Valaskjalf
Club Captain
Heavy...Ive been following the threads on AC09 since the start, got the demo and everything but the more I read the more I realise it was a blessing in disguise that im too broke to buy the game.
Review This game is fully scripted no real physics at all!!!
- Thread starter Allrounder18
- Start date
Heavy...Ive been following the threads on AC09 since the start, got the demo and everything but the more I read the more I realise it was a blessing in disguise that im too broke to buy the game.
one more point is how you can play backfoot shots on full pitched deliveries... that clearly shows that transmission were too lazy to include a few more algorithms to accommodate this facet of the sport... if it was physics based there would have been quite a few bottom edges to the stumps.....
and as for taking pot shots at English..... that is really low....
and as for taking pot shots at English..... that is really low....
D
Dutch
Guest
To be fair I don't think Lazy Chestnut was actually taking the mickey out of somebody for their English. More that the points of view expressed were harder to understand because the use of English wasn't always clear, which is a fair point. If it was the case however that someone is being ridiculed because their English wasn't up to standard then that is wrong and also about three-quarters of the native English speakers using these forums should be getting very worried!
Dabi
Club Captain
@dutchad: Yeah you're right. Lazy was complaining since the grammar / typos made it a little harder to understand and I believe that is all he was pointing out!
Btw completely off-topic but how do you pronounce 'dutchad' and is that your name or something else?
Btw completely off-topic but how do you pronounce 'dutchad' and is that your name or something else?
D
Dutch
Guest
Dutchad...difficult to explain in writing....dutch-ad
And it's just my nickname that I like to use here and there!
D
Dutch
Guest
Yes we know that.
That is what many of us do. If we want to play real cricket we go and play real cricket. If we want to play a computer game of cricket we want to do that with an idea that it approaches the game of cricket as played in real life and if the makers of the game state themselves that this game is the most authentic approach to the game of cricket, then one is allowed to have an opinion whether that is actually the case.
This argument that I can't say anything about the quality of a cricket game because I should be outside playing real cricket is fundamentally flawed!
The actual equivalent is to ask me to go outside and use my laptop as a cricket ball and see how well it bounces!
Last edited by a moderator:
drainpipe32
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2008
- Online Cricket Games Owned
Does it really matter if the game is scripted or not? I dont believe it will affect how fun the game is, it simply might detract slightly from the realism...
I know nothing about game coding so i'm going to stay away from the main argument, but for what it's worth I've found that some grounds (such as Edgbaston) have had ridiculously quick outfields where 'good' timing sees the ball racing to the boundary. And it's not like it's a tiny ground like Harare.
Allrounder18
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2006
- Location
- Karachi,Pakistan,
Let me clarify the issues regarding bowling speed and movement being scripted.
OK this is specially for Lazy chestnut.
Have you noticed when you bowl an outswinger just outside off stump and batsman plays front foot defense the ball behaves like an off-cutter after it pitching it clearly been coded something like BALL MUST FOLLOW MIDDLE PORTION OF THE BAT AFTER PITCHING irrespective of the pitch point and that code is the primary reason for non existent of swinging deliveries because if the ball swings like BLIC 07 and if you bowl out side offstump the ball will still follow the middle portion of the bat and if the batsman play leg side shot it will look terrible to the eye (How come the ball moving towards first slip end up on middle stump?) and thats why the in this game the swing only occurs when batsman leaves the ball.
One more thing have you ever noticed how come Batsmen play cover drive to the ferocious (and probably above head height bouncer according to real physics) its only because of the code BALL MUST FOLLOW MIDDLE PORTION OF THE BAT AFTER PITCHING.
BTW I was pretty bad with my english yesterday night because I was like half sleep half awake no need to blame Lazy for pounding me for that:P
OK this is specially for Lazy chestnut.
Have you noticed when you bowl an outswinger just outside off stump and batsman plays front foot defense the ball behaves like an off-cutter after it pitching it clearly been coded something like BALL MUST FOLLOW MIDDLE PORTION OF THE BAT AFTER PITCHING irrespective of the pitch point and that code is the primary reason for non existent of swinging deliveries because if the ball swings like BLIC 07 and if you bowl out side offstump the ball will still follow the middle portion of the bat and if the batsman play leg side shot it will look terrible to the eye (How come the ball moving towards first slip end up on middle stump?) and thats why the in this game the swing only occurs when batsman leaves the ball.
