andrew_nixon
Chairman of Selectors
Which didn't fix most of the bugs.iceman_waugh said:I think Ea had released a patch for their cricket 2002 game
Which didn't fix most of the bugs.iceman_waugh said:I think Ea had released a patch for their cricket 2002 game
iceman_waugh said:okay agreed that it didnt...but atleast they realised something was wrong..
EA only does that to poor selling cricket games. Have you seen their patch/update support for Madden and NBA Live? Its huge. EA wants to mint money (who doesn't!), but, we cricket game enthusiast are the ones that are robbed of our hard earned money.SAFC said:If the demo is based on the final code I would imagine it has now gone gold and the final version has gone to the duplicators. At least codies are recognising there are bugs that have slipped the net and are willing to release a patch on release day. There are very few companies who would do this and it's a big thumbs up to them to know that once the game is released they aren't gonna disappear like EA do......
Actually its a mistake made by EA if they consider the cricket market isnt huge; its pretty big, I would say its probably bigger than NHL or Rugby, but they cannot publish proper games to draw the crowd, on top of that I think EA isnt very good at innovating games; like e.g. double wicket and stuff; you can easily make a cricket street series and it will sell not cause of cricket fans; but it would be fun to play cricket street online and can be one of the most entertaining games ever; something to think aboutrahulk666 said:EA only does that to poor selling cricket games. Have you seen their patch/update support for Madden and NBA Live? Its huge. EA wants to mint money (who doesn't!), but, we cricket game enthusiast are the ones that are robbed of our hard earned money.
very impressive idea...but i doubt EA would do that. Well not atleast for another few years.aprofromindia said:Actually its a mistake made by EA if they consider the cricket market isnt huge; its pretty big, I would say its probably bigger than NHL or Rugby, but they cannot publish proper games to draw the crowd, on top of that I think EA isnt very good at innovating games; like e.g. double wicket and stuff; you can easily make a cricket street series and it will sell not cause of cricket fans; but it would be fun to play cricket street online and can be one of the most entertaining games ever; something to think about
rahulk666 said:EA only does that to poor selling cricket games. Have you seen their patch/update support for Madden and NBA Live? Its huge. EA wants to mint money (who doesn't!), but, we cricket game enthusiast are the ones that are robbed of our hard earned money.
Well and now you don't even have autoplay for bowling so enjoy!! So much for the BLIC bowling being interesting and gripping. Bah...andrew_nixon said:When you change the controls for batting, the controls for bowling also change, and vice-versa. This is very annoying as the controls I like for batting are horrible for bowling.
The bowling is interesting and gripping, just the controls are taking some getting used to.rahulk666 said:Well and now you don't even have autoplay for bowling so enjoy!! So much for the BLIC bowling being interesting and gripping. Bah...
Andrew, I read somewhere that there is already a way to get batsmen out cheaply. The guy who posted this didn't want to disclose it to take the fizz out. But someone else mentioned that bowling a yorker just outside the off stump you can get lot of wickets. I am suspecting that sooner or later we will find all the cheap ways to get batsmen out for less than 100. And because of no autoplay you will be stuck at bowling purposefully bad despite knowing very well the way to get the batsman out. That will be so annoying! At least the autoplay in cricket 2004 and cricket 2005 will save you from the trouble to purposefully bowl bad.andrew_nixon said:The bowling is interesting and gripping, just the controls are taking some getting used to.
I wouldn't want to autoplay the bowling anyway....... I wouldn't be playing the game then would I?