Rugby Challenge 2: The Lions Tour Edition Gameplay Videos, Ships June 13th

[Krebstar]

Something that bothered me in the last game was that many teams played in the same stadium in career mode. Almost all European clubs.

Even if you edited their home stadium, when you went into career, it would use the default.

Is this different?

[Anners]

Quote: Originally Posted by Krebstar

Something that bothered me in the last game was that many teams played in the same stadium in career mode. Almost all European clubs. Even if you edited their home stadium, when you went into career, it would use the default. Is this different?

Yep, this is different now, just checked.

[Milla]

Quote: Originally Posted by MattyEdgeworth

To be honest I think that Milla guy is a bit of ****. And yeah that is very dissapointing, I mean Rugby is a pretty niche sport. A rugby video game even more so, especially one that is more expensive than other games and harder to find. I'd wager that the majority of people buying the game want a sim.

I'm not a guy, or a ****.

The section of the rugby gaming market that would buy a sim is a fraction of the whole. It makes bad business sense to reduce an already small possible market.

[Stormyhog]

I think people should be thankful to have a rugby game. Sure I want it to be realistic but you also have to make it fun. Even games that say they're sim still have arcade elements so it's not to overly frustrating. I wish the game was available in canada for the PS3 so I could give it a try.

[bad_philanthropy]

Quote: Originally Posted by Milla

I'm not a guy, or a ****. The section of the rugby gaming market that would buy a sim is a fraction of the whole. It makes bad business sense to reduce an already small possible market.

Is it logistically impossible to develop the game with "sim" orientation and simply reduce the more demanding features by default to please both aspects of the market? For example: EA's NHL series is developed as a sim, and out of the box plays more toward the "arcade" end of things. There is an option for those looking for it to switch to "hardcore." I feel like the development of the game as a sim positively serves the more accessible version meant for the every day consumer.

I'd argue purely on the basis of opinion that Ruby Challenge could benefit from a more sim-oriented design in the same way. As it is now, it feels a bit incoherent pairing things like strategies on the d-pad—with which you can set things like line depth, and add the fullback to the backline—with gameplay that doesn't really reflect the value of these strategies. Add a quite well-executed, and deep career mode, and it is out of place when in-match play inadequately differentiates forward and back play. I have a game in which I can manage my squad, have players away on international duty, deal with injuries, select an international squad, all over multiple years, but on the field a lock can fire the ball 20+m with perfect accuracy?

Subjectively, successful sports titles appear to favor sports games developed as sims, but tuned out of the box for a less discerning audience. We can see it with MLB the Show, FIFA, NHL, and even a title like Football Manager finding solid footing in the market, and general praise from gamers and critics. I won't debate the size and popularity of these sports vs. rugby, and the budget the EA games have versus RC, but I think you should give gamers more credit. I understand doing what HES, or whoever does the market research, and supplies metrics about what the market does and does not wan say, but I'd like to see Sidhe have a bit more faith in developing the product they would like to see. If that is what RC is actually doing, then I digress.

Sidhe have done an amazing job in a lot of ways with RC on a shoestring budget, but it feels like there is an element missing. To me that is a bit more attention to the authenticity of the rugby action on the pitch. Regardless of whether the aim is to create a sim or something else, I think the game benefits in either sense from gameplay better resembling real life the union game. I'll continue to support the title because I find it an encouraging framework, and do enjoy actually playing it. I just hope the trajectory of its gameplay in potential future iterations trends toward something deeper.

[Milla]

Quote: Originally Posted by bad_philanthropy

Is it logistically impossible to develop the game with "sim" orientation and simply reduce the more demanding features by default to please both aspects of the market? For example: EA's NHL series is developed as a sim, and out of the box plays more toward the "arcade" end of things. There is an option for those looking for it to switch to "hardcore." I feel like the development of the game as a sim positively serves the more accessible version meant for the every day consumer. I'd argue purely on the basis of opinion that Ruby Challenge could benefit from a more sim-oriented design in the same way. As it is now, it feels a bit incoherent pairing things like strategies on the d-pad—with which you can set things like line depth, and add the fullback to the backline—with gameplay that doesn't really reflect the value of these strategies. Add a quite well-executed, and deep career mode, and it is out of place when in-match play inadequately differentiates forward and back play. I have a game in which I can manage my squad, have players away on international duty, deal with injuries, select an international squad, all over multiple years, but on the field a lock can fire the ball 20+m with perfect accuracy? Subjectively, successful sports titles appear to favor sports games developed as sims, but tuned out of the box for a less discerning audience. We can see it with MLB the Show, FIFA, NHL, and even a title like Football Manager finding solid footing in the market, and general praise from gamers and critics. I won't debate the size and popularity of these sports vs. rugby, and the budget the EA games have versus RC, but I think you should give gamers more credit. I understand doing what HES, or whoever does the market research, and supplies metrics about what the market does and does not wan say, but I'd like to see Sidhe have a bit more faith in developing the product they would like to see. If that is what RC is actually doing, then I digress. Sidhe have done an amazing job in a lot of ways with RC on a shoestring budget, but it feels like there is an element missing. To me that is a bit more attention to the authenticity of the rugby action on the pitch. Regardless of whether the aim is to create a sim or something else, I think the game benefits in either sense from gameplay better resembling real life the union game. I'll continue to support the title because I find it an encouraging framework, and do enjoy actually playing it. I just hope the trajectory of its gameplay in potential future iterations trends toward something deeper.

We just had the budget and time to make one game. And we didn't even get to put in everything we wanted.

No, not impossible, but out of our reach, and outside anything we wanted to attempt. Knowing your scope and sticking to it is important in this industry. A sim of a simpler sport might not be unreasonable, but a rugby sim is always going to be pretty profound, because of the nature of the game. A sim would be a much more formidable and unforgiving genre than what we went for, and then to throw in the arcade version as well? It would be like making two games in one, and probably not doing either genre justice.

[bad_philanthropy]

Quote: Originally Posted by Milla

We just had the budget and time to make one game. And we didn't even get to put in everything we wanted. No, not impossible, but out of our reach, and outside anything we wanted to attempt. Knowing your scope and sticking to it is important in this industry. A sim of a simpler sport might not be unreasonable, but a rugby sim is always going to be pretty profound, because of the nature of the game. A sim would be a much more formidable and unforgiving genre than what we went for, and then to throw in the arcade version as well? It would be like making two games in one, and probably not doing either genre justice.

I can accept that. If RC2 is the direction Sidhe wants to take so be it.

Quick question to other users. Has anyone seen the cpu sub for anything other than an injury?

EDIT: n/m saw the cpu make a sub.

[fearwhatnow]

@Milla, Sidhe ofc has every right to make the game as they wish. It's pure business after all. But this quote seems a little bit harsh to me:
"There are people who want a sim. They won't get one from us. We never set out to make one, and don't plan to do so".
Never? RC2 may sell well and Sidhe may find the funds to improve the game and make it more sim-friendly. I feel that your reaction was a punch in the stomach for all those that provide feedback and for 2 years buy the game to support Sidhe.