EA Sports NCAA Football - Which edition was the best?

[Kodos]

:)

[VPI97]

'99 - the one with Danny Wuerffel on the cover.

[Raiders Army]

2006, no brainer.

[CHEMICAL SOLDIER]

2000 got the most play for me.

[pennywisesb]

'04 for me, but '06 is slowly gaining.

[scooper]

04 got the most playtime. I think 06 is better, but I have much less free time these days so I am not as immersed in it.

[streetballer22]

06 is the best but I enjoyed 02 the most.

[sabotai]

2004. 2005 was 2 steps down from 04 and 06 was one step back up.

[Raiders Army]

2004. 2005 was 2 steps down from 04 and 06 was one step back up.
You've got to be kidding. 2006 is head and shoulders above 2004. The running game is better, the recruiting is tweaked throughout the season, and you have abilities changing throughout the game depending on how the players are doing. How is 2004 better than 2006?

[VPI97]

You've got to be kidding. 2006 is head and shoulders above 2004. The running game is better, the recruiting is tweaked throughout the season, and you have abilities changing throughout the game depending on how the players are doing. How is 2004 better than 2006?There are 10 times more AI busters in 2006 than in 2004. This version ruined online play.

[Raiders Army]

There are 10 times more AI busters in 2006 than in 2004. This version ruined online play.
Ah. I don't play online.

[Cuckoo]

You've got to be kidding. 2006 is head and shoulders above 2004. The running game is better, the recruiting is tweaked throughout the season, and you have abilities changing throughout the game depending on how the players are doing. How is 2004 better than 2006?

Agreed. I thought I would hate inseason recruiting in 2006, but I've come to love it actually. I enjoyed 2004 but can't see how anyone can say it's better than 2006.

This is not to say 2006 is perfect, of course. It definitely has some problems and, like every other game, requires sliders to make the results realistic. But I think it's the best of the series yet, and I've bought every year since about '99 I think.

[Cuckoo]

Ah. I don't play online.

I don't either. That must largely account for the differences of opinion, I suspect.

[tucker342]

Easily 06 for me

[MikeVick7]

2005 - Yeah that's right, I'm the first one to vote for it. I felt like, despite the lower completion percentage, that you actually had to play football and be a little more strategic rather than just dropping back and running your QB all over the damn field.

2006 - Although I may give it another try for the first time in 2 months tonight, dopped the ball because they may it too easy to run online and the FG kickers were on steroids as well.

[Emiliano]

2006 for me, but I played only that and 2005 (which I really liked it, BTW).

[Raiders Army]

I really liked 2005 because of the additional features. I thought passing was difficult at first, but I attributed it more because I used Army instead of USC. IMHO, I thought 2005 was better than 2004 and the series gets better every year. Same with Madden.

[sabotai]

2006 is head and shoulders above 2004. The running game is better, the recruiting is tweaked throughout the season, and you have abilities changing throughout the game depending on how the players are doing. How is 2004 better than 2006?
The passing game is still worse than in 2004, in season recruiting turned out to a big turd for me, HFA is still flawed, sim engine ruins passing stats. I could go on but I haven't touched the game since I got Madden so I'm probably forgetting other complaints I had. (Also, I don't play online either)

Like I said, 2005 was 2 steps below 2004, and 2006 took 1 step back up. There are still things in 2005 that they broke (or threw in unfinished) that are still broken or not tweaked well enough in 2006. Instead of working on a completely useless "RFTH" mode, they should have fixed the game more.

[Cuckoo]

Instead of working on a completely useless "RFTH" mode, they should have fixed the game more.

This is one part I certainly can't disagree with.

[Raiders Army]

This is one part I certainly can't disagree with.
As do I. The game definitely needs some stats adjustments.

[Kodos]

So has anyone reverted to just playing 2004?

[sabotai]

So has anyone reverted to just playing 2004?
I probably would have if I still had it.

[Kodos]

I still have mine. I kept it when it became clear that 2005 was a travishamockery. I think I still have my Indiana dynasty too...

[Raiders Army]

I probably would have if I still had it.
I still have 2004 and 2005 for the Xbox. Sell them to you for cheap. Make an offer.