One more thing have you ever noticed how come Batsmen play cover drive to the ferocious (and probably above head height bouncer according to real physics) its only because of the code BALL MUST FOLLOW MIDDLE PORTION OF THE BAT AFTER PITCHING.
BTW I was pretty bad with my english yesterday night because I was like half sleep half awake no need to blame Lazy for pounding me for that:P
Last edited:
lazy_chesnut
International Coach
OK quite a lot has gone on since I went to bed last night so I'll try and deal with the various points raised an an organised manner.
English
Firstly, and most importantly, I would like to point out that I don't have anything against people who's first language is not English! I was merely pointing out that a lack of proper grammar, punctuation, etc. made it very hard for me to understand the point being made.
'Scripting'
I repeat: all games are what people would call 'scripted'. If they were not, nobody would ever achieve anything in them. This applies a god deal to sports games, but less to things like driving simulations due to the nature of the physical models available. When characters have to intercept moving objects accurately, you pretty much have to force the objects into moving in a certain way.
Back in BLC 99, they probably didn't need to nudge the flight of the ball to line up with the bat, etc., as the graphics were pretty poor so that level of precision is not really necessary. With today's generation of gaming hardware, the graphics are much, much clearer, and also people's expectations have risen, so that the ball really needs to be seen to hit the bat. In BLIC 2005 and BLIC 2007, the path of the ball was obviously changed to make it reach a certain point at a certain time. You could see on the hawkeye that the trajectory of the ball noticeably altered as it neared the floor. In AC09 this is not the case.
Inverse Kinematics - or something similar!
In AC09 the ball does not deviate, but instead the batting animations are altered to achieve the same result. This is evident in the slow-motion replays after having hit a six. This can lead to some quite bizarre bat/hand/body positions momentarily, but I think it's a far better solution than moving the ball (though no doubt this happens a bit too) to hit the bat.
Boundaries
Having had another look at this, I think that the apparently 'non-slowing-down' boundary shot is nothing more that the ball being hit quite a lot harder than with other shots. When I first played the game, I thought it was giving reduced friction to perfectly timed shots, but now I'm not so sure. The jury remains out in my mind!
Just saw Allrounder's new post!
I haven't seen what you are suggesting happens, but I don't doubt that it does. I agree that there should be more playing and missing, but you really do have to understand that these little things have to be done in order to have a playable game. However, it could be done a lot more subtly, and a lot more realistically so it looks like less 'scripting' is going on. This is something that we might get in a patch (playing and missing is something I believe is quite high up on people's priorities) or the next version of the game. Remember that this is just the first of (hopefully) a number of iterations. You have to make PES1 to make PES6.
CaptainOZ
I like the way you slate my supposed intolerance of others by mentioning a 'stuffy British club mentality', and complaining about the language I use. That's so hypocritical it's almost funny. Also, as pointed out above, I was not having a go at his English skills.
Finally, your bold bit about people being 'entitled to their own opinion' is an interesting one. Firstly, I agree in principle. However, if I were to post on here that 'the grass is blue and the sky is pink', I think we can all agree that people would explain to me that I am wrong (at the very least!). Allrounder's point that 'The game has NO PHYSICS system implemented' is factually incorrect so I pointed this out, and in that respect, it is analogous to the blue grass and pink sky example - i.e. piffle.
I used that word just for you.
English
Firstly, and most importantly, I would like to point out that I don't have anything against people who's first language is not English! I was merely pointing out that a lack of proper grammar, punctuation, etc. made it very hard for me to understand the point being made.
'Scripting'
I repeat: all games are what people would call 'scripted'. If they were not, nobody would ever achieve anything in them. This applies a god deal to sports games, but less to things like driving simulations due to the nature of the physical models available. When characters have to intercept moving objects accurately, you pretty much have to force the objects into moving in a certain way.
