Well first off, being the defensive player that I am I take issue with the design of the levels as well as Chi's "cowardly tactics" comment. I like wide open areas that allow for some degree of hiding and I wasn't thrilled by the fact that I couldn't go too many steps in some levels without running into another player or opponent. The other thing is the sheer monotony of the single player. Don't get me wrong it is functional but it's obviously been made for those who couldn't get enough of four-player GoldenEye 007 and Quake 64 II and are dying to build up their skills here and later show them off against friends.
Pretender. Wanna-be. Unoriginal. When I heard people comparing Medal of Honor to GoldenEye 007 I was ready to toss all the slurs its way. But after a few honest rounds during the game I found that I was judging it too quickly and harshly.
Actually the third release bearing the Turok name, Rage Wars unlike its two previous efforts, jettisons the traditional one-player mode for full-featured multiplayer options instead. That's not to say that there isn't any semblance of a single-player game.
The developers have taken the theme and backdrop story very seriously and it shows because the WWII iconography in MoH is captured beautifully not only in the costumes of the characters and the design of the architecture, but it also permeates through the detailed movie-like orchestra scores that make up the background music.
The main problem is that Courtside 2's attempts to improve upon the original either do not alleviate the old flaws or end up unearthing entirely new ones. For example, foul calls were extremely unbalanced in the original Courtside.
I think Chi made some good points, but not many of them were important enough to require a similar rating from me. The fouling is an issue, but it adds a bit of realism to see the computer try to get back into the game late and I was happy to actually see a 4-point-play in a console game. Admittedly, I wouldn't have minded if the computer made a few quick trips downcourt and launched some 'threes' to get close, but it wasn't a big deal. And the little bugs Chi mentioned just looked awkward but never really forced me to get up and scream at the TV screen or anything.
The whole 'Live' franchise is already a legendary one in this industry; every year, no matter how bad or unimproved the new version was from its predecessor, NBA Live is annually proclaimed the basketball game of choice by video game players and critics. So much so that newer and more revolutionary titles like Nintendo's NBA Courtside and Acclaim's NBA Jam (64-bit version) were consistently overlooked. I, for one, was never swept up in the 'Live' hysteria so I've always been a bit more objective and with this latest release, I am even more disheartened seeing the amount of praise already being showered on EA Sports.
However, the 128-bit generation is now upon us and all of the old must change now due to the ground-breaking hoops title for the Dreamcast by Visual Concepts, NBA2K. This is a game so accurate to the actual sport of basketball that it requires no imagination on the part of the user and certainly made me a true believer.
With his review, Dale has thrown down the gauntlet on the myth of NBA Live's dominance over the genre and I'm right there beside him. I'm totally baffled as to how a game with so many flaws can get so much praise from the media. This game is far from flawless (as some have actually described it!).
There isn't much I can add to Chi's (admittedly eloquent) review. I agree that everything in NBA2K from the graphics and animations to the gameplay and sounds are unparalleled. So much so that the exclusion of some standard basketball mainstays like the 3-point contest went unnoticed or, if I did notice, I didn't much care at that point. It's what NBA2K does so well that stands out and overwhelms me with the same impact I get from watching real-life ball games.