| Hephaestos said: There is single reason why soccer is the best sport. "you only need 1 roundish object to play it with friends" with soccer you can make anything into a field, just put two shirts or school bags as posts and use a coke can as the ball... it works you can do a 2 vs 2 or whatever. Hell you can even play in a coridor... kick the stuffed animal past your friend. Basketball -> need hoops and actuall ball Or a single shirt/school bag and a coke can that you try to throw into said shirt/bag. And for others, a basket or score is a given if you can simply dribble past your opponent, so any bouncy ball would work for that game Handball -> need actuall ball Hockey -> gear heaven The only real gear required is a couple of sticks and any object to hit around, though actual hockey sticks will probably be easier to obtain than usable sticks from a tree. It doesn't have to be a contact sport with friends Rugby -> too physical/dirtying is the only reason. us football -> gear heaven Again, it doesn't have to be a contact sport, reducing the requirement to a throwable object(not necessarily a football, but that certainly helps for longer passes) and some shirts/bags/landmarks to mark endzones Baseball -> needs wide field and gear The only real gear needed is a stick and a ball, though a suitable area to play is true. But I'd argue more that you need quite a few friends to play this one or most of the time would be spent recovering the ball tennis -> needs gear and court @topic: the only bad thing about championship manager is that it sucks time.... last time I tryed to play, I spent 2 hours looking profiles to recruit at the begining of the season... way too long (yeah you don't need to do it but I play like this) |
Just wanted to point out that you simplified football/soccer without doing the same for other sports. Otherwise I'd say that it's going to be difficult to find/build posts with a crossbar as a limit to the height of possible goals.
@topic:
Seems to me like IGN US did a review for the general American gamer. So in that regard they did a decent job, as very few of its general audience would be interested in this game. Where they fail though is that games shouldn't be reviewed in this manner. This should have been reviewed for its intended audience, and as many other reviews show it does a great job at being a good management game. Very few people would simply go out and buy a game just because they see that it received a high review, so only those interested in this "genre" would even check out the review and perhaps decide to check out the game themselves.
I've stopped going to IGN and other major sites for reviews alltogether. Scores seem to be based too much on hype and/or my opinions on games differs too much from the reviewers to be helpful. Instead I get most of my info on which games I'd be interested right here, thanks to all of the posting members. :)
