Don Bradman Cricket in the Press

[Slugger]

Yeah, how unpatriotic of me.

Reminds me of the FB, BigFooty, and emails I get with comments like "it's footy season dickhead"...


I should add that I think most here would agree with:

Got Right
+ Best cricket game in years
+ Bowling and batting generally work well
+ Community driven teams
+ Captures the passion and mental side of cricket

Got Wrong
- Massive learning curve
- Lacking polish, a little glitchy
- Career bat/ball difficulty unbalanced
- Recurring terrible run outs


Except I think "Massive learning curve" is by design. The other stuff will be patched then we're on a 10, right?

You should be a reviewer! Pretty much spot on..IMO

 

[BigAntStudios]

You should be a reviewer! Pretty much spot on..IMO

I think it's the view of the majority, not rocket science to see it

----------

Could I copy paste that down the bottom of the review I'm currently writing?

Can you hold off until after Friday

 

[zombieian]

Acknowledged I don't have the game yet but:
Please don't make the game easier @Ross. I want a steep learning curve giving a sense of achievement and longevity to the game.

 

[MattW]

Can you hold off until after Friday

I don't want to be thrown by offers of cake.

 

[Chief]

The other stuff will be patched then we're on a 10, right?

The good news is that a couple of the bigger sites are looking at adopting the Polygon "flexible score" thing, and are perhaps going to start updating reviews when patches/updates come out.
This is the future.

The bad news is many won't entertain it, arguing that the game as per on the disk is the final product and therefore the review applies only to that. And Metacritic is unbending on updating reviews EVEN if the site themselves update the review (Polygon's Sim City review at launch was 9.5, but then when problems emerged they cut it back to a 4. A subsequent patch raised it to 6.5, but 9.5 is still what Metacritic shows).




Another note on this: One particular review of Ashes 09 was an 8, and the reviewer specifically said that if not for 3 things (I think) it would have been a 9. IC10 addressed those 3 points, as well as many more improvements... and he gave it an 8 again citing OTHER things that would make it a 9... They always find something new to moan about.

 

[barmyarmy]

To be honest that just encourages developers to release "new" versions with bug fixes rather than actually patch problems.

 

[BigAntStudios]

Not me, even though I think ours have been good I don't put weight on them, they won't persuade me to do anything in particular unless they come up with a cool idea (that's yet to happen).

 

[dhump]

Yeah, how unpatriotic of me.

Reminds me of the FB, BigFooty, and emails I get with comments like "it's footy season dickhead"...


I should add that I think most here would agree with:

Got Right
+ Best cricket game in years
+ Bowling and batting generally work well
+ Community driven teams
+ Captures the passion and mental side of cricket

Got Wrong
- Massive learning curve
- Lacking polish, a little glitchy
- Career bat/ball difficulty unbalanced
- Recurring terrible run outs


Except I think "Massive learning curve" is by design. The other stuff will be patched then we're on a 10, right?

I dont think learning curve is wrong it is just fine adds to the longevity of the game. I will add fielding to the list but can patch it too just need to tone them down a little and we have the best and most realistic cricket game ever. Fitting fielding reality will compliment batting and bowling brilliantly.

 

[Chief]

To be honest that just encourages developers to release "new" versions with bug fixes rather than actually patch problems.

It will change: games are serviced much more now: time was that it cost you a HUGE amount of money to actually patch your game on consoles. So much so that you just couldn't justify doing it.
Nowadays patching is much cheaper and therefore people are supporting their games to a much greater extent. And this being commonplace I think we'll see a lot more sites acknowledge this in reviews.

 

[Guybrush Threep]

Edit: wrong thread.

 

[speletjiesvraat]

I was torn between posting this on the ?first impressions? or the ?DB14 in the press? thread. On the balance, this one made more sense because of the extreme frustration the ?review guy? at IGN inspired in me, which ultimately ended up in me wanting to post in the first place. These guys influence, however slightly, the buyer and I feel his review was simply a narcissistic need to see his own ?wit? on page, and in no way a guide to whether this game should be bought or not.

