 |
|
|
[Affiliate Program]
|
Feedback received (my comments are in italics) Send feedback about Cricket 2000. Sudhir Kumar Shahi said on 5 September 2000 I would like to thank E.A. for making a good playable cricket game. I know that you will be surprised but I liked c2k because I haven't played CWC 99.I have some suggestions to improve this game
Matt Lane said on 29 May 2000 I'm going to attempt not to rabbit on about the fact that 'action' Cricket games published by EA and produced by Creative Assembly shouldn't be touched with a 40 foot pole but it brings me back to the point that what Codemasters gave us was as close to perfection as we've seen in an 'action' Cricket game ever. I'm tooting the Codemasters horn loudly for a good reason. With Cricket 2000, sadly for those of you who have purchased it, you are realising that it is no improvement over the last game CWC99 (and boy were you hoping that it would be!) it is merely a brush stroke different with a few additions and still featuring the same annoyances. The Codemasters game if re-released in the same vain as EA's Cricket 2000 but with an updated team and player database and a few tweaks (mainly to bowling, batting is superb already, who cares if you can't charge the pitch) then we would all see a 'GOOD' product and be content in the fact that we would be playing a high quality game of cricket. An in depth ADD-ON for Brian Lara/Shane Warne Cricket 99 is what we all really need, not another poor piece of software from poor game developers that the flies wouldn't sniff. Jeremy Wellard was the producer and cricket enthusiast behind the Codemasters game and in my eyes is the 'action' Cricket games GOD after several years making games of the sport we love (Audiogenic ring a bell..Graham Gooch's, Allan Border's etc..). Some people praise John Romero for his 3D Shooter game revelation, well.. we should all be singing some the way of Jeremy. Maybe if the Cricket games EA published had someone on board just like Mr. Wellard and the 'quality' team of folks that worked on his last Cricket game project then they might be able to pull of something worthwhile and regain our trust in the EA label. But meanwhile.. and we can only hope.. somewhere out there Jeremy is making plans for his next Cricket game whether its with Codemasters or not (CM have actually said they weren't going ahead with BLC2 for now) then one thing is for sure.... it won't disappoint.
Paul Clarke said on 29 May 2000 Ah Ha.. On the box, Compatible with 3dfx Voodoo....in the book NOT compatible with Voodoo3 and Direct X 7 (which is required by just about every other new game you can think of). Last 12 months 40% of new PCs into the home came with this graphics card fitted...yet more people bought it separately..So how many copies of this turgid game will be winging their way back to EA (I mean Voodoo 3 is probably THE most popular card at the moment bar none). What is EA quality control up to..its not as if the game is graphically stunning or full of new features or anything?...the mind boggles.
Amin ur Rehman said on 27 May 2000 "Buy NOW!!" It read.."ORDER BY ONLINE!!!" Yeah right..one would think something really great is happening... You would be thinking that I have written nonsense stuff about Cricket 2000 here but it is necessary...i.e. NECESSARY for you to read this before you buy the actual game. Ok then, where should I start?? The game is ......um. Let me put it this way. Brian Lara 1999 is still better. Actually, Cricket 2000 seems like a patch file of Cricket 1999 by EA Sports. I mean it is the complete version but because of Cricket 1999 it is still very boring indeed. I will tell u my observations as I inserted the CD in my CD-ROM. Tada! Cricket 2000 installation file started running. Cool... Now what? When the installation was finished, I started prowling around that how much space it had taken.. Cool...very little. Then came the big part..running of Cricket 2000. I double clicked on the icon. PING! "DirectX error..please reinstall Direct X" That was easy enough. Reinstalled it in 5 minutes, no problem...Cool.. Now I double clicked with crossed fingers (in fact clicking with crossed fingers is a tough job..try it..) Cool... "E.A. Sports..its in the Game!" You wont believe it...its exactly the same as Cricket World Cup 1999!!! Exactly! Only Cricket 2000 is written at the bottom. Not quite cool... NO!! Same screen!! "Loading"! Another new thing I experienced that the Umpire was actually visible! Here are a few bugs : a) Despite coming down the wicket, the ball is still given a no ball if above waist height (full toss) b) Bowlers ball to left handers only around the wicket... c) Occasional crashes take place when changing the field despite having Direct X 7.0. d) The CAMERA ANGLE!!! Another thing..some new stadiums are added like Calcutta, Wellington, Brisbane, etc.. yea..their structures are very much the same but the crowd behaviour is the same (like WC99..i.e the same hummm) unlike Brian Lara Cricket 1999. Eventually I think that EA Sports have destroyed the whole game because of the Camera Angle and the crowd behaviour. It doesn't seem as if we are playing cricket...looks like its a croquet or a golf game. Hear my words, " CRICKET 2000 is a patch file of WORLD CUP 1999" I would rank this game 2/5. Well you have it! WC99!
