck then I will be once again throwing my pad in disgust. If a team of programmers cant think of a better way to make the game of RU more difficult they should be gutting fish for a living.

    I could cope with players being slower although again its hard to get your head round.

    For me it should be down to agility ( step ) fending off tacklers and also missing tackles that would make the difficulty for me.

    Again sliders is the way to go as I loved this simple facility for making the game harder as you went along but being able to stick with your favorite team without having to alter loads of stats.

    On rubgy league its possible to alter the difficulty by changing the stats of your team, but its a heck of a lot of work. A simple slider that adjusted the whole teams stats by a % would have been great.

    I wouldnt expect any of the above though. It is likely to be the whole cant win the ball at the ruck to increase the difficulty once more.

    I also think that if HB drop the ball again on this release then EA should either hand the franchise over to another team of give up, because surely sales are going to get less and less each year if they keep stuffing it up.
  17. Thanks for the sliders explanation.

    I think the best bit about it (from reading) is where you alter the stats so that it is more work for you, i.e. You've got to catch the ball as the wide receiver 100% of the time.

    Now . . . hear me out . . . what about, in the video game of rugby, not only do you have to time your passes right . . . but you've got to catch the ball, i.e. Madden (with a timed triangle button).

    Initially it might seem like more work, but I see it in the similar vein of JLR, where whilst passing the ball and the ball being in air from that pass, you immediately took control over the intended receiver and could alter your runs off ball.

    When done right, you could catch the defense (and mates) off guard. When done not-so-right, the ball went fumbling into space and became an opportunists wet dream.

    Catch your own damn passes -- whaddya think?
  18. Think catching your passes might be a bit too much as well as trying to scan the field for possible openings etc.

    Do agree with the lomu thing though. It was actually possible to over run the ball because control was so accurate and switched immidiately to the player the ball was going to.

    I would not have a problem with a system akin to that at all. I believe you should control the player the ball is going to as soon as the ball has left the passers hands to offer that slight extra control.
  19. NZL Fan

    NZL Fan Guest

    Nice thought............but I don't like it.......

    Catching passes shouldn't be an item of micro management in the game - its just not that important. I would prefer quick, responsive passing movements.....

    Handling should be based on a "handling" ability stat, hence it is still possible for players to knock on whilst receiving a ball (knock ons in this vein would also take into consideration the "passing" ability stat of the player passing the ball in the first place, weather conditions etc).

    Controlling the players off the ball (ie. calling them inside for inside balls etc) may well be implemented in the game via FIFA's "Off the Ballâ„¢ Control" method. Code for this would be availiable to HB studios.

    For those not familiar:

    FIFAs Off the Ball™ Control: "The game’s unique and exclusive Off the Ball™ Control system lets you take command of players not in possession of the ball. Call in tackles, jostle for space, lose your marker, and send players on runs at the touch of a button"
  20. Cowards.

    But you're probably right.

    But there should be control of players on the intended receiving end of passes.

    Just like in JLR.

    Just like in life.
Enjoyed this thread? Register to post your reply - click here!

Share This Page