Review: Anyone else unsatisfied?

[Deleted member 46200]

See as far as buying games on steam goes, i assume im like other folk when i say i will NEVER buy a game with mixed user reviews... methinks the early release will severely damage the pc sales due to this... (presuming im not the only one who listens to steam reviews :P)

I think a lot of people read reviews but I would always check the grammar and syntax to make sure the person writing it has got a grasp of some form of education. An example would be to go on to amazon in the first hour of the launch of FIFA or Pes and see the tripe that is written and mostly 'slagging' of the others nemesis.

It's always worth reading all the positive reviews and then all the negative (or a selection) to see what correlation of problems and positives there are.

 

[Bluebagger]

@CaptainOZ I look back on SWC 99 and ask myself what made it so great and I think above all else it nailed a few absolutely crucial aspects for a cricket game, for me. The game had high replay ability, there was a good system for individual and team stat tracking and records and to segue in to something @Dutch said about the community requests this game feels like My Career 17 and that's in large part to the community wanting so much focus on my career and that's the game we got which meant other aspects of the game were lacking.

Personally I feel that the stadium editor was a great thing and much needed plus I do recall them mentioning a stadium editor would be able to used for the rugby league games so they get a lot of use out of it. Personally I think if there was an area that had too much effort then it was for the logo sharing for the consoles which has clearly caused problems within the game from the start. Some aspects of the game feel very dated and cheap such as the UI and the commentary and throw in some poor game play, lack of stats and oversights and it appears to me that the priorities were misguided. I would have been happy with the exact same game as DBC 14 but throw in a little polish and implement the fearsome tweak hack in to the game

maybe a patch 4 thing? People maybe waiting to see what the patch contains, fixes or even breaks? Before they poor scorn/praise over it.

I think they're waiting for patch 5 by now Nah maybe the negative reviews have just impact sales? But DBC 14 only has 300 or so reviews and is a few years older so maybe that is about right but I think the scores are accurate: 94% for 14 and 60% for 17

 

[francobaldo1]

i'd wait 3 months to see what it will be possible with dbc17. I think Big Ant were a little unlucky with all these issues, considering dbc14, rll3 and Lacrosse are
very polished games. I think with their engine the next patch could possibly make dbc17 very different, as it happened with dbc14.

 

[Acid Burn]

As Ross has alluded to a couple of times , Patch 4 HAS to be a Game changer for them .

Just a pity that its not released in stages , as they fix stuff , so that we can playtest the fixes , and see if it doesnt break anything else .

Doing it this way would also show your followers that something is happening , but thats not the way they have gone .

I for one would unfortunately not have any sympathy if the next Patch breaks more unwanted things along the way , but BA know`s their reasons for going this route , and we have to keep the faith in them .

 

[Mr Snrub]

As Ross has alluded to a couple of times , Patch 4 HAS to be a Game changer for them .

Just a pity that its not released in stages , as they fix stuff , so that we can playtest the fixes , and see if it doesnt break anything else .

Doing it this way would also show your followers that something is happening , but thats not the way they have gone .

I for one would unfortunately not have any sympathy if the next Patch breaks more unwanted things along the way , but BA know`s their reasons for going this route , and we have to keep the faith in them .

I'm guessing that there's probably a bunch of staff on Planet Cricket that probably are playtesting the patch beta, but can't talk about it. gkrama and blocker had a bit of a disagreement about a month or so back, partially about what sounded like gkrama suggesting to BA that some things didn't need fixed, which blocker thought did (as an aside I think he was right - some people were suffering the argued about glitch). gkrama basically said "well you have the same ability to contact BA as I do, why not make use of it".

If there is beta access at some higher level, I'm sure there is however zero correlation between any of that kind of access and Planet Cricket staff generally being favourable about the game.


Personally, I feel like '17 is like BA have made 95% of a brilliant game, there's a lot of great stuff there, logos, stadiums, all of the creativity. The ideas across the board with BARS and all the rest are really great nearly all the time. It's just that there's stuff that's broken that you'd have thought would've been a given to fix. I keep harping on about the fielding, because you can't have fields randomly changing on you, ball to ball from time to time, that's just ridiculous.

I find it ridiculously unfair that there can't have been some update stating an item or two that has at this stage been fixed. I understand why they might not want to, in case in a further revision that it somehow gets left out or doesn't work due to changes. Still, a "it looks like we've at this stage gotten on top of the (X) issue and subject to further revisions, we're hoping it'll work well in the final patch", would be nice.

