Reviewed  6/6/2001
To say the original ISS Pro Evolution took the world by storm, is an understatement.   Basically every single website and magazine gave extraordinarily high marks and appraisals, and it seemed just about the perfect football game ever.  Even to this day, there seems nothing to complain about the game.  So why another version?   Cynics will suggest a cash-in, fans, a potential higher place in video game football heaven.   Probably the only thing of any consequence that could be criticised about the game, are the over-frequency of low-scoring games (1-0, 0-0 & 1-1).  And those scenarios were more a reflection on an individual's defensive skills than the goal-inhibiting niggles in the game.  Still, there are only so many 0-0s to be played before you crave a goal frenzy that Evo could not deliver.

It is a testament to the aura and respect of Konami that the world waited with bated breath for the release of Evo2, despite an already outstanding game in the market.  Could Konami really evolve on what most people saw as perfection, or were they just setting themselves up for a fall?  Well, early reviews lamented the game's slow speed and any lack of obvious improvement.  In fact, just like with the N64's ISS 2000 - another game slowed down, many saw it as a retrograde step in the series.  Of course, websites are notorious for rushing reviews out before anyone else, so obviously, some detailed analysis just has to be sacrificed.  This is were the ISS Realm comes in.

Gameplay
Speed - where is it?  Facts are, this game is slower considerably, and if you were one to play ISS Evo on max speed, then stop reading because you don't want this game.  An accurate indication of the Evo2's speed is that its fastest setting is the same as Evo's default.  The ISS Realm has always thought a speed-meter was stupid since the game should mirror the speed of the actual sport.  And in Evo, it was only ever pumped up a few notches to about 2/3s to 3/4s.  Full speed was unrealistic, whilst the default (or even slower) was just too sluggish.  With Evo2, the speed has to be boosted to full otherwise the game plays like a sick dog.

But has this ruined the game?  Hell no.  To the ISS Realm, max speed seems to be the most realistic, even though the game still feels slightly sluggish as a consequence, but with improvement in other areas, the game is definitely an evolution on Evo.  I'd suggest that those quick to discard it could not overcome the slower speed and did not give it a chance.  But there is improvement, the tweaks to the AI and passing has made goal scoring opportunities easier - or defence easier to break down - and overall, it has created a slighlty better balanced and more fluid game.

The main grumble from the first Evo was that occasional lacking AI in going forward which often saw patient buildups go unrewarded.  Now, the players are more receptive to reading your intentions and rarely don't chase balls.   Only the most errant of passes are left, but of course, with the Press2 move pioneered in the first Evo, you can quite often be first to the ball anyway.  The passing is a tad more snappier, with one-touch passing being the greatest benefactor.   Of course, players that are in positions physically impossible to make a pass that is asked of them, will often just do their best to knock it softly in the appropriate direction.

There seems to be a tad more space in the game, with opposition players not marking you as close as previously.  That aids goal-scoring opportunities to a degree, but still the game asks for intelligent and innovative play to succeed, preferably with close killer final balls or early crosses.  Most opponents will be quick with the Press2 move to close down long passes, so it is still rare that you will get away with them unless the player is in significant space.  Instead, the extra half-second or so of time afforded simply gives you just enough time to get a one-touch pass away instead of being dispossessed as in the previous version.

Conversely, headers, while now easier to direct in open play, seem harder to score, especially in packed penalty boxes.  Unless attackers are free, defenders seem to out-muscle them most of the time.  But lobs are far more potent, and travel quicker to free players. Previously, the lob was useless, with any long ball plays relying on the through-lob move if any sort of success was to be guaranteed.  However, the long-lob legacy still occasionally surfaces in this game with an often huge punt up field when all you want to do is chip it ahead.  Chip-shots are now performed Nintendo-style - by holding the directional pad opposite the goal.  There is also a cancel-shot move that stops you charging your shot - very handy for trigger-happy players, though personally, seldom used.  Other than that, gameplay wise, not much else has changed. 

Initially, with the crisper passing, this game felt more arcade-like than the previous game.  Ultimately, what you end up with is, yes, a slower game, that is more simulation than ever, but not to the degree that the fun has been purged from the game.  If you can handle the speed loss and consequential sluggishness, it is probably more fun than Evo.  Offence and defence have equally potent weapons at combating one another, so while that still leaves you with low scoring games, you end up with more goal-mouth action rather than the mid-field stalemates of the previous game.   

