Ok Which College BBall Game Offers More?

EASports · Post by **EASports** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 10:22 pm

I have not bought any Bball games this year with the exception of espn nba. I love the college game and looking to buy the better game. Thanks for any help in advance men. <IMG SRC="images/forum/icons/icon_razz.gif">

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Fri Dec 05, 2003 4:23 am

If you´re looking for the better game you might as well return ESPN NBA and get Inside Drive...unless you don´t have a Xbox...in that case you´re s*** outta luck.

grtwhtsk · Post by **grtwhtsk** » Fri Dec 05, 2003 11:24 am

I´m wondering the same thing...which is the College game to get?

RiverRat · Post by **RiverRat** » Fri Dec 05, 2003 1:30 pm

I have ESPN CH. I don´t have MM. I bought CH based on the general feelings on the OS forums.
 
 My understanding is that MM is better on the court, but CH is better off the court. MM is smoother and plays a better game on the court, with an appearently total lack of offensive rebounds (as I understand it). CH is jerkier, and does not have 10 man motion capture. There aren´t any particular weaknesses in CH´s game on the court other than it just isn´t as smooth. The only real weakness is that presses are too easy to beat, although I have had some trouble breaking them.
 
 As far as presentation goes, CH is better. MM plays in only 20 or so different arenas while CH has pretty much all of them. CH has all the major pre-season tourneys under fake names, while MM has just the Maui I believe under its real name. MM has a couple of teams in the wrong conference and drops elite programs out of the top 25 too fast while CH appearently doesn´t have this problem. CH has in-season recruiting and MM does not. CH has a pretty deep trophy room and keeps awards for every team in the game, not just you as a coach like MM, which is pretty cool because you can change jobs and walk right into the new team´s history.
 
 Sorry, but I´m not a very fluent reviewer, but I hope this helps. I would say if you are into the total experience, get CH and put up with the less than optimal play on the court. If, on the other hand, you´re looking for a game to pick up and play to get a basketball fix, MM might be your game. I fall into the first category.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Fri Dec 05, 2003 1:41 pm

That´s a great summary, River Rat.

Bill_Abner · Post by **Bill_Abner** » Fri Dec 05, 2003 3:26 pm

MM is broke. Period. CH isn´t perfect but if you can play a basketball game w/o offensive rebounds you are a better man than I. Plus the rosters in MM are perhaps the worst I have ever seen in a big budget video game.

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Fri Dec 05, 2003 3:55 pm

I´ve only got CH, but I can recommend it without reservation. It´s not perfect, but it´s damn good. And if Mr. Abner says MM is busted, I take his word. <IMG SRC="images/forum/icons/icon_smile.gif">

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Fri Dec 05, 2003 4:02 pm

I can usually grab 5-10 offensive rebounds a game in MM. Maybe it is from the time I spent playing Live and learning how to time hitting the x button or using the icons to control specific players (very hard to do though). Are the rebounding totals low? Sure, but not any lower than the amount of foul shots I can have in entire games of College Hoops or the amount of times I turn it over in a season against the CPU full court press.
 
 It is really a shame, but you have to pick your poison this year. MM is broken in a few ways and College Hoops in other ways. Period.

Bill_Abner · Post by **Bill_Abner** » Sat Dec 06, 2003 2:09 pm

I can get a few ORebs in MM too. However the CPU gets none. I played 10 games of MM with the sliders maxxed and the CPU would get between 0-2 Orebs per game.
 
 To me, that kills the game. ORebs are such a huge part of college basketball that not having them ruins the entire game for me. That and the fact that 3 starters for Ohio State are the wrong class and I can´t edit them. EA continues to be flat out lazy with this series IMO.

JOZ · Post by **JOZ** » Sat Dec 06, 2003 2:41 pm

I´m really like ESPN CH. The only major problem I have with the gameplay is some of the ridiculous animations around the hoop. Sega games have always had some messed up animations at the wrong times in their games. Not sure why. But it is far from a gamebreaker. Hell, I even enjoying simming seasons and recruiting in this game. It´s definitely one of the deepest legacy/franchise modes in a game.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Sat Dec 06, 2003 2:55 pm

The CPU offensive rebounding is pitiful. I just don´t think that having a realistic amount of offensive rebounding makes CH any less broken or more playable than MM. In order to get those CPU offensive rebounds you have to give up realistic free throw attempts, 3 pointers taken by the CPU, and full court press turnovers. Those are also essential parts of college basketball.
 
