So what does everyone think?

[Simon Parker]

Working in a well known rental video/games store I couldn't wait and took out Brian Lara last night to play and this is just such a fun game to play.

The gameplay is easy to get use to, the graphics are colouful and smooth and unlike Cricket 2005 the batting is easy to get the hang of.

Some great options and the double wicket game is a wonderful additions.

However There are flaws that can be improved on. It would be nice if they could have had the correct player names and I would have liked to have edited the world cup and ICC trophy teams (Why on earth were Alec Stewart and Nasser Hussain in there when they retired ages ago?) If you could combine the gameplay of this game and the player and team details that Cricket 2005 have then you got the ultimate cricket game.

It is not often cricket fans have had 2 games to choose from and the efforts made by both companies to produce such a hard game is super. Brian Lara is by along way the best of the two but if they can produce cricket games this good now, then next time they will be the ultimate.

So how has everyone else found Lara and indeed cricket 2005?

 

[Kweek]

Welcome to the Forums Simon
myself im dutch but at the moment on holiday in england at guestfamily.
my lift refuses to get me to the city(which is 20 mins away) :P were going tomorrow to get it. cant wait for it as i absolutely loved the demo.

 

[King_Ponting]

yeh i would loe to test it out. but i have to wait till september

 

[Glenn Stiemens]

Bought the game this evening. Its clearly the arcade equivalent of Cricket 2005, but thought it was a fun game to play (only played a 10 over slog).

Lack of real kits is a problem in unlicensed modes but you can edit names.

 

[Kweek]

patch is out glenn to fix the names.

 

[Glenn Stiemens]

patch is out glenn to fix the names.

Not much use if you have the PS2 version. The lack of autoplay and the hilarious player models outside of licensed modes certainly don't impress. Have to say this game is probably worse than Cricket 2005 on closer inspection...

 

[marc71178]

I took 4 balls to decide that it was far superior to C2005.

 

[superkingdave]

are the bowling speeds sorted in the full version?

 

[jordyh]

It may be possible to have an update for the ps2 version using an xport/max drive. I have updated Pro Evolution Soccer this way

 

[Freddie]

The bowling speeds are very temperamental, you have to get it spot on, or just over the line everytime for the 90mph balls. If you do bowl a no-ball though it tend dribbles out at 50-odd mph to be smacked for 4.

Although, I think maybe the idea is to have bowlers bowling a range of different delivery types at different speeds each over. It dosen't seem to be the type of game where you send down 95mph balls on a length everytime ala Cricket 2004 etc. You got to mix it up!

 

[scritty]

Not much use if you have the PS2 version. The lack of autoplay and the hilarious player models outside of licensed modes certainly don't impress. Have to say this game is probably worse than Cricket 2005 on closer inspection...

Ah PS2, Haven't played on the PS2, so the terrible game balance on the PC may not appear on the PS2.

As for licenced names etc. Doesn't really matter on PC. Already patched with real names same day I bought the game so not an issue at all (the beauty of the PC) Couldn't care a less about kits. It's cricket playability that matters to me. Wouldn't be that fussed if they all wore bannana split outfits

No real doubt that on the PC BLC is far better - that's not saying much in itself, because EAC2005 is that bad, a poke in the eye with a sharp stick would run EAC2005 pretty close.

Im boring people by saying it now - but totally "owned" EAC2005 withing 3 hours of installing it. Zim beating Aus in a test match. (on HARD level) Zim scoring exclusivley in boundaries on drive and off drive slog. Found a "magic" ball that gets a wicket about 1 in 10. Match over about tea time on day one. Zim winning by 10 wickets

Could have racked up a gazzillion runs - too bored to bother-
Could have bowled Aus out for less but tried to liven the game up with a couple of short balls that didn't get wickets and got slapped,
Back to "magic ball" and watch-them-wickets-a-tumble.

Glad PS2 version is better. Don't know why they don't just do a direct port of it.
Or stop trying to add features and fancy frills to a substandard PC game engine, and concentrate on the mechanics first and put the options to change the colour of your blokes sideburns and his collar size on the back burner till they have this right

Clarker

 

[jordyh]

My first impressions of the ps2 version are very poor. Just had a quick 10 over game and I thought the graphics weren't brilliant and the grounds are terrible. More importantly, the gameplay. I had a quick go in the nets first and I seemed ok at batting, started a game and I was terrible just got 17 all out of 9 overs. It seems timing is vital for the batting. Bowling seems easy enough except I just can't seem to bowl fast.

 

[scritty]

. It seems timing is vital for the batting. Bowling seems easy enough except I just can't seem to bowl fast.

Agree and agree.

Never played a game where timing is more important. Be interested what Codies thoughts were on bowling speeds. Seems wierd, but I just ignore them and play.

Clarker