The biggest reason I do not play newer cricket games.

[motime6]

I get that the developers have put in a lot of effort to release a much richer cricket game with the previous Don Bradman iteration and now the up and coming one, but I just don't understand why developers continue to ignore one of the most important facets of any sports video game and that is player animations.

How is it that a game 20 years old (Brian Lara cricket) still boasts better more to life batting animations then games today? How hard is it with the technologies we have present today to implement into the game nicer shot animations or bowling actions? I appreciate all the editors and deep game modes, but at the end of the day watching a bowler run in and bowl and then watching a batsmen play just looks nothing like what we see on TV, it looks terrible if I am to be completely honest.

If someone is in contact with big Ant studios or any other cricket game developing studios out there, please stress to them the importance of having as the highest priority the implementation of basic batting and bowling action animations that come close to resembling the game in real life.

This shouldn't even be that hard of a task in cricket as most cricket animations are repetitive and virtually remain the same.

 

[motime6]

As a reference, look at the shot animations in Brian Lara 99 and the bowling animation in cricket 2000 from ea sports, they are so much more smoother than nicer looking than what we can come up with today?

 

[BigAntStudios]

If an animation needs to stop or change due to human input at any point while it is playing then you need to knit together many, many smaller animations to make that system work and remain controllable - you cannot simply play out a full animation as you suggest.

The advantage the previous games that you mention had was premeditation - it's easy to play out an animation when you know its full extent and do not allow a player to have control while it's playing.

It's a choice - user control or pretty pictures - the hard part is getting the balance right. I always err on the side of playability at the expense of being pretty.

What you don't get is, I guess, what you don't get - hence the saying "that guy doesn't get it"

 

[border33]

If an animation needs to stop or change due to human input at any point while it is playing then you need to knit together many, many smaller animations to make that system work and remain controllable - you cannot simply play out a full animation as you suggest.

The advantage the previous games that you mention had was premeditation - it's easy to play out an animation when you know its full extent and do not allow a player to have control while it's playing.

It's a choice - user control or pretty pictures - the hard part is getting the balance right. I always err on the side of playability at the expense of being pretty.

What you don't get is, I guess, what you don't get - hence the saying "that guy doesn't get it"

This is the EXACT theory any developer should follow - It's more how it plays than how it looks. Simple. How it plays it what keeps you coming back for more.

 

[cricket_online]

This is the EXACT theory any developer should follow - It's more how it plays than how it looks. Simple. How it plays it what keeps you coming back for more.

True that! "Gameplay is the king" should be the rule every developer needs to follow. If the core gameplay isn't solid enough no amount of lipstick is gonna help the pig.

 

[Dutch]

True that! "Gameplay is the king" should be the rule every developer needs to follow. If the core gameplay isn't solid enough no amount of lipstick is gonna help the pig.

If only they could understand that in Swansea....

 

[motime6]

If an animation needs to stop or change due to human input at any point while it is playing then you need to knit together many, many smaller animations to make that system work and remain controllable - you cannot simply play out a full animation as you suggest.

The advantage the previous games that you mention had was premeditation - it's easy to play out an animation when you know its full extent and do not allow a player to have control while it's playing.

It's a choice - user control or pretty pictures - the hard part is getting the balance right. I always err on the side of playability at the expense of being pretty.

What you don't get is, I guess, what you don't get - hence the saying "that guy doesn't get it"

You talk about balance, but the shots currently in the game look really terrible and so do the bowling actions. The bowling action is insanely repetitive and I can't imagine there are that many things going on pertaining to user input when it comes to bowling, since all deliveries virtually look the same up and until release, so what is your excuse there?? When a game 17 years old tends to have a smoother and more cricket appropriate bowling action?

As far as batting is concerned, I understand that due to user input you need to trigger a lot more animations, the point is that you have already implemented these animations in the game, but they don't resemble anything we see on TV in international cricket. The followthroughs on drives and flicks etc, there is no user input that is causing those animations to change so late in the shot, but they still are pretty bad.

The point is that aesthetics matter, it's one of the primary reasons we are drawn to the game in the first place, it is the most attractive batsmen that draw in the crowds, it isn't fun watching Simon Katich score runs while people would pay a lot of money to watch BC Lara or Saeed Anwar, perhaps you enjoyed watching Katich just as much.

There is a lot of depth to the game and a lot of potential, and I am sure developers have worked very hard to produce such a product, the appropriate response would be to acknowledge that there is a serious deficiency in a certain area and look to address it, rather than just dismissing criticism as silly.

 

[BigAntStudios]

No. The appropriate and reasonable response was to try and educate you on why your original assertions were incorrect, and remain so.

Not sure if you ever played Bradman but you can change everything about the ball being bowled right up to the point of exit - your example is a point and click, play out the animation affair. You were not comparing apples with apples and are still not.

I never dismissed your assertions as silly, you had a gap in your knowledge which is understandable as you say you don't play the game, I'm all for sharing information and clearing up misinformation.

If you don't get it then you don't get it - you didn't - I can only hope you now do.

