Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

New Rugby game for PS3 and XBOX360

Options
  • 06-05-2010 1:17am
    #1
    pappyodaniel
    Registered Users Posts: 5,720 ✭✭✭


    Taken from this thread http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=65728419#post65728419

    ....If you had of posted this 1 month ago, this would have been the responce you recieved:

    No, there are no rugby games and there never will be on next gen. Give up. Go play Ruby 2008 and stop making these threads, use the search button!

    However, in the last month, out of the blue, HB Studios, the publisher along with EA on all the Rugby games has announced that Rugby 2012 will be coming next summer in advance of the Rugby World Cup.

    http://www.hb-studios.com/rugby2012/ click that.

    There is an official forum over on http://www.therugbyforum.com/ where the developers come in and ask your opinions every now and again, the lastest news can be found there.

    HB have split from EA though, because EA didnt want to make another rugby game, so this wont be EA Rugby 2012, now, I dont know if this means there will be licencing issues or what effect if any it will have on the game, but im hoping EA just let them have the Rugby rights as they dont want anything to do with it.

    I personally am hoping for Rugby 2008 with the stupid things fixed, rosters updated and next gen graphics. Roll on next summer.

    thanks to miket086


«1

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    funky penguin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,352 ✭✭✭funky penguin


    Sweet. Its a hard game to translate to computer, but fingers crossed anyways.


  • Options
    #3
    profitius
    Registered Users Posts: 3,976 ✭✭✭profitius


    funky penguin wrote: »
    Sweet. Its a hard game to translate to computer, but fingers crossed anyways.

    Indeed it is. The 7's version would be alot easier to programme but hopefully they do well.

    It'll take a few generations of the game to get anywhere near the standard of soccer games but you have to start somewhere.


  • Options
    #4
    Stev_o
    Registered Users Posts: 9,249 ✭✭✭Stev_o


    If they split from EA chances are they don't have the licence though for all the rights (Players names, stadiums, teams etc), hopefully i can be proved wrong. But honestly all HB's efforts at rugby games have been pretty dire budget games. Hopefully this will be the real deal.


  • Options
    #5
    toomevara
    Registered Users Posts: 5,772 ✭✭✭toomevara


    If anyones got a wii,and even a passing interest in RL, this is a good laugh....

    http://www.rugbyleague3.com/


  • Options
    #6
    d'Oracle
    Registered Users Posts: 7,025 ✭✭✭d'Oracle


    profitius wrote: »
    Indeed it is. The 7's version would be alot easier to programme but hopefully they do well.

    It'll take a few generations of the game to get anywhere near the standard of soccer games but you have to start somewhere.

    Apples and oranges.
    The rucks alone would probably be a more complicated design challenge than the game of soccer.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    myflipflops
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,817 ✭✭✭myflipflops


    Lomy rugby on the PS1 remains the ultimate rugby game.

    Seriously, the playability on it was brilliant in my opinion. They just need to do a re-hash of that and everyone will be happy.


  • Options
    #8
    chris85
    Registered Users Posts: 4,502 ✭✭✭chris85


    myflipflops wrote: »
    Lomy rugby on the PS1 remains the ultimate rugby game.

    Seriously, the playability on it was brilliant in my opinion. They just need to do a re-hash of that and everyone will be happy.

    that brings back memories. remember the teams of Lomu's you could get. no one could put him down.


  • Options
    #9
    jonnybadd
    Registered Users Posts: 1,295 ✭✭✭jonnybadd


    profitius wrote: »
    Indeed it is. The 7's version would be alot easier to programme but hopefully they do well.

    It'll take a few generations of the game to get anywhere near the standard of soccer games but you have to start somewhere.

    Not even generations, with the current generations processing possibilities you could feasibly do a decent rugby game but there are so many many things to take into account, its an impossible task to make a rugby game that can satisfy the fans of the game.

    Jona Lomu is so revered because it was released in a time when we didn't have the resources to do a decent rugby game, so it was an arcade vision of what rugby could do and it worked very well.

