Home Page / psx / N / NHL 2000 / Review Listing / Review

Here it is, another hockey season, and I am just getting over the shafting of the Sabres in the final game of the Stanley Cup Playoffs. I honestly think I could watch hockey year round without getting tired of the sport. The speed, power, and precision required to play competitive hockey is enormous. Capturing these elements in a video game is a daunting task.

Three major hockey titles will grace the Playstation this year-NHL 2000 (EA), NHL FaceOff 2000 (989), and NHL Championship 2000(Fox). I have extensively played all three games and can honestly say that no one title stands out as a truly great game. However, each game has a distinct feel and offers several strong points.

NHL 98 was a revolutionary hockey title in terms of presentation. The commentary was exceptionally strong, the music flat out rocked, and the TV-style presentation was awesome. Unfortunately, the game suffered from unrealistic gameplay. NHL 98 played too much like pinball on ice. There were also significant flaws in the AI. NHL 99 was a step in the right direction. Many of the AI problems were corrected, and the game speed more accurately depicted the sport of hockey. The presentation was not as flashy as that of NHL 98, but I found it to offer more long-term value. Entering the new hockey season, my expectations of NHL 2000 were fairly high. Read on to discover if my expectations were met.

The modes of play in NHL 2000 are exhibition, season, playoff, world tournament, and shootout. There are four difficulty levels. The rules can be customized, and elements such as injuries and fighting can be adjusted. One problem with the game options is the limitation of period lengths to 5, 10, or 20 minute periods. Period lengths should be adjustable in one-minute increments. The reasoning is that the realism of the user stats can be better tweaked by setting period length.

The gameplay in NHL 2000 is actually less realistic in many ways than in NHL 99. The hockey pinball effect is back and strong as ever. The game plays way too fast--especially during the first several minutes of each period. Adding even more fuel to the fire, the speed burst button catapults players forward at a very unrealistic speed. I know, I know-just lay off the speed burst button. I suppose that is possible, but it takes away from the feel of the game. Hockey players skate at different speeds in real life, thus I expect to experience variation in speed in a video game. Another aspect of NHL 2000 that is unrealistic is the puck physics. The puck travels too far around the boards, too fast down the ice, and in an overall unrealistic fashion. The puck physics are by no means the worst ever, but could use some tweaking. I get the distinct feeling that the complaints I voice above are due to the developer trying to make the game more arcade-like. More than a handful of folks complained that NHL 99 was sluggish and too slow. It looks like many of the concerns of simmers were forgotten.

The board play is something that is severely lacking in NHL 2000. Actual NHL games have a good deal of play against the boards. Unfortunately, there is almost zero board play in NHL 2000, and the play that does occur is not that realistically represented. The CPU defense gets a lot of things right, but it also suffers from some problems. First, the defense is not aggressive enough when the user has the puck and is shorthanded on offense. Second, the defensemen seem to crowd the net too much when the user is engaging in a powerplay. On offense, the user's non-controlled teammates do a better job of positioning than in NHL 99. I was pleased with the player movement away from the puck. The players faithfully execute the called plays on offense.

The fighting system of NHL 2000 is lame. If a hockey game is going to offer fighting, then it should offer more than mindless button mashing. Fighting in NHL 2000 is basically a matter of landing the first punch and keeping up with the barrage of punches. There is little variety in the type of punches thrown or maneuvers. If fighting in hockey games cannot be better than this, then I would prefer to see the fights be CPU-controlled. It would be more fun to see player attributes more heavily factored into the outcomes of fights. When a fight does breakout, a wide variety of animations could be implemented to display an exciting fight.

I tried some of the money plays that were present in NHL 99 and found they no longer exist in NHL 2000. While many of the money plays are absent, it is easier to score goals in NHL 2000. I experienced a lot of pucks going in the net on long shots. On the highest difficulty level I was able to average around 6 goals per game using 5-minute periods. This high scoring was not due to poor goalie AI, but usually poor CPU defense. Gamers who like a lot of offense will have a field day with NHL 2000.