[CHEMICAL SOLDIER]

I really enjoyed 2005 too.

[MikeVic]

I've only played 2004, and am currently enjoying it right now. :D

[jbmagic]

was the AI challenging to play against on 2004?

[RebelMan]

I played the hell out of 2004. For me, 2005 wasn't bad.

[MizzouRah]

2006 (my game of the year) and then 2004 is right behind it.

[Kodos]

I've been playing 2006 a bit recently, and have been enjoying it. I like the running game, and am getting better at passing now that I've turned CPU interceptions way down. I wish the recruiting was left to the offseason, as I like things segmented. During the season, I just want to play games and not worry about recruiting. Found Varsity to be too easy, so moved back up to the 2nd highest level with sliders in my favor.

[Passacaglia]

Whichever was the last one to come out for PC.

[MizzouRah]

Just lost to #3 Nebraska 45-38 as I was driving with no timeouts. :(

I feel sorry for Kanas though as I'm about to open a can of whoop ass on them tonight.

[sooner333]

I voted for 06...but I'm partial to College Football USA '96 on Sega Genesis by EA sports. All of the teams with real player's numbers too and a season mode...it was a pretty cool game.

[Swaggs]

Where is Bill Walsh College Football? :)

[Kodos]

Since I'm only a few games into my NCAA 2006 dynasty -- is there still the traditional recruiting period in addition to the new in-season stuff? Also, what's the consensus on recruiting - too easy?

[Galaxy]

was the AI challenging to play against on 2004?


You asking about the AI?

[Emiliano]

Since I'm only a few games into my NCAA 2006 dynasty -- is there still the traditional recruiting period in addition to the new in-season stuff?
Yeah.
Also, what's the consensus on recruiting - too easy?
My personal opinion after playing 10 seasons: in-season you can get high-rated guys easily, even if you're not a powerhouse. Off-season is a little bit harder.
Overall, I think it's fair.

[Kodos]

So if I ignore in-season, it might lead to more realistic recruiting results.

[tucker342]

ya, it would basically be the same as recruiting in the older versions.

[Emiliano]

So if I ignore in-season, it might lead to more realistic recruiting results.
Well, if you want a tougher challenge, yeah. But I think it's balanced. Also, recruiting in-season is realistic and gives you a taste of the recruiting class. I'd say, if you're in your first season, play it "all out". Then if it's too easy for you give up the in-season and concentrate only on the classic off-season part.
If you're using a low-rated program, maybe it's better to take advantage of it in your first 2-3 seasons... ;)

[Kodos]

Well, I am playing with Indiana U.... :)

[Buzzbee]

Kodos is an EA whore.




That is all.

[Buzzbee]

Dola - The in-season recruiting is somewhat fun for me. The begining kinda stinks because you don't really know much about the players and it is kind of a crapshoot. You select 12 players and then you are stuck recruiting those 12 players.

However, I do like the way they have the points structured, somewhat. You have 100 points to divy up between the 12 recruits. It adds a little bit of strategy to it. However, I've found that the human will generally be a little more savvy in dividing up the points, which gives the human the edge. Also, it allows a weaker team to focus on just a few impact players that they probably wouldn't otherwise get. This tends to make the recruiting process a little easier.

I think you could probably make some house rules to balance things out and make it more realistic and fun.

[Emiliano]

Dola - The in-season recruiting is somewhat fun for me. The begining kinda stinks because you don't really know much about the players and it is kind of a crapshoot. You select 12 players and then you are stuck recruiting those 12 players.

However, I do like the way they have the points structured, somewhat. You have 100 points to divy up between the 12 recruits. It adds a little bit of strategy to it. However, I've found that the human will generally be a little more savvy in dividing up the points, which gives the human the edge. Also, it allows a weaker team to focus on just a few impact players that they probably wouldn't otherwise get. This tends to make the recruiting process a little easier.

I think you could probably make some house rules to balance things out and make it more realistic and fun.
I agree 100%.

[Jaguars]

2006 easily.

[Philliesfan980]

Question: Do you guys think NCAA 2006 is more fun (complete package) than TCY?