Back in BLC 99, they probably didn't need to nudge the flight of the ball to line up with the bat, etc., as the graphics were pretty poor so that level of precision is not really necessary. With today's generation of gaming hardware, the graphics are much, much clearer, and also people's expectations have risen, so that the ball really needs to be seen to hit the bat. In BLIC 2005 and BLIC 2007, the path of the ball was obviously changed to make it reach a certain point at a certain time. You could see on the hawkeye that the trajectory of the ball noticeably altered as it neared the floor. In AC09 this is not the case.
Inverse Kinematics - or something similar!
In AC09 the ball does not deviate, but instead the batting animations are altered to achieve the same result. This is evident in the slow-motion replays after having hit a six. This can lead to some quite bizarre bat/hand/body positions momentarily, but I think it's a far better solution than moving the ball (though no doubt this happens a bit too) to hit the bat.
Boundaries
Having had another look at this, I think that the apparently 'non-slowing-down' boundary shot is nothing more that the ball being hit quite a lot harder than with other shots. When I first played the game, I thought it was giving reduced friction to perfectly timed shots, but now I'm not so sure. The jury remains out in my mind!
Just saw Allrounder's new post!
I haven't seen what you are suggesting happens, but I don't doubt that it does. I agree that there should be more playing and missing, but you really do have to understand that these little things have to be done in order to have a playable game. However, it could be done a lot more subtly, and a lot more realistically so it looks like less 'scripting' is going on. This is something that we might get in a patch (playing and missing is something I believe is quite high up on people's priorities) or the next version of the game. Remember that this is just the first of (hopefully) a number of iterations. You have to make PES1 to make PES6.
CaptainOZ
I like the way you slate my supposed intolerance of others by mentioning a 'stuffy British club mentality', and complaining about the language I use. That's so hypocritical it's almost funny. Also, as pointed out above, I was not having a go at his English skills.
Finally, your bold bit about people being 'entitled to their own opinion' is an interesting one. Firstly, I agree in principle. However, if I were to post on here that 'the grass is blue and the sky is pink', I think we can all agree that people would explain to me that I am wrong (at the very least!). Allrounder's point that 'The game has NO PHYSICS system implemented' is factually incorrect so I pointed this out, and in that respect, it is analogous to the blue grass and pink sky example - i.e. piffle.
I used that word just for you.
D
Deleted member 9102
Guest
Edit: Chris Gayle
Allrounder18
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2006
- Location
- Karachi,Pakistan,
lazy_chesnut
OK quite a lot has gone on since I went to bed last night so I'll try and deal with the various points raised an an organised manner.
'Scripting'
I repeat: all games are what people would call 'scripted'. If they were not, nobody would ever achieve anything in them. This applies a god deal to sports games, but less to things like driving simulations due to the nature of the physical models available. When characters have to intercept moving objects accurately, you pretty much have to force the objects into moving in a certain way.
Yea I agree with that.
Back in BLC 99, they probably didn't need to nudge the flight of the ball to line up with the bat, etc., as the graphics were pretty poor so that level of precision is not really necessary. With today's generation of gaming hardware, the graphics are much, much clearer, and also people's expectations have risen, so that the ball really needs to be seen to hit the bat. In BLIC 2005 and BLIC 2007, the path of the ball was obviously changed to make it reach a certain point at a certain time. You could see on the hawkeye that the trajectory of the ball noticeably altered as it neared the floor. In AC09 this is not the case.
Inverse Kinematics - or something similar!
In AC09 the ball does not deviate, but instead the batting animations are altered to achieve the same result. This is evident in the slow-motion replays after having hit a six. This can lead to some quite bizarre bat/hand/body positions momentarily, but I think it's a far better solution than moving the ball (though no doubt this happens a bit too) to hit the bat.