    The best thing we can hope for in the next few years is a decent rugby management game and that is what I'm looking forward to.


  • Options
    #10
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    jonnybadd wrote: »
    Not even generations, with the current generations processing possibilities you could feasibly do a decent rugby game but there are so many many things to take into account, its an impossible task to make a rugby game that can satisfy the fans of the game.

    Jona Lomu is so revered because it was released in a time when we didn't have the resources to do a decent rugby game, so it was an arcade vision of what rugby could do and it worked very well.

    The best thing we can hope for in the next few years is a decent rugby management game and that is what I'm looking forward to.
    Unless Sports Interactive made one it'd more than likely be terrible.

    I remember Pro Rugby Manager, and how terrible it was, and yet how much I loved playing it. I remember every year my academy would produce about 7 world class players so that I had a team with an average age of 19 that walked through both the Magners and the Heineken Cup.

    That game was funny for two reasons, 1 was that D'Arcy was ridiculously good, and just walked through teams, and the other was that decline due to age just set in randomly at any point after the guy turned 27, so that O'Connell was absolutely awful at the age od 28 (I signed him for Leinster actually...) and then Lewis Moody managed to continue into his late 30s... A really terribly finished game tho, silly french people made it


  • Options
    #11
    Tim Robbins
    Registered Users Posts: 8,964 ✭✭✭Tim Robbins


    d'Oracle wrote: »
    Apples and oranges.
    The rucks alone would probably be a more complicated design challenge than the game of soccer.

    Excatly. Too many people in Rugby have to be doing something at any one time, whereas in Soccer, it's usually just the lad with the ball and maybe one or two around him. No decoy runners and what have you.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    d'Oracle
    Registered Users Posts: 7,025 ✭✭✭d'Oracle


    Tim Robbins wrote: »
    Excatly. Too many people in Rugby have to be doing something at any one time, whereas in Soccer, it's usually just the lad with the ball and maybe one or two around him. No decoy runners and what have you.

    Well you do have off the ball movement, but the nature of the game of rugby puts way too much influence on the behaviour of off the ball players.


  • Options
    #13
    castie
    Hosted Moderators Posts: 3,807 ✭✭✭castie


    American football games have been made very very well


  • Options
    #14
    d'Oracle
    Registered Users Posts: 7,025 ✭✭✭d'Oracle


    castie wrote: »
    American football games have been made very very well

    This is true.
    Which underlines how they are very very different.;)


  • Options
    #15
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    d'Oracle wrote: »
    The rucks alone would probably be a more complicated design challenge than the game of soccer.

    I can imagine a situation where rucks form and its just a mess of bodies with the ball randomly emerging with a player, with an obvious bias towards the team that was carrying.

    I hope I'm wrong and they work out a good system.


  • Options
    #16
    profitius
    Registered Users Posts: 3,976 ✭✭✭profitius


    Stekelly wrote: »
    I can imagine a situation where rucks form and its just a mess of bodies with the ball randomly emerging with a player, with an obvious bias towards the team that was carrying.

    I hope I'm wrong and they work out a good system.

    The advantage games have is they don't have to be too realistic and in terms of rucking thats a good thing. They can design their own system to make it more playable.

    At least nobody can cheat in it... I presume! :D


  • Options
    #17
    feargswalsh69
    Closed Accounts Posts: 36 ✭feargswalsh69


    very happy about this..its about time.....i didnt mind the rucking system in 08 but the way if you worked habana into a yard of space anywhere on the pitch you were guaranteed a try....was absolutely ridiculous..


  • Options
    #18
    castie
    Hosted Moderators Posts: 3,807 ✭✭✭castie


    Different game but pretty similar complexity


  • Options
    #19
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    d'Oracle wrote: »
    This is true.
    Which underlines how they are very very different.;)

    Not really in terms of making a computer game though. The one real advantage that american football has over rugby is the way it all breaks down and stops between plays, which gives people playing the game a chance to sort themselves out tactically etc. Whereas with rugby it can be as quick or as slow as the team with possession decide, and there are no "stoppages" of the same sort.

