Got to say it...

GROGtheNailer · Post by **GROGtheNailer** » Sat Nov 29, 2003 4:05 am

In my opinion, Rivals doesn´t do any one thing better than the big two (EA and ESPN) The one or twos thing it has going for it is that you can have multiple players in an online game and pin-point passing, all other categories are ruled by the other two companies. I always come away unimpressed after playing Rivals, very basic and generic to me, i´m not feeling it at all. The gameplay is just not there for me and forget about single-player, online it´s still an un-inspired game that you can play with multiple players. Basically playing a third rate game online just for the sake of online is how i´m seeing it. Pass the beer-nuts.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Sat Nov 29, 2003 12:19 pm

Grog:
 
 I still put NHL 2004 atop the single-player heap this year. But Rivals is a better single-player game than ESPN NHL for these reasons:
 
 1. Realistic goalie AI. No Berlin Walls.
 
 2. Realistic variety of goal scoring. I´ve seen shots go in from all over inside the offensive zone in Rivals. Slappers from the point. Slappers off draws. Wristers. Short side. Far side. One-timers. Rebounds. Quite a refreshing change from ESPN NHL, in which 85 percent of the goals are scored on one-timers.
 
 3. Unpredictability. Every time I played ESPN at the All-Star level (the only playable level, really, due to the CPU´s inability to score on Pro), I knew I was in for a 1-0, 2-1, 3-1, 1-1, game. Yawn. I never know what to expect with Rivals. I played as Toronto last night and beat Ottawa, 7-0, as Mogilny had a hat trick. When´s the last time you´ve had a hat trick with ANY player on All-Star in ESPN NHL? Then the next game I played as Dallas against Minnesota and lost, 5-1, because I played like an idiot. I´ve had such a wide variety of outcomes in Rivals that it´s more exciting.
 
 I can´t believe I´m typing this, but ESPN is the worst game of the "big four" released for the Xbox this year. It might be the best sim in many areas outside of the horribly broken goalie AI, but it´s the worst game.
 
 Not sure if that makes any sense, but it´s the way I feel. Just not fun to play at all, and I´m usually a sim guy. ESPN´s horrible goalie AI and seemingly scripted game outcomes -- nearly every game is a one-goal, low-scoring affair -- really hurt it for me.
 
 And don´t get me started with "Well, if you use sliders and edits, it´s better." I shouldn´t need a CPA to create good AI for a hockey game for which I just paid $50.
 
 Take care,
 PK

tjung0831 · Post by **tjung0831** » Sat Nov 29, 2003 2:29 pm

<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD>Quote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD><BLOCKQUOTE>
 On 2003-11-29 08:19, pk500 wrote:
 
 
 I can´t believe I´m typing this, but ESPN is the worst game of the "big four" </BLOCKQUOTE></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>
 
 Paul I agree. I´ve never been more disapointed in a game then I was with ESPN Hockey considering how good 2K3 was. ESPN was utter garbage.....more importantly every game I played was like watching a Devils or Wild game. The game was no fun at all for me. I still like Hitz Pro this year for the top hockey game.
 
 Tim

FloridaGators · Post by **FloridaGators** » Sat Nov 29, 2003 4:33 pm

Besides ESPN NFL I am not getting much of a fun factor out of the Sega games lately. To be honest ESPN College Hoops is becoming very boring to play, and their NBA and NHL game( didn´t play ESPN Hockey but from what I´ve read) isn´t the most exciting game to pick up and play. I actually think EA Sports has a much brighter future with their games.
 
 MVP Baseball has the right formula for success over World Series Baseball. The pitch meter and throw meters are a stroke of genius, plus I love the non cursor batting. Have the CPU swing at pitches outside the strike zone, have a better presentation, have a better variety of fly outs/ground outs and you have the best baseball game on the market.
 
 I am finding the ESPN basketball series to become duller and duller. I think it might be the forcefield in the game, or it may be the way the CPU controls the game so you get realistic shot percentages.
 
 You guys seemed to nail the hockey angle.
 
 As for football, I think ESPN has the best game. We played the hell out of NCAA 2004 here at school (Level 63 gamer, geez). It´s a great game but I still don´t like how it handles the option. On the other hand, I find ESPN NFL to be fabolous, though it could do a lot better off the field.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Sat Nov 29, 2003 5:00 pm

>>>Have the CPU swing at pitches outside the strike zone, have a better presentation, have a better variety of fly outs/ground outs and you have the best baseball game on the market.<<<
 
 Not if it´s excluded again from Xbox Live, you don´t.
 
