Gee wizz - this statement is getting tossed around like a Frisbee isn't it...how long is a piece of string?
No disrespect intended but IMO Games like SWC 99, Cricket 97 ATE, International Cricket Captain are all superior cricket games in the context of the period when they were made, and the style of game (interactive v management sim).
If you put peak Bradman in the same team as peak Ponting, Lara, Sangakarra, Kallis and Tendulkar he wouldn't be in the same league technically, but in the context of his era he was miles ahead, and that is why he is regarded as the best ever.
Why shouldn't the same apply for cricket games? SWC 99 was absolutely miles ahead of its time, and that's why its the best ever I think. There are numerous elements in SWC 99 that don't even exist now in modern games (classic matches, huge amount of stadiums, classic commentary, crowd sounds dependent on venue played, beach cricket!). IMO Bradman 14 falls well below average in quality expected of a game retailing at $99 in the year 2014. I don't see how this can be argued. Sure there might be a few outliers that you can refer to as case in point - some games that are just awful, but the quality of the DBC14 product upon release is below average - its as simple as that. I'm sorry if I offend.
Imagine if the developers could of supported SWC 99 and Cricket 97 ATE post release???