-
This is a reminder of 3 IMPORTANT RULES:
1- External self-promotion websites or apps are NOT allowed here, like Discord/Twitter/Patreon/etc.
2- Do NOT post in other languages. English-only.
3- Crack/Warez/Piracy talk is NOT allowed.
Breaking any of the above rules will result in your messages being deleted and you will be banned upon repetition.
Please, stop by this thread SoccerGaming Forum Rules And Guidelines and make sure you read and understand our policies.
Thank you!
Cricket video games pc
- Thread starter wos
- Start date
no licenses sucks, but that's easily remedied (especially on PC) ... but the gameplay and cinematics look much less advanced than previous cricket games ... unless they have a bunch of DLCs to enhance the game aesthetic -- which is unlikely -- it seems a waste ...
if there's a 2013/14 patch for Brian Lara Cricket 2005, I'd play that awesome game again ...
if there's a 2013/14 patch for Brian Lara Cricket 2005, I'd play that awesome game again ...
It was always hard to make a realistic cricket game when real games go so long.
Cricket games get bagged for being slog fests, yet if we compare to games like FIFA, they're no worse. People generally play ~5 minute halves in FIFA, for example.
That said, with T20 so big now, a realistic T20 game could be made much easier I think.
Cricket games get bagged for being slog fests, yet if we compare to games like FIFA, they're no worse. People generally play ~5 minute halves in FIFA, for example.
That said, with T20 so big now, a realistic T20 game could be made much easier I think.
during the PS1 days, we used to play T10 games on BC Lara '99 and Cricket 2000 ... it was Cricket 2004 that started me off playing tests, and that continued onto BC Lara 2005 ...Alex;3610923 said:
anyway, calling games a slog-fest can't be criticism ... even test match scoring rates are soaring in real life ... the real issue of the slog-fests in video games are that they ended up feeling very arcadey ... and there's been no move towards realism, since the evolution of game physics and animatics in cricket games since 2005 have seemed retrograde at worst, stagnant at best ...
Yeah, it's hard in cricket, because gamers want it to be based on skill, not just luck. But then if it's based on skill, people always perfect it, then continually hit 6s etc.
I think maybe the timing with the bat and aiming when bowling is what needs changing.
The batsman shouldn't be able to see where the ball is going to land until the bowler is about to bowl. That stops players just mastering one shot which goes for six constantly. Also it should be harder to time a ball perfectly every time, but miss timing should mean hitting to fielders etc. Finally, depending on the placement and speed of the ball, it should be easier and harder for the batsman to time. If the ball is a well pitched ball on a length, nipping back off the seam, it should be harder to time than a ball just short of a length outside off stump.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
I think maybe the timing with the bat and aiming when bowling is what needs changing.
The batsman shouldn't be able to see where the ball is going to land until the bowler is about to bowl. That stops players just mastering one shot which goes for six constantly. Also it should be harder to time a ball perfectly every time, but miss timing should mean hitting to fielders etc. Finally, depending on the placement and speed of the ball, it should be easier and harder for the batsman to time. If the ball is a well pitched ball on a length, nipping back off the seam, it should be harder to time than a ball just short of a length outside off stump.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
You think they would have tried to coordinate between batting and bowling (difficulty vis-a-vis accuracy too) as the fundamentals of a cricket game, but no. 
How about a first person cricket game? That might add to the spontaneity of play.
How about a first person cricket game? That might add to the spontaneity of play.
Are any of the EA games as perfect as Stick Cricket? 
But, for a non-FIFA experience with a team sport, I've found the Rugby Union games have been a pretty decent second.
But, for a non-FIFA experience with a team sport, I've found the Rugby Union games have been a pretty decent second.
RobbieD_PL;3611548 said:Are any of the EA games as perfect as Stick Cricket?
But, for a non-FIFA experience with a team sport, I've found the Rugby Union games have been a pretty decent second.
They've been really hit and miss. Great sometimes, poor others. Jonah Lomu Rugby back on the PSX/Saturn days was the peak gameplay wise. But it has no subs, no choosing starting side etc.
The rugby league games haven't been great unfortunately. Though they're ok for some knock around fun in multi player. Certainly not single player games. The bugs that annoy the crap out of players, the AI is immune to.
the last rugby game I played had Joost van der Westhuizen on the cover ... sounds like I haven't been missing out on much ...
anyway, Stick Cricket is a lot of fun ... I played it on PC back when it was new, and then even more when it went mobile ... it's a great example of an arcadey slog fest (where 36 run overs are a necessity given some of the targets you have to chase down) ... that's why a no-license game (i.e. filled with generic faces and fake names), void of realistic physics and animatics, makes little sense to me, both from a consumer's and developer's standpoint ...
anyway, Stick Cricket is a lot of fun ... I played it on PC back when it was new, and then even more when it went mobile ... it's a great example of an arcadey slog fest (where 36 run overs are a necessity given some of the targets you have to chase down) ... that's why a no-license game (i.e. filled with generic faces and fake names), void of realistic physics and animatics, makes little sense to me, both from a consumer's and developer's standpoint ...