 Let´s face it: Inside Pitch 2004 has the biggest upside for Xbox owners. Microsoft bought the High Heat franchise, so if it can add the realistic gameplay and sheer statistical depth from High Heat to the online fun factor and graphics of Inside Pitch, then IP 2004 will be THE baseball game for the Xbox.
 
 Take care,
 PK

FloridaGators · Post by **FloridaGators** » Sat Nov 29, 2003 5:17 pm

I put more trust into EA to improve MVP than I do for Microsoft to handle the High Heat series. EA needs to improve a few things, not to transport a gaming engine.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Sat Nov 29, 2003 6:29 pm

Gators:
 
 EA could have the greatest baseball game of all time in MVP 2005, which it won´t, yet it won´t mean that much to Xbox owners if it´s not Live-compatible.
 
 Live has big appeal for hardcore sports games. I´ll take a game with decent offline play and Live over a game with superb offline play and no live.
 
 As Hugo has said in here, playing the CPU eventually gets old. Playing a cool human on Live never does.
 
 Take care,
 PK

GROGtheNailer · Post by **GROGtheNailer** » Sat Nov 29, 2003 7:26 pm

I gues it´s how you look at it and how you are playing, for instance, playing a franchise in ESPN with another person at home then ESPN is definitely up there because you can play on pro and get all kinds of goals. Playing just versus the cpu and it is basically useless as tits on a boar. 3 things to get ESPN on top:
 
 1. Fix the goalies
 
 2. Add more online options
 
 3. Allow more wrsit shots and less one-timers
 
 NHL 2004 has a ton of features and has really stepped up though it has it´s own issues. I am playing this game more than ESPN easily right now, in fact do not play ESPN at all lately. 3 things to get NHL 2004 on top:
 
 1. Fix smoothness of play, some are pretty good but others are bad, switching from animation to animation needs help and play can be jerky, smooth this out a lot. Seems as it is sped up too much and it´s not my frame rate either <IMG SRC="images/forum/icons/icon_smile.gif"> ( get 60-70 fps)
 
 2. Pinching defenseman and cpu´s zealousness in shooting.
 
 3. Tighten up dynasty mode - spread out some of the feature and have stats more attainable or easy to get at
 
 Rivals needs to focus on goalie animations, everything looks the same. I swear the game feels like i´m playing with a bunch of X´s and O´s. Work on the single player game as well. It is a very simple playing game which bad sometimes but i´m way past that for my tastes now a days.
 
 3.

FloridaGators · Post by **FloridaGators** » Sat Nov 29, 2003 7:39 pm

Well, I doubt any EA Sports game will be on Live because EA is really tight with Sony. Has been since the PSX. That being said I guess I am different than everybody. Even if I had Xbox Live I would take the best offline game over a game that is online that is just not as strong.

GROGtheNailer · Post by **GROGtheNailer** » Sat Nov 29, 2003 8:49 pm

FloridaGators....I agree, I need to have both before I shell out more cash.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Sat Nov 29, 2003 8:54 pm

Grog:
 
 Excellent points. I´ll add these suggested improvements to ESPN and NHL:
 
 ESPN
 
 1. Have functioning sliders. I swear, there were times when I set the CPU goalie slider to 0 and to 10 with absolutely no difference in goalie performance.
 
 NHL
 
 1. Sh*t-can the scripted rebound physics. Way too many rebounds sail into the same spot in the corners.
 
 2. Get rid of Jim Hughson. The worst announcer in video games. I pity the poor hockey fans in Vancouver who must listen to this melodramatic hack all season long.
 
 Take care,
 PK [ This message was edited by: pk500 on 29-11-2003 16:55 ]

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Sat Nov 29, 2003 8:56 pm

Gators:
 
 Again, that´s because you have a lot of buds who play games.
 
 Come see us in 15 years when most of your friends have abandoned gaming and you have two rugrats running around the Gator Pen. <IMG SRC="images/forum/icons/icon_smile.gif">
 
 Then you´ll see Xbox Live in a much different light.
 
 Take care,
 PK

JRod · Post by **JRod** » Sat Nov 29, 2003 9:05 pm

Would it be too much to say that Rivals is atleast the better package than both NHL and ESPN?
 
 NHl 2004 is very simple in my opinion most of the game fells canned and if the rebounds are canned then what about goals?
 
 ESPN we all know what´s wrong with that!!!
 
