ICC 3 vs ICC 2006

[lancashire666]

i think the main point he was making is that childish things could of spent there time much more productively improving the gameplay aspect insted of the graphics, most people dont bother with highlights anyway, i only use it for wickets when bowling, and non when batting.
hawkeye is good, but other domestic comps, t20 world cup, better player interaction, abaility to manager youth team/2nd 11, sponsorship, better coaching, central contracts, records section (like the great one in cricket coach would be nice) etc would all have been much more welcome from fans of icc.

however, from there point of view, with the new graphics it is much more likely that people who have never played the game will now take up an intrest and increase there sales, so dont expect any innovate new additions to the game for a while now, prob just updated database, inproved graphics and new shots etc in the highlights

 

[darko21]

dont expect any innovate new additions to the game for a while now, prob just updated database, inproved graphics and new shots etc in the highlights

I hope this isn't the case. Dedicated fans have been expecting bigger things from the series than newbies to the franchise.

 

[Almost_Austwick]

The problem is that the developers of ICC seem happy to produce basically the same game time, after time, after time. Sure, we get the usual database upgrades and a few tweaks of the more major bugs but thats about it.

They have taken (imho) the easy route in adding some average 3d graphics and the hawkeye feature. Whilst nice, what most people want is realistic game play.

Look at the depth of play in some of the football management games - would it really be so hard to implement a few of those ideas.

 

[lancashire666]

i must say, im a little shocked that more people have voted for ICC 2006! i mean, i agree with those people, im begining to get frustrated at the fact there is now an extra click to change your length, but after the first scrennies came out i thought icc 3 was going to be a stunner! alas i was wrong

 

[tk257]

The problem is that the developers of ICC seem happy to produce basically the same game time, after time, after time. Sure, we get the usual database upgrades and a few tweaks of the more major bugs but thats about it.

They have taken (imho) the easy route in adding some average 3d graphics and the hawkeye feature. Whilst nice, what most people want is realistic game play.

Look at the depth of play in some of the football management games - would it really be so hard to implement a few of those ideas.

I agree totally with this. The most successful Football management games do not even have 3d highlights because if you want that you buy, in crickets case, Brian Lara or an EA cricket game.
I would like to see a game where players have ratings for example:
these ratings could then change as form does and young players improve. just a quick idea.

I don't know if this would work well but it is just an idea. as Lancashire666 said it would be nice to look at other aspects such as finances from sponsorship and other staff such as physios and varying quality of coaches who improve your players more than others

 

[Notts til i die]

Haven't played ICC3 myself but my mates say it is pants so ICC 2006 for me!

 

[Hooper]

Haha, "Pants"? If that means crap then he is sorta right because its not a needed game if you have ICC06.

 

[fisch]

One would assume that ICC III has better graphics than its predecessors.

But the thing is, I've just downloaded the trial of ICC III today, and the graphics are an eyesore! There's something really disorientating about the 3D engine, for a start I would like to zoom out more, and the kits are not authentic.

I mean if ICC III was about one thing (graphics), then they might as well have done that one thing properly. But I despise the graphics.

And as for the gameplay and realism, well, take a look at this from my first game:

I was playing as Sri Lanka. Bermuda's opening partnership was 144 off 137 balls. After 16 overs, their run rate was exactly 7.5 runs an over. Bermuda's opening batsmen, one of 'Very Defensive style', the other of 'Defensive style', absolutely mauled my bowlers. This is one of them, the Very Defensive batsman:

Note the lack of chances and the high strike rate. Remember, this is a Very Defensive batsman playing for Bermuda. I tried to be canny, bowling to their weaknesses, etc, but it was of no use.

My custom fields are not that bad, are they?

On first impressions, ICC III has too much pot luck involved. There is simply no method to this madness.

 

[lancashire666]

i think that shows excatly what icc 3 is, and i was looking forward to it sooooooo much as well

 

[darko21]

I agree with the huge inaccuracies of ICC 3. I would have to say ICC 06 is superior in gameplay but I have an old version and my game has crashed and I cannot update due to the server being down! But yeah, ICC 05 was great too.

 

[Hooper]

Why would you say ICC 05 and ICC 06 were both great when they were basically exactly the same?

 

[darko21]

No they weren't. They were completely different. Why would a game be exactly the same but released a year apart?


Sorry, sarcasm. Yes, looking back, it was a redundant comment.