    I can see in my mind how they could deal with things such as rucking, certainly its possible. The problem is you would need a good mix of a production team who really understand rugby (not casual fans) and more than likely whole lot of money, I don't know if either of those things are available right now.

    I'm prepared for it to come out and be ****, and yet still be a commercial success because of it being a world cup year


  • Options
    #20
    anonymous_joe
    Registered Users Posts: 9,255 ✭✭✭anonymous_joe


    Jonah Lomu Rugby + beer still equals epic fun.

    Rugby 08 was alright, especially with some of the fan updates.


  • Options
    #21
    d'Oracle
    Registered Users Posts: 7,025 ✭✭✭d'Oracle


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    Not really in terms of making a computer game though. The one real advantage that american football has over rugby is the way it all breaks down and stops between plays, which gives people playing the game a chance to sort themselves out tactically etc. Whereas with rugby it can be as quick or as slow as the team with possession decide, and there are no "stoppages" of the same sort.

    I can see in my mind how they could deal with things such as rucking, certainly its possible. The problem is you would need a good mix of a production team who really understand rugby (not casual fans) and more than likely whole lot of money, I don't know if either of those things are available right now.

    I'm prepared for it to come out and be ****, and yet still be a commercial success because of it being a world cup year

    I totally and with absolutely no reservation disagree.

    The fundamental nature of the games are totally different.
    From down to down, a whole team of players have predefined routes and movements. At most a player will need to react to 1 or 2 opposing players actions. Gridiron works because it is so controlled and predictable. You literally pre assign the actions of every player in the real game as much as in a video game.

    Rugby by contrast has FAR more degrees of freedom. Consecutive phases evolve depending on teammate position and opponent position, off loading creates situations which are dependant on tackler, defence, attacker angle of running etc. There are just way too many complications in rugby.

    I think you are underestimating the level of programming complication that would be required to make rucks or mauls even remotely realistic or even functional.

    At the risk of sounding dismissive, the reason Gridiron works are the same as why Rugby can't work.

    Unless the PS3 is actually as good as they make out. But that is irrelevant because any game would be made cross platform and therefore it would be limited by the capabilities of the 360.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    dreamer_ire
    Registered Users Posts: 1,894 ✭✭✭dreamer_ire


    jonnybadd wrote: »
    The best thing we can hope for in the next few years is a decent rugby management game and that is what I'm looking forward to.

    Blackout Rugby is pretty good as a management game. There's a forum on it here. http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=1220


  • Options
    #23
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    d'Oracle wrote: »
    I totally and with absolutely no reservation disagree.

    The fundamental nature of the games are totally different.
    From down to down, a whole team of players have predefined routes and movements. At most a player will need to react to 1 or 2 opposing players actions. Gridiron works because it is so controlled and predictable. You literally pre assign the actions of every player in the real game as much as in a video game.

    Rugby by contrast has FAR more degrees of freedom. Consecutive phases evolve depending on teammate position and opponent position, off loading creates situations which are dependant on tackler, defence, attacker angle of running etc. There are just way too many complications in rugby.

    I think you are underestimating the level of programming complication that would be required to make rucks or mauls even remotely realistic or even functional.

    At the risk of sounding dismissive, the reason Gridiron works are the same as why Rugby can't work.

    Unless the PS3 is actually as good as they make out. But that is irrelevant because any game would be made cross platform and therefore it would be limited by the capabilities of the 360.

    Well everything a rugby player does as soon as the ball is out of the ruck is fairly predefined. The ball goes to the first reciever, and from there he either runs, passes or kicks, and the same with the second receiver. I don't see where the complication comes in terms of processing.