Darren Adams said on 25 May 2000 I only wish I'd read the review by Darren Parrett before I wasted $AUS60-odd on this load of shite (Cricket 2000). I whole-heartedly back up his comments and irateness. I have now mistakenly purchased three cricket games which should be ashamed to wear the EA logo (unlike the NBA and FIFA games they produce). I won't make the mistake again - I'll stick to ICC 2 for simulation, and Shane Warne cricket when I want a bit of action.
Paul Clarke said on 21 May 2000 Well, what did I predict eh? I hate being all smug, but Cricket 2000 THIRTY FIVE QUID for the same game that came out a year ago. I apologise to my mate Neil Larner, I told him to buy the game (sorry Neil) at the time I couldn't believe it could be as bad as it is. Electronic Boutique had it in the "coming soon" area in the second week of March for christs sake. (normally a game is only put in that section if it is due out the following Friday) Two months later its out...and its rubbish. I'd been telling Neil that they must REALLY be putting some work into it...Ha flipping ha! The TV advert says Give me the hook, the pull, the bouncer...well that's about all it does give you. These shots were not possible in the unpatched cricket 99, are now available (EA discovered ball physics I guess) Other than that its just a few more pretty pictures. In fact I would go so far as to say its no better in any real way than CWC with the second patch (and my local Format has that for 7.99). All the niggles are their, bats that clang, balls that skim a non existent roof, fielders that are just plain bizarre, yes all that rubbish is still in their.To paraphrase EAs own ad slogan 'If THIS is in the game...I must have had a night on the happy pills' If the Fifa series is anything to go by, we can expect a good game in another two instalments (Road to Cricket World Cup 2003 anyone?). Oh well, lets hope ICC200 keeps me going (good luck with that by the way).
Darren Parrett said on 10 May 2000 I've just read the info on EA's "NEW" game and I can't believe it. The game is basically unchanged from Cricket World Cup. Actual New Features
That's it. Apparently "Expert Mode" is a "New Feature" - but that was put in Cricket World Cup's second patch. I'm irate. This game is exactly what I predicted. It's astonishing that the game took so long to release given that most of the work would have gone into designing the new grounds. I think this game should be referred to as "Cricket World Cup" with Patch 3...
Richard Watters said on 15 February 2000 After playing the CWC99 initially, I was appalled that EA would put their good name on it, it was marginally better with the patch. It just goes to show how many bugs there were if the patch was 13Mb+, However let's make a few basics comparisons between the CWC99 and BLC (latest version), First of all, shot selection, BLC has far more selections, except for coming down the wicket. BLC can play tests; before you all jump down my throat telling me the CWC was only for the world cup, I realise this but now its 2000, England are presently in South Africa getting their butts kicked in a TEST series, surely its not rocket science to send out a patch for this facility. I hardly think 2-1 was a butt kicking and even despite result in last test England did better than many expected. All I can say is IF Cricket 2000 is CWC99 with all the bugs fixed that ought to have been fixed then I say keep it.... I recommend we plead with Codemasters to make a new BLC 2000 or 2001.