I agree we do ask too much, we're all whining. Honestly, why should I play a game where I need to defend 11 runs off the last over and have the field change on me randomly and lose to a couple of fours struck right where a fielder should've been?

 

[blockerdave]

Unfortunately at this stage "mixed" is about right.

List me 5 things that are sub-standard, I can list 5 things that are great.

List 5 things that are great, I can list 5 things that are sub-standard.

Personally I think the gameplay is very close. There are things that should be done to tighten up the AI, but I think are achievable as they aren't on the fly things: bowling changes, chase aggression, field sets, these can all be calculated between balls with fairly simple logical processing. Otherwise the gameplay is genuinely good.

It's the periphery that needs fixing. I include the field settings issues as peripheral because it's not really "gameplay" in terms of how the ball behaves, players behaves etc. The problem really is that there are so many of these non-gameplay issues (persisting field changes, stats tracking, the UX, logo display, framerate drops, moving effing adboards behind the bowler's arm) that are so bad that they really detract from the solid core of game play.

We've got a game that has given us the AI edges, pitch variation, player skill/attribute variation etc. that built on dbc14's shortcomings which is all fantastic, but unfortunately there are too many issues taking away from all that.

 

[Bluebagger]

i'd wait 3 months to see what it will be possible with dbc17. I think Big Ant were a little unlucky with all these issues, considering dbc14, rll3 and Lacrosse are
very polished games. I think with their engine the next patch could possibly make dbc17 very different, as it happened with dbc14.

RLL3 wasn't exactly polished there were a few pretty bad bugs, the ball going up in the air was one, and the gameplay has some pretty obvious short comings. Like DBC 14 an incredible mod saved that game

 

[chaman82]

For the time being ...
Playing dbc14 again..(only batting)
It's so much better..

 

[CaptainOZ]

@CaptainOZ I look back on SWC 99 and ask myself what made it so great and I think above all else it nailed a few absolutely crucial aspects for a cricket game, for me. The game had high replay ability, there was a good system for individual and team stat tracking and records and to segue in to something @Dutch said about the community requests this game feels like My Career 17 and that's in large part to the community wanting so much focus on my career and that's the game we got which meant other aspects of the game were lacking.

Shane Warne Cricket 99 was such a good game. Where did everything go wrong? Cricket has hundreds of millions of fans - I don't buy the argument that it's a niche area. So why hasn't someone nailed this like they did with baseball?

 

[Chief]

Shane Warne Cricket 99 was such a good game. Where did everything go wrong? Cricket has hundreds of millions of fans - I don't buy the argument that it's a niche area. So why hasn't someone nailed this like they did with baseball?

Baseball games generally sell 3 or 4 times the copies.

I follow you - the logic works. But it's not Cricket on it's own that is niche - it's Cricket fans + Games fans + Technology available/affordable. There's a lot of dropout there on console that you don't get with Baseball (which is really a global sport, given that it has 2 key markets, US and Japan, that Cricket barely touches).
A F2P, low spec, PC or browser game would fly, but you wouldn't make much money back. And to make it from a mobile game would require huge amounts of advertising to make it pay for itself, and in turn that would totally turn off players.

It's very tough when your only viable commercial markets are UK and Aus.

 

[Deleted member 46200]

Shane Warne Cricket 99 was such a good game. Where did everything go wrong? Cricket has hundreds of millions of fans - I don't buy the argument that it's a niche area. So why hasn't someone nailed this like they did with baseball?

I don't think we are that far away from a decent cricket game here the developers know they have to deliver a good patch. The trouble nowadays is the demand for great graphics and low emphasis on game play but not sure what has happened here. I personally don't play it anymore due to the fact I'm not very good at it but time will tell. I'm sure those EA sports games weren't that great but then I was only seven when it was out... So cruel! Sorry.

 

[CaptainOZ]

Baseball games generally sell 3 or 4 times the copies.

I follow you - the logic works. But it's not Cricket on it's own that is niche - it's Cricket fans + Games fans + Technology available/affordable. There's a lot of dropout there on console that you don't get with Baseball (which is really a global sport, given that it has 2 key markets, US and Japan, that Cricket barely touches).
A F2P, low spec, PC or browser game would fly, but you wouldn't make much money back. And to make it from a mobile game would require huge amounts of advertising to make it pay for itself, and in turn that would totally turn off players.

It's very tough when your only viable commercial markets are UK and Aus.

