Dear Future Gamer

In response to Sensible Soccer being put in the Hall of Shame (FG42, readers - blimey, he's going back some!), don't you think we're really missing the point? I think what we have to look at here is why Sensible Soccer '98 is so different to the original classic. I feel that maybe the developers got a little worried that all these fancy 3D games were taking over the football game market.

What Sensible should have concentrated on was perfecting the gameplay of the original. Yeah, alright, slap in a couple of fancy graphics but there isn't a law saying games have to be updated in 3D. I feel that if a game is working in one format then why change it to fall in line with the rest of the developers? I reckon if Sensible just tweaked around with the original engine, perfected the AI and improved the management options of SWOS then gamers would have probably bought it because it would be a refreshing change to what's on the market at the moment.

Just think how much the games industry has grown since the last Sensible Soccer. I bet half the people who have PCs and PlayStations have never played it before. It's an unfortunate trend at the moment that too many games are getting bad updates when converted to 3D. All I ask is, why bother doing it?

Rob Wilson

FG: Clearly, Sensible Soccer was a fine 2D football game. When quizzed at the time as to whether SWOS would be converted to the PlayStation in its original 2D, Sensible supremo Jon Hare was worried that people would think it was a cop out. He needn't have. Yes, folk might not have paid £44.99 for it, but a budget-priced conversion would have been lapped up by Amiga owners who had bought into PlayStation. Maybe one day...