Let me start off by saying what annoys me in life: I hate it when people use self-made acronyms that no one can possibly understand and then seeing their gloating shoulders when they explain it to me. I hate annoying habits such as commentators who refer to a singular person but then, for some hair-rippingly unfathomable reason, say it in plural: ?the Steyns really contributed to this win today?. - Similarly, this IGN guy explored the very annoying realms of using similes in a totally illogical way. Shane Watson is one of many cricket players; DB14 is one of many cricket games; Shane is not the best ever produced; DB14 is. Cricket fans SHOULD buy this game. And this guy?s review basically said: ?I think I liked it, but nah, don?t bother?. and here are some smart-ass comments that make no sense.?

Because of my chosen thread, I?ll keep my own impressions succinct. This game is amazing. The pressure in the middle is very realistic. I am enjoying my PS3 like never before. ?WOW, so that?s what a bouncer at 130kmph looks like! Better just survive this over.?

What a game. Big-up to every one at BIG ANT!

 

[Srivathsan]

This statement from Matt summarised everything: Get a life !!! you Critics
"To not recognise their dedication to fixing the issues in recognising the issues would be unfair."

 

[IceAgeComing]

The problem with review scores (and IGN in particular) is that you end up with the whole 4 point scale phenomenon. They don't use there full 10 points: generally 0-6 is "terrible shit"; 6-7 is "games that we don't like/understand (DBC probably fits here)" or "better terrible shit"; 7-8 is "alright, I suppose"; 8-9 is "good game"; and anything above 9 is "very good". Most games are in the 8-9 range; which is not true in reality tbh.

It also doesn't help that reviews are by definition partial to some extent. There are some games which swing so much one way that everyone thinks the same about them (think Ashes Cricket 13 or Big Rigs for the terrible part; or something like MGS4 for the bloody good part); but most don't. I feel that having a big 6.8/10 at the end of your review tries to create this impartial, quantitative approach to video game reviews which simply doesn't exist. I feel the same for films and other stuff: you learn more from actually reading a good review than seeing the big number at the start.

The SimCity thing is another reason: there still are a bunch of reviews out there giving 9/10 to a game that, even without server problems, is a broken mess that has a very unrealistic simulation model to it - sort of a problem for a city simulator! Polaris's score jumped around quite a bit - I think that a 4 is around right if I was too apply a number to it... Look at titanfall - a dumbed down version of call of duty with mechs is apparently a 8.9/10 game: which may excite the 4 people to own Xbox 1s; but a majority of people wouldn't say that. Its this vagueness that make numbers a bit useless: a sentence describing the basic nature of the game says a lot more than a simple number will.

The mention of titanfall was just admittedly to give me an excuse to post this...

 

[Slugger]

What frustrates me about reviews about cricket games and many games with more than 1 or 2 modes, is how the hell can they make an informed decision in the short time they play it? I may be worng here, but i cant see them sitting down for a week or so straight and really flogging it that hard? I dunno maybe they do? However to really appreciate all aspects of a game like this, weeks are needed to really get to understand each aspect and make an informed decision.

 

[Jadel]

Got Right
+ Best cricket game in years
+ Bowling and batting generally work well
+ Community driven teams
+ Captures the passion and mental side of cricket

Got Wrong
- Massive learning curve
- Lacking polish, a little glitchy
- Career bat/ball difficulty unbalanced
- Recurring terrible run outs


Except I think "Massive learning curve" is by design. The other stuff will be patched then we're on a 10, right?

Pretty much spot on. Though I have to admit massive learning curve is killing it for me. I wish there was a setting harder than amateur but easier than pro. The jump is too big for me. I just cannot bat on pro. 7 career innings 5 ducks 6 runs total.
Played alot of casual pro and practice in nets though.