But how did Shane Warne Cricket 99 sell? My focus is on the game itself, rather than the market. Has every company since SWC99 been just bad at making cricket computer games? Again, focusing on the quality of the game itself, not how it sells.

I guess personal opinion on whether or not a game is very good is also a factor.

 

[Deleted member 46200]

Baseball games generally sell 3 or 4 times the copies.

I follow you - the logic works. But it's not Cricket on it's own that is niche - it's Cricket fans + Games fans + Technology available/affordable. There's a lot of dropout there on console that you don't get with Baseball (which is really a global sport, given that it has 2 key markets, US and Japan, that Cricket barely touches).
A F2P, low spec, PC or browser game would fly, but you wouldn't make much money back. And to make it from a mobile game would require huge amounts of advertising to make it pay for itself, and in turn that would totally turn off players.

It's very tough when your only viable commercial markets are UK and Aus.

Have to admit MLB the show (add any number) is a class game and has so much depth.

 

[grkrama]

, partially about what sounded like gkrama suggesting to BA that some things didn't need fixed, which blocker thought did (as an aside I think he was right - some people were suffering the argued about glitch). gkrama basically said "well you have the same ability to contact BA as I do, why not make use of it".

what you have to understand is i was never derailing blocker or your feedback or experiences, only when blanket statements like only one guy can bat in this game while literally many others were enjoying the batting, this stance i took that the core batting BA have made is in-depth and really good bar a few niggles was necessary cause otherwise this was leading to an illusion that the whole batting system that BA built and refined with patch 3 was broken and crap which it is not as is most evident from your and blockers experience once you were able to experience it without that logo glitch.

even with that glitch thing aside i do believe a few areas in batting can be improved like i listed in that other thread like cutting out the wrong anims, having better feedback, more tuning of certain BF shots etc

Just to clarify 70+ percent of the beta team is not PC staff this including dutch a ex staff. While me or blocker may be able to put a feedback closer to the ears, mostly we are just testers before releasing to the broader PC community. Also i cant speak for others but from my point of view im favorable for the game, in the sense it has all the right stuff in there like you have mentioned, if it can be refined and improved would be a 1000+ hr game for me.But im also aware that this process of fixing and refining has to be definitely done otherwise the niggles and lack of certain features in the game really get in the way of immersion.

Also the argument we had in the forums isnt the best example of how blocker or I generally interact in the community either in beta or here. Things just got heated and words flew.

 

[Chief]

But how did Shane Warne Cricket 99 sell? My focus is on the game itself, rather than the market. Has every company since SWC99 been just bad at making cricket computer games? Again, focusing on the quality of the game itself, not how it sells.

I guess personal opinion on whether or not a game is very good is also a factor.

Lara/Warne 99 was basically the first Cricket game for the big-selling console era. And it had 3 years of polish from the Amiga/MegaDrive versions. Which was basically a game which had been iterated on since the mid 80s. Same core mechanics (In fact same mechanics that exist to this day!). Just a huge leap in tech - commentary, graphics up the wazzoo... It was really stunning at the time, which I think is why it scored so highly in reviews. And I think that people who played it at the time were blown away because of what a leap it was, so they remember it being amazing.

As you say, it's a pretty subjective business, but I went back and played it when we were looking in 2005 and again in 2007 and even then it felt very dated visually. It had some crazy glitches. It was solid, but I do think there's a fair bunch of nostalgia behind it. Honestly, I don't think it was any better mechanically or technically than 2005 or 2009/2010. It had some good features the others didn't, but the others had some that 99 didn't. My personal feeling is that they were all pretty similar in terms of quality, and I'd throw DBC14 in there as well.

For someone to make something really, REALLY good (like next level wow) takes a good budget and a lot of time. And consistency. For smaller companies that's not there in the way it is for bigger ones (look at who makes those Baseball games and the size of their teams, and they have been iterating mostly the same game for fifteen years!). Look at the development of the Codies games - 1999, 2005, 2007, 2009 - all made by different teams (and 2010 had a lot or turnover at the developer). You need someone to commit to an entire generation of consoles minimum.

That's why I'm always banging on about the sales - The bigger the sales, the more you can invest in the game to make it better, but because of the size of the market you're constantly in a balancing act where you have to sacrifice quality because of the commercial implications. You have to grow the product over a period of 5 years minimum and be prepared to be in the red for all of it - sometimes a long way in the red.

Quality takes tiiiime. And most don't have the patience/capital to see it through.