 Rivals. Granted I probably would feel a bit cheated if a bought this game without access to XBL. However this is a very nice extended rental.
 
 Not to pimp Gamefly but games that last longer than a week before I send them back are extended rentals.
 
 Back to rivals, on 5 minutes the game requires you to hit hit and hit. But how is that any different than NHL and ESPN. Both those games were all about hitting. However Rivals is the only game that smacks you around. Try playing on pro and the CPU will actually get more hits than you. The shots on goals for 5 minutes is spot on. With gameplay slowed down, it´s no half bad.
 
 Now the CPU doesn´t really cycle the puck if they have a glimpse of a open shot they take it. And PK, maybe I don´t know how to use it but the pivot is less effect than just playing smash mouth hockey.
 
 Rivals is a pleasent suprise, however I have to go with what PK said a while back. If I had the game and needed some quick cash this would probably be the first to go.
 
 I have to say though this is the most complete game. That´s not saying much considering the field is so bad. It´s not like Fever where the game compared to others is piss poor but the genre of hockey isn´t all that good and Rivals is just as quality as NHl and ESPN.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Sat Nov 29, 2003 10:06 pm

John:
 
 Interesting points all around.
 
 >>>NHl 2004 is very simple in my opinion most of the game fells canned and if the rebounds are canned then what about goals?<<<
 
 Hmm ... I don´t think the goals in NHL are scripted at all. I saw a big variety of goals and outcomes in NHL 2004, as I do in Rivals, too. ESPN was the game that felt scripted, if you ask me. One-goal, low-scoring games, nearly every goal scored on a one-timer.
 
 >>>Back to rivals, on 5 minutes the game requires you to hit hit and hit.<<<
 
 Totally disagree. Sure, I hit in Rivals but no more than any other game. I´ve found that pinning and using the pivot-hook and pivot-poke check are very effective forms of defense. Freezing the puck after the goalie makes a save in traffic also is a smart, tacit form of defense.
 
 >>>However Rivals is the only game that smacks you around. Try playing on pro and the CPU will actually get more hits than you. The shots on goals for 5 minutes is spot on. With gameplay slowed down, it´s no half bad.<<<
 
 Damn good point, man!
 
 >>>Now the CPU doesn´t really cycle the puck if they have a glimpse of a open shot they take it.<<<
 
 Yep. ESPN is the king when it comes to the CPU cycling the puck. And NHL is the king when it comes to the CPU playing dump-and-chase hockey. Rivals is inferior to both in those regards although it does a decent job of mixing the strategy if you play good defense.
 
 Rivals´ AI seems to be more adaptive to what the human defense gives it than the other two games. When I play good, stand-up defense at the blue line, I see the CPU dumping the puck more often than when I sit back toward the tops or middle of the circles and wait to poke-check or make the big hit. Meanwhile, NHL and ESPN both seem to have a premeditated offensive AI. Regardless of your defensive strategy, it seems the CPU has its mind made up on its offensive strategy just as it crosses the center red line.
 
 >>>And PK, maybe I don´t know how to use it but the pivot is less effect than just playing smash mouth hockey.<<<
 
 No way, Jose. I allowed around 45 shots per game on five-minute periods playing smashmouth hockey. Now I´m holding the CPU to 25-35 shots on goal by using the pivot effectively and mixing in well-timed hits and pins.
 
 >>>Rivals is a pleasent suprise, however I have to go with what PK said a while back. If I had the game and needed some quick cash this would probably be the first to go.<<<
 
 Well, my friend, my opinion has changed. Rivals is climbing my Kasey Kasem Top 40 chart quickly. It no longer would be the first to go. I´m really starting to enjoy it a lot more, offline and online, as I start to come to grips with the various control features.
 
 Take care,
 PK

FloridaGators · Post by **FloridaGators** » Sat Nov 29, 2003 10:51 pm

I can see it from your side. My real question is how does it hurt EA Sports to put their games on XBL? Why not do this?

Toper · Post by **Toper** » Sat Nov 29, 2003 11:03 pm

<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD>Quote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD><BLOCKQUOTE>
 On 2003-11-29 18:51, FloridaGators wrote:
 I can see it from your side. My real question is how does it hurt EA Sports to put their games on XBL? Why not do this?
 </BLOCKQUOTE></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>
 
 
 My take is that EA wants control of their online titles so that they can possibly charge extra for them in the future. They have the freedom to do this on the ps2. But MS controls what goes on Xboxlive. Sofar, neither side wants to give in to the other...hence the current "stalemate".
 
 Toper