Have the game? Rate it!

[Trevytrev11]

Skip the reviews, the Madden comparrisons and the list of complaints. For those that have had the game long enough to get a solid feel for it, give it a score.

A lot of people looking to buy the game put more faith in the opinions of the guys in there then they do for any internet video game reviewer.

So let's keep it simple and to the point...just pick a score that most closely resembles how you would score the overall game. If yo want to throw in a few quick comments, feel free, but there is a seperate thread for the major impressions and reviews and I don't want to get the two mixed up.

If you played the game for a few minutes at your buddies house or just saw the demo somewhere, hold off for those that actually got to play the game long enough to get a feel for it.

I made the votes public so that people can determine if they beleive the people voting are credible sources.

[JayBee74]

I voted 9.4 (9.0-9.4 range), and feel a little guilty about it because I'm basically taking off for the "playable graphics". If you manually replay you will see that the graphics fade a little as the players get smaller, but are fine at medium or close up range. I thought this was a legitimate reason to knock it out of the highest scoring range in your poll, because we are talking about next generation. Having said that I have to tell you I really like the graphics as a whole. There's too much to like about this game with the no nonsense rating system of Gold, Silver, Bronze, and the GENERICS! So easy to spot matchups on the line or corners on their wideouts, etc, etc.And the ratings are spot on! There was a thread on "Bargain Bronze Players"-does it get any better than that? (by the way-I disagree about Natrone Means, but I will still give him another game or two). I consider franchise play in this type of game a little overrated (don't hit me!!) so that had no effect on my scoring. If you want to make a no franchise adjustment knock it down to 9.3.

[ODogg]

I've only had the game since Tuesday and only got in about 10 hours with it but I rate it a 9.5 for fun factor alone. They need to clean up the graphics and work some on those dreadful menus (man those fonts look like something a high school a/v club would have) but the actual gameplay is fantastic!

[drae2]

All this game needs is John Facenda's voice. Beautiful game. What football should be.

[Dregur]

I'd rate it an 8.5. Gameplay is great so far (which heavily weighted in my score). But there is a lack of options, and having a franchise mode would be nice (although, I do have to admit, I wouldn't know how that would work.).

Graphics are good, but not great, and it runs mostly smooth. The animations are also good, but there could be improvements. Also, as much as I like Dan and Peter, after playing 2k5 for such a long time, alot of the commentary is exactly the same.

Great game that could get some improvements.

Also, I wish they had Steve Largent, so I could recreate some of the magic that was the early to mid 80's Seahawks offense. Already have Curt Warner and Dave Krieg/Jim Zorn.

-The Grinman

[dacks]

Franchise would be easy. Think of it this way, in the licenced game players are set to their current age and abilities. They could do two things, allow us to create a slew of players or use and edit generics or they could have rosters full of former standout players(which would cost more money but add to the feel).
So, in essence, either path they take they can have a franchise with a fantasy draft style and the remaining players go on free agent lists. For successive seasons there is a draft of generic players and they could also add all sorts of extra management aspects.
I gave this game an 8.7 because of the fact that it lacks options. If they implement a fanasty style franchise next year(which they had no reason not to this year, come on 3 years and you can't put this in?) ,then this game would get a 9.5(only drawback being the graphics atm.)

[xrams]

I had to give this a 10 out of 10.....!!!!!

1) there nothing to compare it too....

2) the sheer (obvious) strategy needed to learn and beat this game on a consistant basis will take at least until 2K9...

3) the imagination and time to create the new rating system and make it workable..

4) the stadium models....

I could go on and on.....!!!!

[ODogg]

You know after thinking about this for a bit, you really have to come up with what you're rating the game on and how. Because if it's just rate the game for fun, I think for a lot of people it will be a 10. But if you mean rate the game like based on graphics/audio/modes included, etc it may be an 8. Or if you rate it based on what's wrong with it and/or missing then maybe it's a 7 for you. I think this is why ratings of games is so difficult. Each person has their own way of thinking about a game.

I gave this game a 9.5 rating because to me overall for fun and wanting to play it, it's very very high. However there are a ton of things I could point out that are wrong with it, but yet none major in gameplay which is what matters (to me). But to John Doe he may see no Franchise and say, no way can he rate it a 9.5 without a franchise. Personally i don't care that much about it because I play online a lot though.

Just some food for thought..