IGN preview for Don Bradman 14 (Looks cool)

[grkrama]

Isn't NBA Live 14 further proof of the importance of graphical elements in sports games though; the reviews of it pretty much said that it felt a lot less fluid and a lot more fixed and artificial than 2ks game; and a lot of that would be because of the lack of animations for some things making things that you'd want to do in real basketball impossible...

The last think i want is an argument about the graphics in DBC, The game looks gorgeous to my cricket game starved eyes.

 

[Snowy]

We aren't arguing about DBC graphics at all. It's a conversation about graphics in general.

'Graphical' elements is a bit ambiguous. The issue with NBA Live 14 is, as you said, the animations and blending (which is unfathomable to think given their development cycle, budget and the fact it is on next-gen). Even if it had incredible graphics (textures, colours, lighting, player models etc.), the gameplay would still be complete arse...

People should want to play an ugly game with great gameplay more than a beautiful game with horrible gameplay. Unfortunately, that isn't the case for some people.

 

[DN4ngel23]

As said prior, openly, honestly (hate using that word now post AC13), the graphics are not up there with NBA2K/Madden, however they are not "a bit shit", that's just not a reasonable assessment.

In any case, it's not the graphics as a whole, it's the stitching together of separate animation that is the issue - this is our *major* focus with the game we are working on now.

AFL Live 3?

 

[cricket_online]

People should want to play an ugly game with great gameplay more than a beautiful game with horrible gameplay. Unfortunately, that isn't the case for some people.

This. I hate it when folks come along and say a game is poor coz it has poor graphics and no licenses, with no mention of gameplay.

 

[DN4ngel23]

In other words, one shouldn't judge a book by its cover

 

[IceAgeComing]

We aren't arguing about DBC graphics at all. It's a conversation about graphics in general.

'Graphical' elements is a bit ambiguous. The issue with NBA Live 14 is, as you said, the animations and blending (which is unfathomable to think given their development cycle, budget and the fact it is on next-gen). Even if it had incredible graphics (textures, colours, lighting, player models etc.), the gameplay would still be complete arse...

People should want to play an ugly game with great gameplay more than a beautiful game with horrible gameplay. Unfortunately, that isn't the case for some people.

and those gameplay problems also make NBA Live look worse than 2k14, right? This is a bit of a hard thing to debate since 2k14 is a better looking game than Live on every measure; but the effort they put into faces and stuff can't be seen from the broadcast cams while the animations can...

Graphics isn't just polygon count and texture quality; you also have to consider animations and all round style of graphics. To use a non-sporting example; I'd argue that the original Metal Gear Solid has some of the best graphics of any game. This is because the developers knew that photorealism wasn't a thing so worked with what they had and made a game in which the atmosphere and the graphics mixed very well; and the game itself doesn't have glaring animation problems which has a big problem on 3D games; and probably harder to deal with now because of the complicated nature of 3D stuff. The original MGS is hard to play for lots of reasons (tank controls, no first-person view etc); but the graphics are not one because they still look nice!

That's the thing about it; I couldn't care less if the players looked like MGS1 Solid Snake if the other parts of graphics work as they should to make the game realistic. But the other parts of what most people would consider graphics work with the gameplay on a game as physics based as cricket; so they should be responsive and fluid and handle as you'd expect them to which as a byproduct would hopefully make them look realistic.

 

[79cricket]

I read the same posts on IGN as I bet many of us have and this was to be expected. I think Iceagecoming/Snowy and Ross post were spot on about the future for this series of games and sport games in general..

It's also great that there has been a jump in graphics with the show and NBA 2k14 showing EA how to do it right, I bet ross would love to have a chat with these teams and get a insight into where sport games are going.

PS My View on DBC14 is overall it's going to be a amazing game for Bigant first try, they are changing how cricket games have played for so long and this is not a easy task as many on here were set in stone(Me) with how to play cricket games before this game and Beta Nets came out and just opened are eyes.

Bring on the 4th of April I say.

 

[Snowy]

Eh, comes down to a fairly subjective definition of whether animations are included as part of gameplay, graphics, or a weird grey area in between (although we're basically on the same page, just semantics really)

 

[79cricket]

This. I hate it when folks come along and say a game is poor coz it has poor graphics and no licenses, with no mention of gameplay.

So True cricket_online but at the same time people these days expect both and more, the normal lines of it's not 1995 it's 2014.

 

[IceAgeComing]

Eh, comes down to a fairly subjective definition of whether animations are included as part of gameplay, graphics, or a weird grey area in between (although we're basically on the same page, just semantics really)

Its why people who review games and split it into boxes with "Graphics"; "Gameplay"; "Presentation" etc are dumb because they're all interconnected things. Regardless of what people say regarding "I don't care about graphics!!!"; its been proven that people do subconsciously care about graphics because they can cause a game to feel more/less realistic even if the same gameplay engine is there.

 

[79cricket]

Eh, comes down to a fairly subjective definition of whether animations are included as part of gameplay, graphics, or a weird grey area in between (although we're basically on the same page, just semantics really)

Very true Snowy, if you see something that takes you out of reality then some people will be dicks about it, the internet is a perfect place for this as everyone is a expert.

 

[cricket_online]

Its why people who review games and split it into boxes with "Graphics"; "Gameplay"; "Presentation" etc are dumb because they're all interconnected things. Regardless of what people say regarding "I don't care about graphics!!!"; its been proven that people do subconsciously care about graphics because they can cause a game to feel more/less realistic even if the same gameplay engine is there.

Graphics are important in the sense they should be good enough that the game looks like current gen. Beyond that graphics are an ideal candidate for "law of diminishing returns". You don't want to play a game which looks as if its made for PS1/2 and as long as the graphics are good enough to pass for the console they are made for, gameplay should be the criteria the games need to be judged on.

 

[79cricket]

That's why Ashes 2013 failed to be honest, wait and for the other 1000 reasons.

 

[IceAgeComing]

The biggest problem that AC13 had was about animations not triggering or triggering at the wrong time or simply not being there, and that could be seen as a graphical thing greatly killing the gameplay of the game depending on if you're a pedantic ------ like me.

It'd be interesting to see someone do a study into graphics in games; perhaps prepare (as much as possible) games with identical gameplay but with a version with good graphics and one with bad graphics and see what people objectively think of the game. Lots of game things are all about perception; and even if you think that gameplay is king the graphics are still there and may change the way you perceive the gameplay...

 

[Mr Snrub]

As said prior, openly, honestly (hate using that word now post AC13), the graphics are not up there with NBA2K/Madden, however they are not "a bit shit", that's just not a reasonable assessment.

In any case, it's not the graphics as a whole, it's the stitching together of separate animation that is the issue - this is our *major* focus with the game we are working on now.

Completely right. The graphics are fine and a light year ahead of anything we've had in Cricket before. Also agree about the animations, they're nearly all great, but for a couple that might be a little lesser than that. On the whole though, they look terrific.

As for the game you're working on now, you might be talking about La Crosse, which I'll also get and give a whirl too. If not, I can think of one other Australasian sports license that has recently had some good-ish animations terribly stitched together with woeful gameplay that I'm hoping you're getting the chance to do.