 It is a shame the rosters are so screwed up. I´m not much of a dynasty guy as I usually have a hard time making it through more than one season, but I can see why that would suck. [ This message was edited by: Leebo33 on 06-12-2003 11:01 ]

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Sat Dec 06, 2003 3:00 pm

Speaking of rebounding...ID 2004 has the best rebounding model ever. Anyone disagree? They made huge strides with rebounding this year.

Bill_Abner · Post by **Bill_Abner** » Sat Dec 06, 2003 4:05 pm

Leebo is certainly right in that it´s a matter of picking your poison. If someone made me make a choice, I´d take CH, but that game is by no means great. Neither college hoop game is in the same league as NCAA 2004.
 
 CH has a ridiculous sim engine, lacks realistic free throw numbers, the CPU burns its timeouts in the first half, and all of the incoming recruits shoot LEFT-HANDED. For some reason that annoys the bejeebers out of me. CH, IMO, is like most Sega Sports games--they´re almost great. But they´re not finished or have a number of annoyances that end up making you shelve it.
 
 The inside game in CH, like the poster above noted, needs vast improvement because of the animations and the general ease of getting the ball in the post. It shouldn´t be so easy to get the ball within 3 feet of the rim. As a result, every center in the game is a serious scoring threat.
 
 CH plays stiff and the players do way too much standing around. And when you do get the ball down low, the player goes into this elongated animtion that can take him 7 feet away from the basket before he shoots. It´s silly.
 
 The short answer is that both MM and CH have issues. A lot of issues. But if you simply must make a choice, I´d say go with CH because of the rosters, the deep recruiting model, and the fact that it doesn´t have a Dick Vitale Bobblehead image.

EASports · Post by **EASports** » Sat Dec 06, 2003 10:00 pm

Thanks for the suggestions guys.

grtwhtsk · Post by **grtwhtsk** » Thu Dec 11, 2003 3:08 pm

Bill, I´m torn...I want a college game, but it sounds to me like neither game makes the grade from what you are saying. I wish I could rent ESPN CH, but I can´t find it anywhere!
 
 One more thing, can the rosters in MM be fixed with an AR update? If so, are there any good ones out there?
 
 Does anyone else have any input on these titles? Thanks guys. [ This message was edited by: grtwhtsk on 11-12-2003 11:12 ]

tjung0831 · Post by **tjung0831** » Thu Dec 11, 2003 3:58 pm

I have MM 2004 and while the game is far from perfect I think it plays a pretty good game. I haven´t got totally into yet but I think I could. After I finish my Hitz Pro season, and MOH Rising Sun then I will get into MM. The atmosphere is top notch and the gameplay is decent.
 
 Tim

RiverRat · Post by **RiverRat** » Thu Dec 11, 2003 5:08 pm

I have CH and am enjoying that quite a bit. There are gameplay flaws in this one as well, but the in-season recruiting adds a whole new dimension to the game. I´ve got a game coming up in my legacy against Army and I really need to win because I´ve got two recruits attending that I really want to sign. Need to make a good impression. And the fun part is that it really matters.
 
 One bad thing about the game is that I have never really had a super hot night or really cold night offensively. Defensively, yes. But not on offense. That´s something the WE series did really well in varying players effectiveness over the course of the season. Why does it matter? I´ve played nine games in my legacy on 10-minute halves and I´ve never scored more than 50 or less than 43 points. Given up as many as 56 and as low as 31, which is good, but on offense, it gets a little old.

