Which game are you getting?

[GROGtheNailer]

ESPN 2004...yes

NHL Rvals and Hitz....possible

NHL 2004...no, havent released a decent hockey game in years

[pk500]

Quote:

---

hulkster29 said:
oh i am a fan of realistic hockey, and yes nhl 2003 was a little arcadic.. but sega cannot graphically hold a candle to ea games & also what is up w/ the fact you cannot play w/ creted players during a franchise??? to me that seems to be a waste.. that is why i dislike sega..

---

A little arcadish? That's the understatement of the year. Sega's game is light years ahead of EA's NHL series in terms of realism.

You can say all you want that you like realistic hockey, but when you state graphics quality as the major reason you prefer EA's NHL series, we all know that realism doesn't mean that much to you. Oh, and news flash: The jerky framerates in EA's NHL series are a joke compared to the smooth framerates in the NHL 2K series.

Enjoy your 15-13 scores, endless turbo rushes up the ice and watching Ken Daneyko pull a Bobby Orr/Denis Savard spin-o-rama at will. As a fan of realistic hockey, you know who Orr and Savard are, right?

Take care,
PK

[nyisles16]

didn't they play ss for the ny giants??? lol.. maybe i am basing it on graphics, however what really disappointed me w/ sega games was (i know wrong forum) wsb for ps2 - very choppy frame rates & didn't seem to have accurate game play.. maybe its because im used to playing ea games.. i believe this issue has more to do w/ the fact the games were just ported from the x-box versions so the kinks couldn't be worked out.. and didnt guy lafleur pitch for the brooklyn dodgers??

[pk500]

So you're generalizing all Sega games based on a bad experience with WSB? Come on, man.

If there's any company guilty of lazy ports, it's EA. EA's Xbox games are nothing but ports of PS2 versions, with faster load times and slightly polished graphics about the only improvement. Sega's games look much better on the Xbox than the PS2, as that company actually takes the time to explore the Xbox hardware.

As for framerate, the framerate for PS2 versions of EA's NHL series has been awful. Jerkier than David Byrne in the Talking Heads' famous "Once in a Lifetime" video.

To each their own ...

Take care,
PK

[nyisles16]

i guess your right.. i shouldn't have bases my opinion based on one game - besides i have just taken the time to go through screenshots of both new espn titles coming out & WOW- what a difference from last year.. this may be the year that ea loses out on my dollar.. i do like the fact also that they will have legends..

[GROGtheNailer]

If you like hockey-lite go EA, if you like hockey and all things that should go along with it...ESPN 2004 easily. Depending on what you are looking for, EA hockey is a joke while Sega's game is the realism hockey fans are looking for.

EA for years has not made any sunstantial improvements to it's game, have ignored hockey fans and what they have asked for. They release garbage year after year and keep expecting the gullible to swallow it. Their football game is good but they can't seem to get hockey..it's like they just don't "get" it. Sega totally and utterly outclasses them in the hockey department and I really hope the public realizes that EA has a lot of advertising but their hockey game sucks a lot as well.

Sega is the "man" now, but hey..let's see what Rivals and Hitz bring to the ice.

[Money99]

This one's easy. ESPN Hockey.

[Splitter77]

ESPN Hockey ps2-definite
Hitz Pro ps2-definite
NHL 2004 PC-wait for reviews