MVP 06 NCAA Baseball Review (Xbox)

[Shaver]

Quote: Originally Posted by KBomber

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.............

So...as I suspected... you're hung up on the score and as has been stated literally hundreds of times on OS... read the review... not the score.

[KBomber]

Quote: Originally Posted by Clay_OS

So...as I suspected... you're hung up on the score and as has been stated literally hundreds of times on OS... read the review... not the score.

You can't say this.......

Quote: Originally Posted by Clay_OS

“Improvise. Adapt. Overcome.” That was the credo of Gunnery Sergeant Thomas “Gunny” Highway in the Clint Eastwood classic “Heartbreak Ridge.” That’s what good Marines do in any difficult situation. There’s no surrender. You never stop fighting. You think. You act. You win.

....then temper those comments with this.....

Quote: Originally Posted by Clay_OS

While the advancements are fantastic, and you’ll find a rock-solid gameplay experience within, I’d be remiss if I didn’t point out a few negatives. The graphics and sounds in this title are not nearly as polished as one would expect from a major release. The animations seem to be improving, but the player models themselves really look no better than back in the Triple Play days. Sure, it is gameplay over graphics for me, but the hardware is there. Pretty it up a bit.

... in order to arrive at this conclusion

Quote: Originally Posted by Clay_OS

They took an existing series that worked; did a 180 when they lost their MLB license - and produced a product with more features that was even better. Not only that, they were first to market in the baseball game race by weeks. As a sports gaming and baseball fan, I’m excited to think about what the team can do with a full year to prepare for next year. More teams. More stadiums. We’ll likely even see a deeper Dynasty mode like its gridiron counterpart. The sky is really the limit here. They improvised. They adapted. They overcame.

They didn't. They failed to deliver in critical areas, so while the gameplay is fine, the overall impact does not round into an extraordinary gameplay experience. And you can hedge your bets all you want by saying the score isn't indicative of the review, but if it is that much of a throw away, why include it at all? To me it makes sense if you consider both equally

Take it as you will

Have fun.............

[fossen]

Quote: Originally Posted by KBomber

9/10 suggests otherwise Have fun.........

If you think Operation Sports somehow gives EA a free pass ....
you
haven't
been
paying
attention.

[KBomber]

Quote: Originally Posted by fossen

If you think Operation Sports somehow gives EA a free pass .... you haven't been paying attention.

That's great, but based on the reality of the title being reviewed and the impression provided by said review, you guys sure haven't paid attention to the game that this review is based on either

The review is inconsistent with the game, both in how the numeric score relates to the written review and in how the written review conveys the overall game experience. Throw anything else out there that you want, but that's pretty apparent

That's one man's opinion in snowy Guelph

Have fun................

[fossen]

Quote: Originally Posted by KBomber

That's great, but based on the reality of the title being reviewed and the impression provided by said review, you guys sure haven't paid attention to the game that this review is based on either The review is inconsistent with the game, both in how the numeric score relates to the written review and in how the written review conveys the overall game experience. Throw anything else out there that you want, but that's pretty apparent

So you don't agree with the review. You don't think it's a good review.

Fine.

But to go from that to asinine potshots at the site's credibility with comments like "Quit apologizing for EA", is a huge step. You've been proven wrong on that count - that somehow OS hands out good scores to EA. At this point, you owe Clay and the site an apology for such a comment .... instead, you sidestep the issue.

[Ramminyou]

Quote: Originally Posted by KBomber

That's great, but based on the reality of the title being reviewed and the impression provided by said review, you guys sure haven't paid attention to the game that this review is based on either The review is inconsistent with the game, both in how the numeric score relates to the written review and in how the written review conveys the overall game experience. Throw anything else out there that you want, but that's pretty apparent That's one man's opinion in snowy Guelph Have fun................

I've never seen one person take his or her own personal opinion and so staunchly argue it as some kind of unbiased, objective observation - and I've visited many Internet forums in my day.

"The review is inconsistent with the game, both in how the numeric score relates to the written review[...blah blah blah]"

No it isn't. Clay's review is just inconsistent with your opinion of the game, and for some reason you feel the need to decry its value by refuting the validity of its substance in long-winded posts that, in the end, say nothing more than "THat re veiw sux!"

[KBomber]

Quote: Originally Posted by fossen

So you don't agree with the review. You don't think it's a good review. Fine. But to go from that to asinine potshots at the site's credibility with comments like "Quit apologizing for EA", is a huge step. You've been proven wrong on that count - that somehow OS hands out good scores to EA. At this point, you owe Clay and the site an apology for such a comment .... instead, you sidestep the issue.

I stand by my comment and I'm not the one backtracking given the realization that the review is flawed

If you guys have an issue it's that the review needs work and I've called you on it. You apologize for dropping in a poorly conceived review and I'll apologize for noticing

It's not the first time

Have fun..............

[KBomber]

Quote: Originally Posted by Ramminyou

I've never seen one person take his or her own personal opinion and so staunchly argue it as some kind of unbiased, objective observation - and I've visited many Internet forums in my day. "The review is inconsistent with the game, both in how the numeric score relates to the written review[...blah blah blah]" No it isn't. Clay's review is just inconsistent with your opinion of the game, and for some reason you feel the need to decry its value by refuting the validity of its substance in long-winded posts that, in the end, say nothing more than "THat re veiw sux!"

Yeah, okay

Thanks for coming out

Have fun.............