HipE · Post by **HipE** » Thu Dec 11, 2003 5:54 pm

The atmosphere in March Madness 2004 is outstanding, it has the best crowd I have ever heard i a videogame. The game has some flaws, but the fun factor and atmosphere make it a tough game for me to put down. I rented CH 2004, and although it played a solid game of basketball, I really didn´t think the game was much fun to play. On the other hand, March Madness is probably the most addicting single player basketball game I have ever played. I downloaded the rosters from OS, and they seem pretty good. The only real mistake with Iowa´s rosters is that EA made the starting SG white, but this was corrected in the file I downloaded at OS.

grtwhtsk · Post by **grtwhtsk** » Thu Dec 11, 2003 6:30 pm

Do the rosters that you can download for the AR have the Freshman that were missing from the game?
 
 HipE - Are you playing the Xbox or PS2 version? Are there any significant differences between the two (other than online for the the PS2)? Also, I think I read that the xbox version doesn´t have dolby digital 5.1 support? Is that right? If so, how is the sound in the game?
 
 Please keep the impressions coming guys. Could those who really like MM2004 comment on the arenas. How many are accurate? I heard that most in ESPN CH are in the game with a good deal fewer in MM 2004. [ This message was edited by: grtwhtsk on 11-12-2003 14:33 ]

HipE · Post by **HipE** » Thu Dec 11, 2003 6:41 pm

I have the game for the Xbox. I have heard from a couple of people that the slowdown in the PS2 version nearly makes it unplayable. I don´t believe that any players are created in the download, I think it is just that existing players are named, and possibly looks have been altered. The courts look great in MM, but the arenas are lousy. I´m not sure about 5.1 surround, I never use it since it causes divergence errors online with so many games. CH by far is the more complete package in terms of rosters, arenas, schedules, and dynasty mode. All I wanted though was a fun and challenging college bball game, and MM delivers in that area.

grtwhtsk · Post by **grtwhtsk** » Thu Dec 11, 2003 6:51 pm

Thanks HipE.
 
 Has anyone else downloaded the rosters for MM2004. I would really like to know if there are any out there which contain the missing Freshman. Thanks.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Thu Dec 11, 2003 6:59 pm

I think it boils down to this:
 
 If you have enjoyed any of the past few editions of Sega basketball, I can´t see why you wouldn´t like College Hoops. It is better on the court IMO than NBA2k2, NBA2k3, ESPN Basketball, and it is much much better than last year´s CBB 2k3. That said, it is far from perfect as summarized somewhat in this thread. The problem I have with College Hoops is that after the initial presentation wore off I started noticing that most of my games felt the same. This is partially because I started to play Inside Drive, which has much much better CPU AI. In College Hoops the AI is good, but I never really feel as if they are "thinking." Hard to explain, but in Inside Drive I feel that the CPU does a much better job of recognizing mismatches, running plays, and generally realistically suckering me into getting out of position defensively.
 
 March Madness for the PS2 was a slideshow, but I have heard the game is really good on Xbox. More people that I have talked to or posted here like the game than dislike it. I rented it and enjoyed it. They took the very promising Live 2004 engine and made some improvements (toned down pro-hop, more realistic CPU passing, etc.). If they would have improved the offensive rebounding I could recommend it from a gameplay standpoint without exception. Every game felt fresh and unique. I am not a big franchise player so I cannot comment on that aspect.

tjung0831 · Post by **tjung0831** » Thu Dec 11, 2003 7:07 pm

I have MM for the PS2. While the framerate stutters from time to time...it´s very playable. The framerate doesn´t hinder the game at all to me. The game is actually very fun to play and that´s what counts to me. The CPU is actually quite tough as well.
 
 Tim

jLp vAkEr0 · Post by **jLp vAkEr0** » Thu Dec 11, 2003 7:17 pm

I really would like to play a good College bball game.
 Looks like the consensus is that MM is just more fun than CH.
 I will try to find them both for rent.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Thu Dec 11, 2003 7:28 pm

Damn, Tim. EA games can be funny like that. I know people complained about the framerate in Live 2004 for PS2 but to me it had a framerate like you are describing for MM. Live stuttered while MM was like playing a PC game that your computer can´t handle.
 
 MM to me was borderline unplayable. I got somewhat used to it, but the framerate was dropping several times each possession and I tried several different cameras with no luck.