    Rucks only seem complicated because of how poor the attempts at creating have been so far. If that was managed by someone with a proper understanding of exactly what happens at ruck time then it would be much easier. For example, going through it, when the player is tackled then have the tackler roll away automatically (that part would be unrealistic, but some element of realism would have to be sacrificed for playability), then the proximity of the attacking support relative to the defensive players coupled with the attributes of those players decides the two team's chances of winning the ball.

    The problem isn't in the programming at all, the problem that I see would be in the budget for the animation of the players, as it would take a large investment to motion capture all the potential movements, and then it would take an investment in something similar to the Pro-Tak engine that Madden uses (or, the backbreaker engine that would be perfect) to sort out clipping.

    The two sports are different, but in terms of the difficulty of the programming they're really quite similar. While rucks and mauls are difficult they're not nearly impossible. In fact American Football is probably tougher to programme and tougher on processing power considering that at any one time every single one of the 22 players are doing something, whereas in rugby only 10 or so players will be active at any one time, (lots of wingers standing around, forwards in pods waiting for the ball etc.).

    If rugby was as popular as american football is in america, then there would be a top-class rugby game. If Tiburon (the guys who do Madden) made a rugby game then it'd be excellent. The only reason Madden works far better than the rugby games made so far is that the commercial success of Madden means that there's been one every year for years and years, and the development team are free to work constantly on it, whereas a rugby game doesn't offer that level of guaranteed commercial success.


  • Options
    #24
    anonymous_joe
    Registered Users Posts: 9,255 ✭✭✭anonymous_joe


    irishbucsfan wrote: »

    If rugby was as popular as american football is in america, then there would be a top-class rugby game. If Tiburon (the guys who do Madden) made a rugby game then it'd be excellent. The only reason Madden works far better than the rugby games made so far is that the commercial success of Madden means that there's been one every year for years and years, and the development team are free to work constantly on it, whereas a rugby game doesn't offer that level of guaranteed commercial success.

    Bingo.

    The two best sporting games in the world are Madden and FIFA. Everyone knows this. Coincidentally they're the world's number one sport and, well a very rich American one. For the purposes of games, you're mainly aiming at the First World anyway, so American Football takes up a big chunk of the First World's imagination.


  • Options
    #25
    docdolittle
    Registered Users Posts: 2,026 ✭✭✭docdolittle


    I can't wait for this..! :D but I just don't understand why people on here are saying it'd be so hard to do a rugby game...? It doesn't seem too hard to do at all :confused:


  • Options
    #26
    rockman15
    Registered Users Posts: 277 ✭✭rockman15


    upgrade of jonah lomu would be ideal for me...

    realistically its a simple trade off between investment and returns. if EA were to make consistent money out of it they would make one every year. but the fact that squads change relatively less dramatically than NFL or even soccer teams makes splashing out unrealistic for the consumer. the more a game makes, the more they could put back in.

    so...lets all go out and buy it regardless of quality and support our sport :D

    seriously though id be very supportive of a madden esque approach...love the format and gameplay of that series. it would be agreat starting point.


  • Options
    #27
    Clemon
    Registered Users Posts: 564 ✭✭✭Clemon


    Yes so happy this is happining ..Now i can play my good friend feargswalsh online.. Its going to be such a hoot!!


  • Options
    #28
    d'Oracle
    Registered Users Posts: 7,025 ✭✭✭d'Oracle


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    Well everything a rugby player does as soon as the ball is out of the ruck is fairly predefined. The ball goes to the first reciever, and from there he either runs, passes or kicks, and the same with the second receiver. I don't see where the complication comes in terms of processing.

    Rucks only seem complicated because of how poor the attempts at creating have been so far. If that was managed by someone with a proper understanding of exactly what happens at ruck time then it would be much easier. For example, going through it, when the player is tackled then have the tackler roll away automatically (that part would be unrealistic, but some element of realism would have to be sacrificed for playability), then the proximity of the attacking support relative to the defensive players coupled with the attributes of those players decides the two team's chances of winning the ball.