NHL 2000 offers a career mode. The career mode is not very deep in terms of GM features, but does keep stats over the course of the career. All in all, the longevity rating of NHL 2000 is not higher because of the unrealistic gameplay and the limited GM features in career mode. I welcome the career mode, but it could offer more depth. Hopefully, a model similar to the one offered in Madden 2000 will be available in NHL 2001.

The stat tracking in NHL 2000 is solid. Season stats of CPU-controlled players tend to be fairly equivalent to real-life stats. User stats will vary, but I found it to be very easy to dominate most stat categories. Also, even when playing with the 5-minute period length, game stats are unrealistic. The shot totals are on the high side for the user due to the many quality opportunities that arise. Breakaways occur too often as well. Overall, the unrealistic season stats of CPU players and limited career play were not able to impress me enough to want to continue past one season.

There are a nice number of possible moves in NHL 2000. Players can poke check, make a big hit, body check, speed burst, deke, shoot, spin, slide block, and pass. The deke move is implemented well. It takes good timing to effectively deke. Another control that is well implemented is the big hit. The big hit is great for taking out some frustration. However, in keeping with actual hockey, big hits make the player more vulnerable to getting a penalty. Unfortunately, there is no ability to choose between wrist shots or slap shots. The CPU determines the type of shot based on the situation. The controls are responsive in NHL 2000. I never felt like my players were not properly responding to my input on the controller.

The graphics are very similar to the ones in NHL 99. The players look good, and their faces can be seen during close-up shots. The players animate well for the most part. However, at times, the players look silly while skating. For example, when using the speed burst, the players' legs move abnormally fast and seem to twitch. Also, the puck is way too large. I understand that the puck has to be a reasonable size so the gamer can adequately see it, but the size used in NHL 2000 is ridiculously large. The logos at mid ice look good, as does the ice deterioration over the course of the period. The arenas, while they have the proper banners hanging from the rafters, still look generic from the inside. The animations are pretty good. I especially like the goalie animations. One area where the animations deviate from reality is in the checking. Players fly high into the air on checks. The checking animations also occur too quickly. It is so exaggerated that it is comical.

The menu screens and load screens are sharp. A gorgeous photograph of the home arena is shown while the game loads. The menu screens are easy to read and look good. They are much blander than in the PC version though. The camera angles are average at best. I could not find a camera angle for which I was totally satisfied. The default angle is too far away from the action. NHL 2000 would benefit from a well-implemented, dynamic camera system.

First off, the intro FMV sequence is wonderful. "Push It," by Garbage, fits in well with the highlights. I still do not like the FMV intro as much as the one in NHL 98, but it ranks a close second. It is hard to dislike good hockey highlights mixed in with jamming music. The commentary in NHL 2000 is fine. Jim Hughson handles the play by play, while Bill Clement does the color. I like the fact that the commentators are not overly chatty. They offer just enough chatter to keep up with the game and keep things fresh. The developer has this aspect of NHL 2000 down pat.

The on-ice sounds are pretty decent. The skating sounds good, the hits sound average, and the shots sound good. The puck hitting the post is perfect. I like to play games with the volume turned up, and the first time I heard the puck hit the post I was amazed at the clarity. The crowd cheers and chants at appropriate times and adds to the atmosphere of the game.

The sound is solid, the graphics are fairly good, and the career mode is a welcomed addition. Unfortunately, the gameplay is too unrealistic for me to enjoy NHL 2000 as a sim. Gamers looking for a fast-paced, up-and-down-the-ice game of hockey will love this game. There are plenty of breakaways, an incredible number of shots on goal, and a high number of checks. For sim-o-philes, however, NHL 2000 falls flat on its face. If you have both a PC and a Playstation, I recommend bypassing the PSX version and opting for the PC version. The PC version plays a more realistic brand of hockey and can be patched. The PC version also has more options for the tweaking of gameplay. NHL 2000 is not a disaster, but EA is capable of releasing a better hockey game. With EA being on a recent roll with their sports titles, I felt a little let down after playing a season of NHL 2000. Hopefully next year will be better for EA hockey.