Cricket 97 (the best cricket game ever in my opinion) had no such facilitating the ball to hit the bat thingy how ever I agree its kind of necessary in today's game but here the implementation from Transmission is rather poor the point of reference near bat (the small invisible window around the bat which used to apply code that IF BALL IS AROUND THE POINT OF REFERENCE THEN ALTER THE TRAJECTORY OR PLAY CERTAIN ANIMATION ) is too large and it look very unrealistic because of it if you have look at cricket 07 point of reference (which involves altering ball trajectory) is quite smaller and the result is much better and because in AC09 the point of reference is so big that believable bowled/Lbw never occurs and thats why they AI switches to different animations (wrong shot selections) whose point of reference is far away from ball so that ball can actually hit the stumps Now tell me is it better than ball trajectory system of BLIC 07 or worse???
Boundaries
Having had another look at this, I think that the apparently 'non-slowing-down' boundary shot is nothing more that the ball being hit quite a lot harder than with other shots. When I first played the game, I thought it was giving reduced friction to perfectly timed shots, but now I'm not so sure. The jury remains out in my mind!
I already posted about that in my previous post
Just saw Allrounder's new post!
I haven't seen what you are suggesting happens, but I don't doubt that it does. I agree that there should be more playing and missing, but you really do have to understand that these little things have to be done in order to have a playable game. However, it could be done a lot more subtly, and a lot more realistically so it looks like less 'scripting' is going on. This is something that we might get in a patch (playing and missing is something I believe is quite high up on people's priorities) or the next version of the game. Remember that this is just the first of (hopefully) a number of iterations. You have to make PES1 to make PES6.
If you have noticed the play and miss also looks so unrealistic again because of the large point of reference and AI forced to switch to animation whose point of reference is no where near the ball so that ball can be missed by the batsmen
Finally I was not saying that the sky is pink and the grass is blue and I have proved that with my logic.
OK quite a lot has gone on since I went to bed last night so I'll try and deal with the various points raised an an organised manner.
'Scripting'
I repeat: all games are what people would call 'scripted'. If they were not, nobody would ever achieve anything in them. This applies a god deal to sports games, but less to things like driving simulations due to the nature of the physical models available. When characters have to intercept moving objects accurately, you pretty much have to force the objects into moving in a certain way.
Yea I agree with that.
Back in BLC 99, they probably didn't need to nudge the flight of the ball to line up with the bat, etc., as the graphics were pretty poor so that level of precision is not really necessary. With today's generation of gaming hardware, the graphics are much, much clearer, and also people's expectations have risen, so that the ball really needs to be seen to hit the bat. In BLIC 2005 and BLIC 2007, the path of the ball was obviously changed to make it reach a certain point at a certain time. You could see on the hawkeye that the trajectory of the ball noticeably altered as it neared the floor. In AC09 this is not the case.
Inverse Kinematics - or something similar!
In AC09 the ball does not deviate, but instead the batting animations are altered to achieve the same result. This is evident in the slow-motion replays after having hit a six. This can lead to some quite bizarre bat/hand/body positions momentarily, but I think it's a far better solution than moving the ball (though no doubt this happens a bit too) to hit the bat.
Cricket 97 (the best cricket game ever in my opinion) had no such facilitating the ball to hit the bat thingy how ever I agree its kind of necessary in today's game but here the implementation from Transmission is rather poor the point of reference near bat (the small invisible window around the bat which used to apply code that IF BALL IS AROUND THE POINT OF REFERENCE THEN ALTER THE TRAJECTORY OR PLAY CERTAIN ANIMATION ) is too large and it look very unrealistic because of it if you have look at cricket 07 point of reference (which involves altering ball trajectory) is quite smaller and the result is much better and because in AC09 the point of reference is so big that believable bowled/Lbw never occurs and thats why they AI switches to different animations (wrong shot selections) whose point of reference is far away from ball so that ball can actually hit the stumps Now tell me is it better than ball trajectory system of BLIC 07 or worse???
Boundaries
Having had another look at this, I think that the apparently 'non-slowing-down' boundary shot is nothing more that the ball being hit quite a lot harder than with other shots. When I first played the game, I thought it was giving reduced friction to perfectly timed shots, but now I'm not so sure. The jury remains out in my mind!
I already posted about that in my previous post
Just saw Allrounder's new post!