    The problem isn't in the programming at all, the problem that I see would be in the budget for the animation of the players, as it would take a large investment to motion capture all the potential movements, and then it would take an investment in something similar to the Pro-Tak engine that Madden uses (or, the backbreaker engine that would be perfect) to sort out clipping.

    The two sports are different, but in terms of the difficulty of the programming they're really quite similar. While rucks and mauls are difficult they're not nearly impossible. In fact American Football is probably tougher to programme and tougher on processing power considering that at any one time every single one of the 22 players are doing something, whereas in rugby only 10 or so players will be active at any one time, (lots of wingers standing around, forwards in pods waiting for the ball etc.).

    If rugby was as popular as american football is in america, then there would be a top-class rugby game. If Tiburon (the guys who do Madden) made a rugby game then it'd be excellent. The only reason Madden works far better than the rugby games made so far is that the commercial success of Madden means that there's been one every year for years and years, and the development team are free to work constantly on it, whereas a rugby game doesn't offer that level of guaranteed commercial success.

    I still disagree.
    And I'm far to lazy to multiquote.

    Suffice to say, the simplicity of opposition players proximity being the main factor in rucking is exactly why it does not work in EA Rugby 2009. You break the line and 90% of the time you loose the ball cos you are isolated. the reason being that proximity allows the defence to get there first. So really you would need to bring in the momentum of attacking ruckers, and the time it takes for a defensive rucker to engage in the ruck.

    Not to mention the possibility of a quick ruck or a pop off the ground.

    There is literally nothing like the challenges in rugby offered up by NFL.
    Ball hits deck, reset.
    It means the engine only has to handle a small amount of inputs.

    I think you misunderstand the how these things demand processing. All 22 players doing predetermined actions dictated by the play and a simple area of proximity is actually very simple.
    Linemen hit in predetermined directions, backs react to the pass receivers/ offensive backs run routes.
    Programming a simple blitz from say a nickel formation is not demanding.
    Programming a drift defence to react to a player with the ball and to the support players lines is a lot more challenging.

    I reckon treating rugby like American football would lead to even more constrictive games than what you have already.
    It'd be nice if I was wrong though.


  • Options
    #29
    crisco10
    Registered Users Posts: 6,180 ✭✭✭crisco10


    I always thought the match engine in Lomu was pretty good with regards to ruck time. (assuming you didnt button bash Sqr and Circle).

    Myself and my mates still play Lomu, and rucks tend to work quite well if you limit people to only adding men to rucks (this is to counteract button bashers!). If you are going forward or carry with a big player, you get quick ball. If your 10 gets creamed by the 7, good chance of a turnover! Fairly realistic.

    And someone mentioned Blackout Rugby. Fantastic Management Sim.


  • Options
    #30
    bossa_nova
    Closed Accounts Posts: 458 ✭✭bossa_nova


    what does everyone here think about rugby 06?? havent played 08 at all, but i always thought 06 was a really good attempt at a rugby game, still play it every now and again, didnt think there was much wrong with it other than the limited lineouts and coming up against Wilkonson and him kicking the ball from his in goal all the way to your 5 meter :pac::pac:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    crisco10
    Registered Users Posts: 6,180 ✭✭✭crisco10


    bossa_nova wrote: »
    what does everyone here think about rugby 06?? havent played 08 at all, but i always thought 06 was a really good attempt at a rugby game, still play it every now and again, didnt think there was much wrong with it other than the limited lineouts and coming up against Wilkonson and him kicking the ball from his in goal all the way to your 5 meter :pac::pac:

    I thought it was decent enough alright. Was that the one where Hickie was a No.8? Annoying inaccuracies like that took away from it.

    Also, the fact it was impossible to make a linebreak and then win the next ruck if someone did tackle you eventually. Incredibly frustrating to make a 50 yard break, be tackled by the 15 and then turned over everytime.

    I also think in general in EA rugby the "Star" players are far far too good. The things you could do with BOD, Wilkinson and co were just boring very quickly. I used to "drop" BOD because he just made it too easy to be in anyway satisfying.


Advertisement