Vishal said (messages sent all in CAPS are considered shouting and bad netiquette) on 27 January 2000 I saw the Cricket 2000 page in your cricketgames and must say that the first impression I had about this game was that it is going to turn out like the Cricket 97 & Cricket 98 Ashes Tour. C97 was released as C98 the following year with no additional features but the cost was raised by 100 rs (Indian money). When I saw the C2000 screenshots it looks as if C2000 and CWC99 are going to be the same. Also in one of the shots the Indian team was listed and the team was not updated. For ex Gagan Khoda, Kanitkar and no Bharadwaj or M.S.K.Prasad. These EA people release such game with no updated teams, cameras and lots of bugs and then release corrupted patches. Believe me if C2000 turns out be like the story of C97 and C98 then they have a big problem. I doubt Creative Assembly have yet got the updated players as would be best to wait until the end of development to get all the latest players. EA people have also forgotten about the losers who brought CWC99. The teams are changing and many of the 16 members of each team in CWC99 are changing. For ex Paul Reiffel retired and Azhar's career is over. Now there are new faces. EA must constantly update the teams so that CWC99 copes with the modern faces and just not old faces. Maybe they would change the team in C2000 but what about buyers of CWC99?????????????? All of us cannot afford to buy a new game every year. As we ourselves cannot edit the player names in CWC99 EA must release a file that would include new faces instead of old ones. We don't demand much. EA must release a short file that would update the latest player names, photos and commentary that would comment their name. For ex Vijay Bharadwaj in place of Azhar, MSK Prasad for Mongia, Symonds for Reiffel, and so on. I hope EA people would look into it and release a file soon. How about a patch for the camera????? EA don't have to release new teams details although it would be good support if they did. I think the plan is though to make the game like the Fifa series and release a new version every year which will have the latest players. What patch for the camera??
Paul Clarke said on 21 January 2000 I am inclined to agree with Darren Parretts' opinion on this one. I am still flabbergasted that one magazine gave the unpatched version of cricket 99 a score of nearly 90% and to this day still puts it in their 'reccommended' list for sports games. Unpatched the 99 version was completed at the hardest level within half a day of purchase, with very little in the way of enjoyment of authenticity in the middle (but lots of bugs and 'niggles') Mind you this magazine never gives any EA game less than 80% (...don't believe me...check for yourself) So Cricket 2000...sadly by the same team (are these the fellas that did the original Fifa games in the mid 90s? they were rubbish as well) and yes it does just sound like a working version or Cricket 99. But the point of this mail is... Dont buy it until you've read a review in something other than PCZONE first (mind you 99 was out for weeks before their was a review anywhere...what does that tell you?). Oh well....
Darren Parrett said on 14 November 1999 Here's a quote from EA Australia regarding Cricket 2000 (taken from their website). "EA SPORTS presents Cricket 2000 for the PlayStation and PC to be released in early 2000. The definitive one day cricket simulation includes the following features The only Officially licensed simulation of the 1999 Cricket World Cup competition. " I realise that this is not any new news, but it just occurred to me that EA Sports Cricket World Cup (99) is also an officially licensed simulation of the 1999 Cricket World Cup Competition. Does this mean that EA have effectively abandoned any further enhancements to the other game and consequently the new game would in effect become exactly what the original was intended to be? I received my copy of the game for free so I'm not complaining, however I feel people who paid for the game would feel a little pissed off that Cricket World Cup in it's current state is still an incomplete product. I think EA is chasing the money here - they could just release more patches to get the current game up to the standard you would expect from this franchise, instead they choose to make the user pay for the patched version under the guise of a 'new' product. They don't even acknowledge the existence of the other Cricket World Cup game in the above quoted feature list!!! I can only assume that very few units of the game moved off the shelf otherwise I can't see how they can get away with this. The only thing I would like added to the original game (in a patch) is the ability to choose your shot as a batter - if that feature was present the game would be flawless. I know some people have claimed the inability of the game to play a 50 over match (this was improved in the second patch) but even Lara has the same fault. Cricket World Cup got everything right except for the batting and also the camera view - if it had of had those features implemented properly it would be the King of Cricket games. Even so, Cricket 2000 looks like it's just gonna be an enhanced version of Cricket World Cup - basically the enhancements come down to things that should have been in implemented by patches and stuff that Lara got right. |
Revised:
Saturday, 16 March 2013. |
