Poll: Who would you support
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
Big Ant Studios
79.03%
49 79.03%
EA Sports
20.97%
13 20.97%
Total 62 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Thread Rating:
  • 4 Vote(s) - 2.25 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
RLL3 (Big Ant Studios) v NRL 16 (EA Sports)
(08-16-2015, 12:47 PM)FiddleDiddle Wrote: Yes EA has had some bad products but let's face it they are still more likely to produce a better game. Rugby League games aren't really that great gameplay or graphics wise. It's not like the bar has been set too high to reach.

Nope. It'll take them atleast 2-3 tries to make a decent Rugby League title. By that time BigAnt would already have a near perfect Rugby League game.
Reply
(08-17-2015, 07:37 PM)FiddleDiddle Wrote:
(08-17-2015, 02:44 PM)FissionMailed Wrote: [Image: rmdSx.gif]

Pointless.
Hilarious.

(08-17-2015, 07:37 PM)FiddleDiddle Wrote:
(08-17-2015, 02:38 PM)Swiftestblade Wrote: Just saying but you could have used a better review site as an example. IGN is pretty well known for giving terrible reviews and it's widely believed that they are paid for a lot of their reviews.

You can find any review you don't agree with anywhere. No point shooting down the site because you disagree with some of the reviews or believe in rumours. I take it your issue isn't how poor the league games rate compared to the union ones there, if not I don't see your point.

I'm pointing out that your example is not a good example to back your argument on. Also as I said it is widely regarded that what I said is true. It isn't coincidence that IGN never gives a bad score to the larger publishers.

But anyway regarding your point specifically that rugby games score higher than rugby league games, it's probably because most of those rugby games were made in a completely different time. EA's quality 5-10 years ago was at a much higher standard, it's only in recent years they dug themselves into a hole with things. Most rugby games recently that have been made on what are probably bigger budgets than what BA have to work with have been poor quality.
Reply
(08-17-2015, 08:07 PM)roostersule2 Wrote: Hypothetically they could.

Realistically they won't mate.
Reply
(08-17-2015, 07:37 PM)FiddleDiddle Wrote: Whilst I understand it's easy to shoot down their rugby games they were still lightyears ahead of league games. But if we label EA's rugby games as "ordinary" then all our league games this last 10 years are easily "pathetic".

I disagree. League games on the whole have been better than their union counterparts. Rugby '05 and '06 were decent at best, and if reviews are your thing though, League games have received better rankings from those in market. Heck, NZ Gamer gave Sidhe's Rugby League 2 an 8.2/10.

For a point of reference, EA's SECOND Rugby game (EA Rugby 2004) scored 4/10 over at Eurogamer http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/r_rugby2004_ps2

But that's beside the point - I get that you hate the League games, but that doesn't change the cold hard fact that IF EA were to invest in a Rugby League title then the economic realities would dictate they invested less money than they did in Union.

(08-17-2015, 07:37 PM)FiddleDiddle Wrote: As for how they invest, can't answer that. That's down to how well they handle their resources and what they'd be willing to commit.

As I stated in my opening post on this, the equation here is extremely straightforward: EA does not equal good games. Rather, EA targeting a massive and competitive market equals good games.

Rugby League has neither, so I am quite confident I CAN answer how they'd invest if they did, and the answer is very little.

Again, try to keep in mind these are business people in America. They'd be quite happy to feed you shit in the full knowledge plenty of misguided people would buy the game simply because of the EA brand.
Reply
You guys are hilarious - EA have never made an indigenous Australian sports game and never will - they've always outsourced it in the past and always would do so in the future in the unlikely event that they entered the market again.

So essentially, you'd have Big Ant, Wicked Witch, HB Studios, and the like to make the game for EA.

PS: EA Budgets for Cricket, etc. that I have talked to them about in the past have been LESS than we have invested. A typical EA budget does not make sense at all, but if they were to do anything they'd be doing Union, not League, League will never, ever make sense for them.

Big Ant Studios store at www.BigAnt.com
Reply
(08-17-2015, 08:16 PM)roostersule2 Wrote: IGN are generally okay with their reviews.

Must be why the PC version of Bradman is 80% on IGN - thanks Smile

Big Ant Studios store at www.BigAnt.com
Reply
If only you could translate that into Facebookese... people might just start to get it.

*Disclaimer... don't try, no one who speaks Facebookese will ever get it. Smile
“There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.”
Reply
Don Bradman Cricket's rating was well deserved too

It was the best sports game to ever come out of an Australian developer

It's set in motion RLL3 which looks even better graphically. Don Bdradman 20xx will be even better.

I'm not sure whether the lacrosse game fits in before or after the next cricket game.
Reply
Lacrosse is before the next Cricket game.

Big Ant Studios store at www.BigAnt.com
Reply
Clearly for the US market Ross... who is doing the publicity for it over there? IS it expected to go great guns? Has one been done before?
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)