Ashes Cricket 2013 General Discussion

[saif258]

calm down.you can polish them if you want.

 

[sami ullah khan]

When asked about the reason for same bodies, Chief made some points about difficulty of implementing animations due to different body sizes etc etc. Lack of effort and lack of knowledge of a competitor are the reasons if you ask me.

 

[JasXI]

When asked about the reason for same bodies, Chief made some points about difficulty of implementing animations due to different body sizes etc etc. Lack of effort and lack of knowledge of a competitor are the reasons if you ask me.

Exactly my thoughts

 

[saif258]

well player size matters in cricket if you have ball physics.if not then they are just a gimmicky option if the difference in bounce isn't different.

 

[sami ullah khan]

Well Yorkers technically can be carved over long on/off if you get really deep in the crease but pulling and cutting those for sixes is impossible.

 

[blockerdave]

Yeah I guess they couldn't get the physics right or for some (bizarre) reason didn't think the physics were important so why bother spending time on "complicated" animations. One of several examples of poor thinking on this game, and taking the gamers for granted thinking we have nowhere else to go (which we wouldn't have but for Big Ant)

 

[Dutch]

Well the discussion at hand is about the generic body types and why Ashes has not feel inclined to implement different body shapes and lengths, even cosmetically. the yorkers and sixes thing has been done to death. Hopefully Mike or Chief can give some insight into what choices are made there.

I do remember Chief posting about animation difficulties etcetera......

 

[sami ullah khan]

They were just too lazy. This is a hard to admit fact.

 

[blockerdave]

Who needs different bodies anyway when you have over 200 kit items. I for one am very excited to see if they've gone for the Duncan Fearnley BulgeProtect Box with the patented PubePocket.

 

[saif258]

Well the discussion at hand is about the generic body types and why Ashes has not feel inclined to implement different body shapes and lengths, even cosmetically. the yorkers and sixes thing has been done to death. Hopefully Mike or Chief can give some insight into what choices are made there.

I do remember Chief posting about animation difficulties etcetera......

what's the use of different body sizes and heights if ball physics isn't there.just cosmetic?i'd rather have a better bowling action or multiple bowling actions,graphics than various player sizes for cosmetics.

so i think those two discussions are related.

 

[Dutch]

They were just too lazy. This is a hard to admit fact.

Maybe not lazy, but perhaps not innovative and creative enough, too one-minded in how things are done and have been done in cricket games.

Hopefully BA will push other developers to become more creative and innovative in what they do.

 

[saif258]

Who needs different bodies anyway when you have over 200 kit items. I for one am very excited to see if they've gone for the Duncan Fearnley BulgeProtect Box with the patented PubePocket.

hey do u have your cap for jardine?if yes then we know which game you'll be buying.

 

[blockerdave]

hey do u have your cap for jardine?if yes then we know which game you'll be buying.

I just think with over 200 kit items, and that exclusive ashes license, and Ashton Agar available in the game, even I will cope without a harlequin cap. I was just pushing Ross to put it in Bradman, because hey what else has that game got going for it?

 

[Biggs]

As I said much earlier in a much longer post. It doesn't have anything to do with "lazy" ...it's just they're making a cricket game how they've always made a cricket game based on their experiences. There's no way they could have predicted the innovation and 180 degree approach to a cricket game that BigAnt has taken...

 

[blockerdave]

I dunno, if not exactly lazy, starting with the approach "let's do the same thing we've done before" is at best highly unimaginative.

They certainly seem to have often taken the path of least resistance (from a tech pov obviously, not user resistance!)