I haven't seen what you are suggesting happens, but I don't doubt that it does. I agree that there should be more playing and missing, but you really do have to understand that these little things have to be done in order to have a playable game. However, it could be done a lot more subtly, and a lot more realistically so it looks like less 'scripting' is going on. This is something that we might get in a patch (playing and missing is something I believe is quite high up on people's priorities) or the next version of the game. Remember that this is just the first of (hopefully) a number of iterations. You have to make PES1 to make PES6.
If you have noticed the play and miss also looks so unrealistic again because of the large point of reference and AI forced to switch to animation whose point of reference is no where near the ball so that ball can be missed by the batsmen
Finally I was not saying that the sky is pink and the grass is blue and I have proved that with my logic.
I did notice that in the slow motion replays after hitting a 6, the ball travels fine but just after bouncing it rises a bit too high to match the bat animation like if it were to continue without hitting the bat it'd reach waist-height although it was pitched near his feet. Other than that, I think relying on physics too much would be a problem we'd need far more control and accuracy to even play the game. Errors aside I think the game's fun and playable we just need a patch that allows pitch details like consoles without any tweaking, crowd at day time matches don't make frames drop, AI fixes. If Codemasters allowed the modding now it'd surely last for next 2 years :P
MasterBlaster76
ICC Chairman
Cricket 97 (the best cricket game ever in my opinion) had no such facilitating the ball to hit the bat thingy how ever I agree its kind of necessary in today's game but here the implementation from Transmission is rather poor the point of reference near bat (the small invisible window around the bat which used to apply code that IF BALL IS AROUND THE POINT OF REFERENCE THEN ALTER THE TRAJECTORY OR PLAY CERTAIN ANIMATION ) is too large and it look very unrealistic because of it if you have look at cricket 07 point of reference (which involves altering ball trajectory) is quite smaller and the result is much better and because in AC09 the point of reference is so big that believable bowled/Lbw never occurs and thats why they AI switches to different animations (wrong shot selections) whose point of reference is far away from ball so that ball can actually hit the stumps Now tell me is it better than ball trajectory system of BLIC 07 or worse???
I'm sorry, but I find it hard to see how anyone can think Cricket 97 was the best cricket game ever! No matter the shot that was played, the ball always sped to the boundary every time (sped being the operative word - it was way too fast!) Awful game, in my opinion - the worst cricket game I've ever played.
MasterBlaster76 added 5 Minutes and 42 Seconds later...
Umm...no. The word 'daft' is still in frequent use, where did you get that from? Besides which, my reply had nothing to do with whether or not I know Tom (which I don't) or am 'chummy' with Transmission (which I'm not), it was simply based on the fact I thought the OP was talking a load of rubbish. Simple as that. To say the game has no physics at all is just plain nonsensical!
What if you're not that good? What if you can't find several other people who want to play? What if it's slinging it down with rain? Not to mention the quality of 'playing surfaces' at most local parks; forget about getting true bounce with the ball...
MasterBlaster76 added 2 Minutes and 17 Seconds later...
Indeed. We're not actually out there at the crease with a bat in our hand, so the 'physics' have to be simpified, otherwise the game would be impossible.
I'm sorry, but I find it hard to see how anyone can think Cricket 97 was the best cricket game ever! No matter the shot that was played, the ball always sped to the boundary every time (sped being the operative word - it was way too fast!) Awful game, in my opinion - the worst cricket game I've ever played.
MasterBlaster76 added 5 Minutes and 42 Seconds later...
Umm...no. The word 'daft' is still in frequent use, where did you get that from? Besides which, my reply had nothing to do with whether or not I know Tom (which I don't) or am 'chummy' with Transmission (which I'm not), it was simply based on the fact I thought the OP was talking a load of rubbish. Simple as that. To say the game has no physics at all is just plain nonsensical!
What if you're not that good? What if you can't find several other people who want to play? What if it's slinging it down with rain? Not to mention the quality of 'playing surfaces' at most local parks; forget about getting true bounce with the ball...
MasterBlaster76 added 2 Minutes and 17 Seconds later...
Indeed. We're not actually out there at the crease with a bat in our hand, so the 'physics' have to be simpified, otherwise the game would be impossible.
