First Reviews, new screenshots and video.

[zreh]

It just shows they don't know anything about Cricket, seriously Cricket 2002 + 2004 had white sight screen, cricket 2005 still has them :

what do you guys mean by white screens?
what are they?
and why is it a pig problem...?

thanks,

zreh

 

[taxial]

what do you guys mean by white screens?
what are they?
and why is it a pig problem...?

thanks,

zreh

Referring to the sight screens zreh. They should only be white in a test. It?s very minor but many seem to make a big deal out of it. It doesn't take away anything from the game. ( Coming from a graphics stand point, if each stadium is dynamically lit it would mean they would have to have two different versions on that stadium to have the two different color screens and since Cricket 2005 has dynamically lit stadiums this time around its probably the reason why it didn't make it in .... again ). On another note, the fielders seem to be using their proper hand this time around to pick up the balls. Nice one.

 

[Asjad]

True, sight-screens don't matter in "video cricket games" but if you talk about realism which EA so proudly boasts, where the hell is realism where there are white sight-screens in ODIs?? You know why its such a big issue in terms of realism?, well then think, because batsmen wouldnt be able to see a "white ball" in front of a big "white" sight-screen, in real life if that was the case you wouldnt get any score from the batting team.

 

[taxial]

True, sight-screens don't matter in "video cricket games" but if you talk about realism which EA so proudly boasts, where the hell is realism where there are white sight-screens in ODIs?? You know why its such a big issue in terms of realism?, well then think, because batsmen wouldnt be able to see a "white ball" in front of a big "white" sight-screen, in real life if that was the case you wouldnt get any score from the batting team.

I?m not disagreeing. It just doesn't bother me. I like to think on the positive. Highlights, Confidence Meter that actually works! Special Bowls, Manual Fielder Throw Gauge, Dynamic Stadium Lighting, Names/Numbers and Man of the Match SWEET!

 

[Mahesh Babu]

True, sight-screens don't matter in "video cricket games" but if you talk about realism which EA so proudly boasts, where the hell is realism where there are white sight-screens in ODIs?? You know why its such a big issue in terms of realism?, well then think, because batsmen wouldnt be able to see a "white ball" in front of a big "white" sight-screen, in real life if that was the case you wouldnt get any score from the batting team.

I dont think so
Batsman can easily make runs even without a sightscreen .May be they need some extra concentration.In the same way u need that extra concentration when playing a game to make runs easily.

EA2005 is the way to go

 

[fanirama]

Its a freakin' game where *YOU* are the batsman. and in the default view, you don't see the sightscreen.
Also, try the first person view and even though you have the white sightscreen, you can still see the ball clearly. Whats the big deal.

The ball could be red, blue, green and I still will be ok with it.

 

[Asjad]

I don't think you could make out a white ball from a white sight-screen in reality, in a video game though iam not saying its a big deal, the only thing wrong is with Ea, if they haven't fixed some bugs from the last games, then they should'nt say that they have.

Batsman can easily make runs even without a sightscreen .May be they need some extra concentration.In the same way u need that extra concentration when playing a game to make runs easily.

offcourse, i really do believe in that, batsmen don't really need to see the ball :

Its a freakin' game where *YOU* are the batsman. and in the default view, you don't see the sightscreen.

iam not saying it matters in a video game, though if you talk about reality it matters a lot, you'd need super-vision to differentiate white from white. THATS exactly why ODI's have BLACK sight-screens so the batsmen see a WHITE ball.

I?m not disagreeing. It just doesn't bother me. I like to think on the positive. Highlights, Confidence Meter that actually works! Special Bowls, Manual Fielder Throw Gauge, Dynamic Stadium Lighting, Names/Numbers and Man of the Match SWEET!

hmm, new features, nice to hear about them and i certainly hope these are in the final product, might think again about getting it.What iam saying is that EA said it has fixed all the bugs, but yet they are still in them, petty bugs such as these, and then also announces new features, in the past all it has done is lied about new features.

 

[fanirama]

Look. There are only 1 or 2 people making this game every few years. EA makes it more regularly. ( forget the good or bad aspects of it. Talking about its simple existance )
Instead of focussing on all the negatives and being picky, I choose to focus on the good experiences the game will give and am very excited to get not one but 2 games now !!!!!
Where I could've had none, I'm now about to get 2 games within a month !!!

Cricket gaming has taken off and its becoming like NFL or Baseball etc. where you now have more recognition to the sport. Sure, its not a perfect game ( both Cricket 2005 or BLIC ) but in a drought of cricket games, you're getting a hurricane.

Enjoy it.

 

[Asjad]

I really appreciate your thinking but if the flaws are all the time ignored and are not conveyed to the companies producing the product then iam afraid we'll be getting the same crap over and over again, it just isnt right, so many games have set a higher standard, why doesnt cricket deserve just as good a game? iam just saying that surely EA could have done a lot better, don't you? BLIC's textures don't impress me, i admit they do look pre-mature and by adjusting saturation/brightness and contrast i think that problem can be resolved but why doesn't the company making that do this?? apart from this, i think its a fine game with some effort put behind it.other than this, i think the player models and animations look fine.EA's graphics arent bad at all, but the speed of the game, models, other bugs do matter. They've done a good job interms of improving the look of the game.
I, for one, certainly wish that there was a complaint thread instead of a questions' one, so that we could send the complaints to the respective companies, so that they make a patch/do something about it, whatever.

 

[mattwinter]

how come adelaide oval is not updated with the new stands while they updated the MCG

I know, that is very annoying, i love sitting in those new stands

 

[Ankit kukreti]

Cricket 2005 sounds good but why haven't we seen anything good. The gameplay video is ordinary and the game looks very inactive. Hopefully we will get some good videos.

 

[sachin]

Apart from looking a bit like guerilla's i think the gameplay videos look okay.Well apart from the aweful commentary which doesn't seemed to have changed at all.

 

[kodos]

does anyone else notice that the menu and general game features look like the same as rugby 2005. Some great effort put into there but i like the adam gilchrist picture in the menu. I suppose cricket 2005 will also have the "my team" feature where u pick one team that you would like to always use.

 

[sachin]

Well i just had a look at the video from the start of the thread and it has got to be one of the worst video's i've seen!They can't even hit the ball,and whay hasn't Mcgrath got his bowling action?He's the best bowler in the world.

 

[Asjad]

They can't even hit the ball

thats because the person who made the video,according to everyone, isn't even your average cricket fan, he doesn't like cricket.

and whay hasn't Mcgrath got his bowling action?He's the best bowler in the world.

thats because it appears to be the case that EA doesnt like working hard and takes short-cuts instead.