 

[Snowy]

You talk about balance, but the shots currently in the game look really terrible and so do the bowling actions. The bowling action is insanely repetitive and I can't imagine there are that many things going on pertaining to user input when it comes to bowling, since all deliveries virtually look the same up and until release, so what is your excuse there?? When a game 17 years old tends to have a smoother and more cricket appropriate bowling action?

As far as batting is concerned, I understand that due to user input you need to trigger a lot more animations, the point is that you have already implemented these animations in the game, but they don't resemble anything we see on TV in international cricket. The followthroughs on drives and flicks etc, there is no user input that is causing those animations to change so late in the shot, but they still are pretty bad.

The point is that aesthetics matter, it's one of the primary reasons we are drawn to the game in the first place, it is the most attractive batsmen that draw in the crowds, it isn't fun watching Simon Katich score runs while people would pay a lot of money to watch BC Lara or Saeed Anwar, perhaps you enjoyed watching Katich just as much.

There is a lot of depth to the game and a lot of potential, and I am sure developers have worked very hard to produce such a product, the appropriate response would be to acknowledge that there is a serious deficiency in a certain area and look to address it, rather than just dismissing criticism as silly.

That's a lot of words to simply say 'I don't like the animations'.

 

[Bluebagger]

Simon Katich was incredibly fun to watch I'm not sure what your point is there.

The shots in SWC 99 were fantastic and I love them still to this day but that's because they were animations whereas in DBC 14 you have more control over the shot selection and the footwork, timing and shot selection are all crucial whereas none of that was important in SWC 99. The batting is far from terrible but it can look a little stiff at times but there is seriously nothing more satisfying in game than getting all of it correct and smashing a shot for 4.

Personally I think this game has some of the best bowling animations too. It would be great if we had maybe 3-5 various animations for each bowling type similar to have NBA 2K games have about 100 different slam dunk animations, just for variety, but I don't see what's wrong with the bowling.

 

[BigAntStudios]

Simon Katich was incredibly fun to watch I'm not sure what your point is there.

The shots in SWC 99 were fantastic and I love them still to this day but that's because they were animations whereas in DBC 14 you have more control over the shot selection and the footwork, timing and shot selection are all crucial whereas none of that was important in SWC 99. The batting is far from terrible but it can look a little stiff at times but there is seriously nothing more satisfying in game than getting all of it correct and smashing a shot for 4.

Personally I think this game has some of the best bowling animations too. It would be great if we had maybe 3-5 various animations for each bowling type similar to have NBA 2K games have about 100 different slam dunk animations, just for variety, but I don't see what's wrong with the bowling.

Now that's something that I 100% agree with - more variation is certainly needed.

We have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in a mo-cap facility, I take animation and aesthetics very seriously, we will be expanding the range greatly over what I am sure is to be an ongoing franchise. This is a marathon, not a sprint - FIFA was not built in a day.

 

[Bluebagger]

Now that's something that I 100% agree with - more variation is certainly needed.

We have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in a mo-cap facility, I take animation and aesthetics very seriously, we will be expanding the range greatly over what I am sure is to be an ongoing franchise. This is a marathon, not a sprint - FIFA was not built in a day.

That's awesome news! More variation certainly doesn't mean what's currently there is bad either. I think the point of the series being a marathon is important, you need the solid foundation before you add the bells and whistles but a lot of developers seem to go in reverse but Big Ant is on the money with both the Don Bradman series and the Rugby League Live. Game play wise I think DBC 14 has nailed it, I really haven't had as much fun with a cricket game since SWC 99 or perhaps Cricket 2000.

There's nothing wrong with the shots in the game and as much as I love the on drive or the back foot flick off the pads from SWC 99 it just doesn't compare with the satisfaction to nailing a shot with perfect timing, footwork and shot selection that i get from DBC 14. I think that maybe for so long we've kind of been hand fed our shots and performances in cricket games that there's a perception than DBC 14 isn't good in the shot selection because now we have total control and the onus is on us to make the right choice rather than having the little pitch marker for us to premeditate what to do. For the first time ever concentration is a requirement for batting and it's something I notice in myself that I have a batting collapse when I drop my concentration but you've never needed to have concentration in a cricket game, which I would say is underrated because anybody who has played cricket would realise that concentration is a huge part of the game. That's how I see it though.

And if the OP was around enough here on Planet Cricket or over at the Big Ant Forums he/she would know that Ross and the team don't dismiss criticism or suggestions at all, on the contrary they've listened and worked very hard to implement community feedback, particularly with the cricket as I believe they have a bit more freedom with what they can do, but when you say things like "acknowledge there's a serious deficiency" that's a subjective opinion and not a fact.

 

[border33]

A mocap facility? Can't wait to see the 'bare my arse in Burke Street' animation mo-capped and added it into the game. Streakers confirmed!

 

[Dutch]

A mocap facility? Can't wait to see the 'bare my arse in Burke Street' animation mo-capped and added it into the game. Streakers confirmed!

And its early September.....

 

[Bluebagger]

As a reference, look at the shot animations in Brian Lara 99 and the bowling animation in cricket 2000 from ea sports, they are so much more smoother than nicer looking than what we can come up with today?

Is this your video?