Hi all,
I upgraded from cricket 2004 to 2005 after reading the reviews of both it and BLC. I have the demo for BLC on my PC, but have cricket 2005 on the ps2. I wouldn't say i'm a great cricket fan, but i love watching the england matches.
So Cricket 2005: first impressions are that it has a few minor bugs, it takes time learn but it is very good.
Better than Cricket 2004 - Without a doubt.
Graphics - Best looking cricket game so far IMO. ps2 is showing its age a bit though and i'm not the biggest fan of the way EA games render the players - they look like they're made of plastic (i prefer pro evolutions look by a long way)
Sound - commentry doesn't flow very smoothly but does the job, and richie benaud is the best commentator. the other sounds are awesome, very atmospheric - some of which sounded like they were coming from behind me - have EA integrated pseudo-3D sound?
Gameplay - At first this game is rock hard (and still is a few days later!). i don't think you have to be a cricket expert to play this, but you certainly have to appreciate the patient nature of cricket. It sure ain't "whack it out the ground" baseball. bowling is harder than batting IMO. some moments in the game are thrilling, like when Flintoff came out to bat for me and hit a 6 and a 4 off the first three balls and then went for another monster 6 to be caught near the boundary (typical...). because its a difficult game it makes you appreciate it when you play/bowl something decent, you feel like you've achieved something instead of being spoon fed 6's arcade style. it reminds me of the golden age of video games before consoles and easy games dominated!
Bugs - if you skip through all the animations etc quickly the game can be choppy for a short time as it sorts out whats happening. miscellaneous bugs like showing the duck when you got a score, incorrect score announcements, bowlers allowed too many overs in one dayers, catches on the boundary counting. they're all pretty minor in the scheme of things and don't take much away from the game.
Overall - I'd recommend it if you want a game that makes you feel like you're playing cricket - it makes you appreciate the sport much more.
If you want something thats a bit more pick up and play perhaps BLC is a good choice also, although i'm still crap at that so can't comment further. Theres room for both games in the world why does one have to be better than the other? strangely for football ea's fifa is the "arcade" while pro evo is the "sim" --- I wonder why its the other way round for cricket? having BLC around is good because both games will benefit by taking the best features of each others (as happened with the footie titles - although EA nicked most of pro evo for those )
I upgraded from cricket 2004 to 2005 after reading the reviews of both it and BLC. I have the demo for BLC on my PC, but have cricket 2005 on the ps2. I wouldn't say i'm a great cricket fan, but i love watching the england matches.
So Cricket 2005: first impressions are that it has a few minor bugs, it takes time learn but it is very good.
Better than Cricket 2004 - Without a doubt.
Graphics - Best looking cricket game so far IMO. ps2 is showing its age a bit though and i'm not the biggest fan of the way EA games render the players - they look like they're made of plastic (i prefer pro evolutions look by a long way)
Sound - commentry doesn't flow very smoothly but does the job, and richie benaud is the best commentator. the other sounds are awesome, very atmospheric - some of which sounded like they were coming from behind me - have EA integrated pseudo-3D sound?
Gameplay - At first this game is rock hard (and still is a few days later!). i don't think you have to be a cricket expert to play this, but you certainly have to appreciate the patient nature of cricket. It sure ain't "whack it out the ground" baseball. bowling is harder than batting IMO. some moments in the game are thrilling, like when Flintoff came out to bat for me and hit a 6 and a 4 off the first three balls and then went for another monster 6 to be caught near the boundary (typical...). because its a difficult game it makes you appreciate it when you play/bowl something decent, you feel like you've achieved something instead of being spoon fed 6's arcade style. it reminds me of the golden age of video games before consoles and easy games dominated!
Bugs - if you skip through all the animations etc quickly the game can be choppy for a short time as it sorts out whats happening. miscellaneous bugs like showing the duck when you got a score, incorrect score announcements, bowlers allowed too many overs in one dayers, catches on the boundary counting. they're all pretty minor in the scheme of things and don't take much away from the game.
Overall - I'd recommend it if you want a game that makes you feel like you're playing cricket - it makes you appreciate the sport much more.
If you want something thats a bit more pick up and play perhaps BLC is a good choice also, although i'm still crap at that so can't comment further. Theres room for both games in the world why does one have to be better than the other? strangely for football ea's fifa is the "arcade" while pro evo is the "sim" --- I wonder why its the other way round for cricket? having BLC around is good because both games will benefit by taking the best features of each others (as happened with the footie titles - although EA nicked most of pro evo for those )
Very good review you made there 
