NHL 2005: Junk

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)

I just tried to play an IP-to-IP game, which worked decently last year, and
this year, it is the worst netcode i have EVER seen. I am not kidding. In
1996 I could play 16 people online with a 14.4 modem, and in NHL 2005, with
a DSL to DSL game the lag was the worst I had ever seen. You cant even chat
with the other player.

Its obvious what happened this year, player strike, and the accountants at
EA put as little into NHL this year as they could. This blows.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)

"fredrickson" <no@spam.com> wrote in message
news:E813d.76534$Np2.48257@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
>I just tried to play an IP-to-IP game, which worked decently last year, and
>this year, it is the worst netcode i have EVER seen. I am not kidding. In
>1996 I could play 16 people online with a 14.4 modem, and in NHL 2005, with
>a DSL to DSL game the lag was the worst I had ever seen. You cant even chat
>with the other player.
>
> Its obvious what happened this year, player strike, and the accountants at
> EA put as little into NHL this year as they could. This blows.
>

You might want to test things a little more before making such a judgment.
Not to say you're incorrect in your assessment of netplay, but sometimes
it's just whom you're playing with that might cause the problem, or any
number of variables.

And I do think you exaggerate a bit when you say that back when you could
play with 16 people with a measly 14.4 modem. I can't believe that is true.

Alanb

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)

"Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
news:Zo53d.66757$MQ5.45642@attbi_s52...
>
> "fredrickson" <no@spam.com> wrote in message
> news:E813d.76534$Np2.48257@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
> >I just tried to play an IP-to-IP game, which worked decently last year,
and
> >this year, it is the worst netcode i have EVER seen. I am not kidding. In
> >1996 I could play 16 people online with a 14.4 modem, and in NHL 2005,
with
> >a DSL to DSL game the lag was the worst I had ever seen. You cant even
chat
> >with the other player.
> >
> > Its obvious what happened this year, player strike, and the accountants
at
> > EA put as little into NHL this year as they could. This blows.
> >
>
> You might want to test things a little more before making such a judgment.
> Not to say you're incorrect in your assessment of netplay, but sometimes
> it's just whom you're playing with that might cause the problem, or any
> number of variables.
>
> And I do think you exaggerate a bit when you say that back when you could
> play with 16 people with a measly 14.4 modem. I can't believe that is
true.
>
> Alanb
>
>

Actually, NHL 98 had very good net code.

Giz

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)

"Gizzo" <gizzo@sportplanetr.com> wrote in message
news:d_63d.34944$0h7.2272294@news20.bellglobal.com...
>
> "Alan Bernardo" <master@oforion.net> wrote in message
> news:Zo53d.66757$MQ5.45642@attbi_s52...
>>
>> "fredrickson" <no@spam.com> wrote in message
>> news:E813d.76534$Np2.48257@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
>> >I just tried to play an IP-to-IP game, which worked decently last year,
> and
>> >this year, it is the worst netcode i have EVER seen. I am not kidding.
>> >In
>> >1996 I could play 16 people online with a 14.4 modem, and in NHL 2005,
> with
>> >a DSL to DSL game the lag was the worst I had ever seen. You cant even
> chat
>> >with the other player.
>> >
>> > Its obvious what happened this year, player strike, and the accountants
> at
>> > EA put as little into NHL this year as they could. This blows.
>> >
>>
>> You might want to test things a little more before making such a
>> judgment.
>> Not to say you're incorrect in your assessment of netplay, but sometimes
>> it's just whom you're playing with that might cause the problem, or any
>> number of variables.
>>
>> And I do think you exaggerate a bit when you say that back when you could
>> play with 16 people with a measly 14.4 modem. I can't believe that is
> true.


You never played quakeworld ?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)

> Plus, there is no way one could have played a hockey game with the lag
> even in Quakeworld. It works in a shooter, but sports games need much
> better performance to be playable.

I guess you wont like NHL 2004 then

 

[jayhawker]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)

fredrickson wrote:

>>Plus, there is no way one could have played a hockey game with the lag
>>even in Quakeworld. It works in a shooter, but sports games need much
>>better performance to be playable.
>
>
> I guess you wont like NHL 2004 then
>
>

I might not, but that has nothing to do with the point I was making.
Nobody was getting good gameplay in Quakeworld with a 14.4 modem.

Personally, I have my doubts that a hockey game can pull off internet
play effectively. ESPN Baseball was close, but the lag made it a
guessing game when it came to pitching and hitting, rather than trying
to locate and hit a pitch where it is.

Football has pulled it off, although there are games where the lag will
rear its head, and you get two teams running up an down the field
because the defense cannot adjust on the fly.

Top Spin looked like a great game, but on Live, it was just too hard to
react to what your opponent has done smoothly.

The game I am really looking forward to see how well they can pull it
off online is DOA Ultimate. There is not room for even minute lag in a
fighting game.

Trying to say that Quake was great on a 14.4, so NHL 2004 should be
awesome on DSL is just weak reasoning. You were wrong about Quake, and
you are comparing it to a game that has significantly different
requirements for effective gameplay.

Jayhawker

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)

Go play a game of NHL 2005, then come back and make some more
over-analytical points. Bottom line is the network code in NHL is horrendous
and not up to standard.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)

So far the game bites, too fast, too much hitting, controller support is the
shits. Let's see what the community can do with this, I was expecting a lot
more that this so far.

If you have an xbox etc. and a spare 20 bucks, go buy ESPN 2k5, much better.


"fredrickson" <no@spam.com> wrote in message
news:dhI3d.86348$Np2.53388@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
> Go play a game of NHL 2005, then come back and make some more
> over-analytical points. Bottom line is the network code in NHL is
> horrendous and not up to standard.
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)

"GROGtheNailer" <grog-the-nailer@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:dPN3d.480012$gE.80768@pd7tw3no...
> So far the game bites, too fast, too much hitting, controller support is
> the shits. Let's see what the community can do with this, I was expecting
> a lot more that this so far.
>
> If you have an xbox etc. and a spare 20 bucks, go buy ESPN 2k5, much
> better.
>
>

That's the obvious choice, if you have an XBox. You can spend 50 bills for
hockey game that isn't hockey or 30 bills for a hockey game that is hockey.

And the hockey game that is hockey plays flawlessly online.

Alanb

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)

> I wouldn't bother with this that much. Good ol' Fred tends to
> over-exaggerate, and that's putting it lightly.
>
> Alanb

Uh, like what? Go play NHL 2005 and come back to me.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)

"GROGtheNailer" <grog-the-nailer@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:dPN3d.480012$gE.80768@pd7tw3no...
> So far the game bites, too fast, too much hitting, controller support is
the
> shits. Let's see what the community can do with this, I was expecting a
lot
> more that this so far.
>
> If you have an xbox etc. and a spare 20 bucks, go buy ESPN 2k5, much
better.
>


I'm saddled strictly with the PC, but with this sort of commentary coming
from you specifically, it must be a pretty bad game. Maybe I'll wait a year
and a half to buy it when it goes down to $10 CDN! Unfortunate to see all
of the negative opinions of NHL 2005.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports (More info?)

> Personally, I have my doubts that a hockey game can pull off internet play
> effectively. ESPN Baseball was close, but the lag made it a guessing game
> when it came to pitching and hitting, rather than trying to locate and hit
> a pitch where it is.
>

I've played ESPN NHL on Live and have had no problems.

> Top Spin looked like a great game, but on Live, it was just too hard to
> react to what your opponent has done smoothly.
>

That would be difficult. If an opponent is a smooth player, he's virtually
unbeatable.

Alanb