I appreciate your viewpoint but will say this. If we look at any scoring system we have to consider that when we assign full value 10/10 we are assessing all elements included to be superior.
If we step out of sports gaming for example, and look at a game like Ninja Gaiden Black, we see a game that combines flawless gameplay, beautiful presentation, along with fine-tuned attention to all details, whether they be sound, presentation, or any other part of the gameplay experience
Using that as a mindset, let's look at MVP 2006. Is the gameplay there? Sure for the most part it is and it even exceeds MVP 2005 in some areas of animation, as more have definitely been added, and in some of the gameplay features like analog fielding and hitting. But when we consider all the other elements of presentation and graphics, how do we assess the
overall experience? To your own review, the graphics are well below the established standard for this current level of hardware. EA has been trotting out inferior graphical presentations, especially on the Xbox, where the standard practice has always been to do a straight port over from the PS2. That needs to be considered in any review
Similarly, and you have highlighted it, in other areas such as the commentary and even in the dynasty mode, MVP 2006 is below the standard of established titles in the EA family. The dynasty mode is decent but not as deep as either MVP 2005 or, should we compare to another NCAA property, any NCAA Football title circa 2003. In terms of the graphical presentation provided by even mundane elements like the menus and cut-scenes, again we see a product that is below established levels, not even comparing outside of EA properties, but within those
To my point, what we have is a game that plays well but falls short of the water mark in many other areas. A 9/10 suggests that it is above average in all areas, let alone gameplay. Understand, I am a fan of the MVP engine. I'm not a fan of the rest of the elements that should combine to make it a well-rounded title. I understand that a game can be incredibly fun to play and not be a beauty to look at, but at some point we do need to consider where the median is in the industry at large. Graphically and presentationally, MVP 2006 doesn't get there and regresses in those elements from last year. Does it need to have the same character as MVP 2005? No but it should have
some character. Titles like NCAA Football and College Hoops have shown that you can do that, even with generic players
I can understand a score within the 7.5 - 8.0 range, but like I said, your score is over the top and doesn't take into consideration the critical elements of graphics and presentation that you yourself mention as being below par
They are still called "videogames" so those elements do need to be weighted to the capabilities shown by both current and next gen
You said it, I didn't. Your comments represent a graphical degradation of over three editions of the game
Bottom line, the score isn't reflective of the game and the overall tenor is much too agreeable to a product that misses the mark as much as it hits the sweet spot
Have fun.............