It’s not a case for looking for the wrong foundations for success. When you yourself (the companies in this case) use lines like “most authentic”, “best ever”, “most accurate” in their tag lines, then clearly the are aiming for the things I’m mentioning. Realistic animations, ball physics, tactics, patterns of play, movement, surface degradation…those things are essential if your aim is on those things I listed.
Again there is not doubt that they are hard working, and they most certainly fill these games with things that add to the immersion and experience. But if your version of success is based on how well it does, well are they really successful then? Commercial success is your other mentioned companies/franchises mentioned (EA/FIFA), and big ant hasn’t come close to those numbers (even to scale).
And I too have a similar background in a sport, and several of their games don’t pass my eye test. I can’t speak for Cricket or AFL, but Rugby and Tennis have other titles coming into the market, so Big Ant won’t be alone anymore….now is time to really make a mark.
Again I agree and disagree. Not a single Rugby game, union or otherwise has ever got the ball physics right. Even the real world can’t sometimes with that odd shaped mess of a ball ha ha. I don’t think getting the ball physics absolutely bang on immediately will account to success either.
My version of success is not how well a title does commercially on its own, but it is purely factual that if a title is not so, it will never be successful in any way. Nor would it ever be possible to ever become successful in other ways. No one would stick to developing a product that was not profitable.
BigAnt can’t be compared to EA/FIFA, I was making the comparison in regards to an ongoing title that can be built on each iteration. I said this will be the best rugby game created so far, not that it will be the best rugby game ever. To be honest there is not really any competition for a great rugby union game, no one has ever managed that using an eye test comparing the games to real sports.
I think we need to be expectant and hopeful, yet also realistic. If your eye test is a perfect rugby game in every way, you’ll certainly be disappointed. I can guarantee that.
I think Cricket and AFL are their best titles, in regard to recreating the sport authentically. But people knock Rugby League Live far too much, that is a quality title and absolutely the best league franchise from anyone ever imo.
Your points are absolutely valid in every way though and that is what makes having successful titles so tough, because what one consumer see’s as priorities in their perfect game the person playing in the house next to them may not see it that way.
I think if I strip my argument right back to it’s simplest from, it would be that I want a Rugby title with good bones to be built on, and a title that both developers and publishers see value in continuing after the first iteration in the series is released.
For sure. A solid foundation is something that can be built on with the “fun stuff”. I just see far too many comments that seem content with their games and use the AA excuse as justification. There will be no growth if everyone excepts it as is.
These companies charge the same as AAA and put in the same effort in dev time, so we should expect better than just “passable”. Ultimately I think everyone just wants authentic, fun and immersive sports titles that carry on for the years to come.
Just look at Tiebreak. It’s had two release date’s that have been entirely missed by the social media channels. It’s due any day now and there’s still no comment officially online, and there’s zero gameplay footage. Oh, and the CEO claims they can’t even talk about the project until after release. Absolutely shocking rollout.
I don’t understand how/why Nacon haven’t been marketing this game, when they regularly promote other upcoming games they are publishing on their Twitter page (which have release dates well after Rugby 24).
We’re being repeatedly told that any information about the game will come from Nacon, but they have been saying this for months, and with 2 weeks to go this clearly isn’t the case!
You’re not telling me no-one at Big Ant knows when information is coming, and the release marketing schedule (if there even is one)!
Clutching at straws here but are you waiting for the six nations squads to be announced (Scotland is tomorrow)???
From what I gather from the small amount of information out there, it seems to be a licencing issue. Tiebreak cannot be promoted or shown because they are awaiting final approval on outfits, stadium etc. I presume it would be the same with rugby 24.
The difference with other BIG games like FIFA is that they sign multi million pound deals with the licenses over several years so probably don’t have to wait for such approvals. Where I imagine Big ant/Nacon are still signing and sorting out licenses, getting them into the game and signed off right up until release.
Just an educated guess on my part so could be completely wrong
That would make sense if this was the first ever tennis game. These things didn’t stop AO Tennis 2, AO Tennis 1, Tennis World Tour 2…which were also Big Ant/Nacon games. Furthermore, if this is indeed the case, why did they ever choose January 11th as the original release date? It’s not like the dates of the Australian Open have changed, so they had to have known the game wouldn’t be allowed before January 14th. Rugby seems to be going down a similar path and I just don’t see them balancing THREE new games at the same time (two of which would be brand new).
Yeah, I don’t know the ins and outs of it. Ross tweeted hinting at the fact that they had to wait on some final approvals before they could release tiebreak. That may be players or stadiums which were not in the games you’ve mentioned?
Nah. The just did Day 1 patches to bring everything current. Both AO Tennis games were released during for Australian Open, and both titles had similar gear/player patches. IIRC, it was the same for Tennis World Tour 2, which also released around a Grand Slam. Maybe if there was more clarity and communication during the pre release, people wouldn’t be asking these things.
I think Bigant might be in a bit of a mess, AFL had a terrible release, cricket 24 was in a dreadful state when it came out and Tiebreak is releasing in early acces. I wonder if they have bit off a little more than they can chew spread themselves too thin trying to fix games that have already released and we are getting no feedback because Nacon arent certain that Bigant can keep up their end of the bargain and release the game on time in an acceptable state
You could say the same about Gollum though, Nacon releasing a game with the Lord Of The Ring IP, and that game was appallingly bad on release from the gameplay I saw and the reviews I read. Im more in line with what @BearGamer suggested, I imagine with so many teams involved, they are probably held back by not having every team sign off on something. And therefore can’t release anything. Unfortunately it’s the fans who suffer the most by having no news about the game until its officially out. Ive already had quite a few people say in comments and DM’s they are waiting to hear my opinions on it in videos before they buy it themselves, because no one is confident to pre-order the game based on the info we have.
I agree with all of you. I have been trying my best to defend Nacon or Big Ant on this as I am a huge fan of Rugby as it’s my most played game in 2023 even if I have the Game Pass.
But there is nothing to defend anymore.
Yes Big Ant work with limited ressources and the roadmap for all titles is too full for a company of this size. And that’s understandable. I think we all have empathy for both companies. It is not easy.
But not a single sign of life is not Ok. When the game was pushed to a later release date, every players felt that it was actually a great news as it meant that there was big work in progress instead of releasing too early something.
We didnt have big expectations. A photo of a developer, a screen with a animation, a photo of photometry of some players etc… just a bit would have been fantastic. Even just a simple message teasing with some names of the 15 competitions, or the nations present in the competitions would have been fabulous.
Instead there is nothing ABSOLUTELY nothing !!!
Looking at Ross saying that he plays the game at the office and he liked it : Great. Show us then.
Also they already have the licences for Top 14 Prod2 amd URC, how about releasing the game with these teams or just a demo to some influencers.
Given the creation suite that I’m assuming the game is going to have, how hard would it be to create a couple of teams of generic players, wearing generic strips, playing on a generic pitch, and show us some pictures or footage?
Not sure how helpful this info is, but I’ve got a few mates who play for super rugby teams. I asked them if they had done any player shots or whatever it’s called for the game & they didn’t even know about the game lol. So do with this info what you will. Part of me also doesn’t want to say who they are incase it could ruin potential licensing etc. But a couple play for nz teams & one for an Australian team.
Super rugby not being in it really doesn’t matter though if the customisation is good enough. Is the morning of the 16th now here in Europe where Nacon is based. So the work day just starting. If nothing in the next 10 hours or so I’d say we are heading for another delay.
I just hope that if super rugby is in fact licensed that Big Ant manage to capture as many faces as possible when all the super rugby teams play a round in Melbourne on the 1,2,3 of March
