What's up with these reviews of FIFA2000? All they say is: "after the intro i go on the field with my favourite team. wow! I pass to the wing, the winger gets a cross in and i score a marvellous goal with my favourite striker! What a terrific game!!!".
Very few of them address the real problems of the game: UGLY cartoon-like players, terrible kits, few dribbles (and they are RANDOM- push the shift button and you don't know if your player will hurdle or skip to the side)

The gameplay IS better, though. more realistic passing (i.e. more difficult), better goalies (less supersaves, less silly mistakes) and the pace is a bit slower.

But the bottom line is, the reviewers don't seem to pick up on the points made on this forum about the aspects of the game that most players find irritating. They just seem happy to play a soccer game and being able to score a goal.

Just read a good one though, on PCGamepro. This addressed the real problems and came to a reasonable conclusion. well done.

I think the problem with previews in magazines is that they are dependend of the big softwarehouses. They have to fill their magazines with previews, because that's the main thing why they sell those magazines. So when they write bad previews for a new game of, for instance, EA, they risk NOT to get new games from them to preview. So those magazines are very reluctant to be too critical. It's clearly commercial.... http://www.soccergaming.com/ubb/frown.gif

If that's the case, why don't they tell it like it is?
If EA tells a magazine "Give this a good rating, or we'll stop sending games to you", then the mag should tell it to all their readers, and the readers can all see for themselves what villains the companies are. I am a music journalist, and it's unheard of to pay attention to threats like that. If a record company tries a trick like that, they can be sure to have it smeared all over the pages the next day.

The softwarehouses dont ask for high ratings: they just stop sending games when you write bad reviews, so smart are they...
Then the mags can't say they are threaten...
Apart from that: Would you start a war against the deliverers of your work?

To Han:

You say "The software houses don't ask for high ratings..."
Are you really sure ? I think they "could" give some money to get an high rating for them game.

You say also "they just stop sending games when you write bad reviews...".
In the case, could'nt people who review a game just wait the game is out and test it, with their real felling about it ?

No, no... if really Fifa 2000 sucks and reviewers still give to it a high rating that's certainly because EA is behind all this...

it's not a free $30 game they're looking for. it's advertising.

It doesn't change my point. If EA just stops sending games, it's still a threat. tell the readers about it if it happens!!
As for the advertising, The advantage works both ways. OK, the mags need the ads, but the companies also need mags where their ads are read by their target group. The companies does NOT want to start a war with their customers either.
Anyway, I don't really think the reviewers are "bought", but i DO think some of them don't have a clue about football. and they certainly don't pay attention to the criticism that has been presented by us, the dedicated gamers

[This message has been edited by Divine (edited 11-04-1999).]