Quick run-down of other new stuff:
* Strategy mentality setting is semi-automatic now, though you can preset whether it remains normal (all zones), offensive-minded or defensive-minded.  Still don't know why there is no manual adjustment anyway.  The mentality can still be adjusted during the game, but the CPU will resume control shortly after.
* Offensive attributes.  Borrowed from Nintendo ISS games, this is in the formation section whereby individual players on the field can have their offensive mentality switched on.  While in past Pro ISS games, I've relied on the strategic mentality setting to add more attacking impetus to the team, since this version's now semi-automatic, I prefer to switch all the strikers' and offensive midfielders' offensive attribute on (Don't ask why the strikers' are not already on like with the Nintendo ISS games.  After all, they are strikers!).  Otherwise, the team simply does not attack urgently enough, or in great enough numbers. 
* Player names - they are real!  Yep, finally, all the big teams are 100% faithful both physically and in name.  When you get to lower teams, things become more murky.   For example, Australia and Manchester City's Tiatto has dark hair, when in reality, it is light.  And most of Iran's team are either mis-spelt or totally ficticious.   Croatia's offered mis-spellings too.
* More teams and more stadiums, that's a given.
* An information screen which details the enhancements to the game.  There was something about tournaments and transferring players, for those that are so deeply inclined to play. 
* The game is even sharper graphically, but aurally, the same as previous.  Again, a minimal upgrade, but there are few select things like goalies red-carded - a first.

Quick run-down of old stuff that should have been changed:
* Damn button configuration, arghh!  Why do I have to exit a tournament to the main menu to change the config???
* Ball inertia still rolls too much, but it is no big deal; player's inertia has been improved in that they don't run too far after chasing down a ball.  However, in shooting situations on the run, the pause while a shot is charged often sees the GK strip the ball off you.
* Semi-automatic guiding of through-balls.  Like in Evo, the game often takes total control of where a through-ball goes, which at least is always in the direction of a player running into a channel.  However, you may not want that.  Example: you aim a ball out wide for the player to run on to, only the ball goes down the middle - an angle some 90 degrees different to your intention - with the player darting inside through the back line instead your intented out wide destination.  Nice idea, except often the ball will get intercepted because the through ball was passed from too far away.   Evo rewards close final balls and crosses, or balls played to free players, to score.  Anything else gets intercepted.  I have had an instance where a through-ball has gone almost 180 degrees in the wrong direction which can be frustrating.   Suppose it is just consistent with the helping-hand the game gives in defence.
* The refresh of the screen before a throw-in or goal kick is taken, which puts players in their formation positions, instead of leaving them roughly where they were when the ball went out.  Also, and this has been an ongoing ISS Pro quirk, players are too static when waiting for a throw-in.  N64 ISS allows the recipient to be moved around, as well as the ability to switch control to another.

Compared to N64 ISS 2000
After discovering the Press2 and Press-hold moves with the Evolution games, I was eager to see if something similar was in ISS 2000 that I had missed.  But no, the only help you get is the automatic interceptions of long passes, which Evo does too.  It was quite disconcerting that attempts at applying those Evo Press moves ended up in zilch.   Simply, you must take control of a player to make tackles in this game, which like the consistent helping-hand that Evo has, is consistent with the total player control philosophy that Nintendo games have always had.

People thought ISS 2000 was too slow, but compared to Evo2, it flies.  That is quite a bit to do with the lower and closer perspective, but in terms of gameplay, the ball certainly moves about quicker, hence, quicker gameplay.   The game is much more frenetic with many more shots on goal - typically more than double than in Evo2.  However, and we are talking about the default difficulty levels here, goal tallies were similar with 1-0, 0-0 and 1-1 results common.  However, the CPU was more adept at scoring in ISS 2000, and also, that game more often produced 3+ goals in a game.  On the harder ISS 2000 levels, goal tallies do drop a tad with the game obviously much harder.  For Evo2, inexperience on Hard level precludes a complete confirmation, but the few attempts have showed the CPU more challenging in going forward and scoring in more games, with player goal tallies remaining the same.  In versus mode, with no help from the CPU, defences are more easily broken down and the game averages 3-4 goals a game compared to Evo2's goal tally which sees little change.

This CPU intervention with the Evo2 Press moves and general tackling system, is the single biggest difference between the two games and a highly contentious issue.  Do we want this sort of help, or should the individual use absolute skill to win the ball?  Facts are, the current system works well for each game, though a toning down of the Press2 to merely make it a marking and interception move would help increase goal scoring situations in Evo2 without sacrificing too much of the defensive edge and making it pretty much perfect.  For N64,  porting it, plus the Press-hold-barge (hold X move) to N64 - which in fact does not have a true barge, only a standing tackle and illegal push move - would help defend against those slippery attackers that still seem to evade your best endeavours in defending.  N64's actual tackles - standing and slide - are still more effective than Evo's, but they need to be, given the looser and more agile players.

Goal keepers are significantly better in ISS 2000, but again, they need to be due to the greater frequency of shots on goals.  Of course, unlike the PS games, they have 5 attribute levels (amongst the pre-game handicapping options), so can be reduced to even lower levels than Evo's for friendlies if desired.   The manual control option that simply instructs your GK to charge out whilst holding the GK button but automatically makes tackles and saves, works better in Evo, though.  Nintendo versions see you actually controlling him just like any other player on the pitch, and forced to tackle and save.  Only problem is, that saving is quite hard due to the agility on the opposition players.  Only with SNES ISS Deluxe could you be confident of saving shots manually.  The goal keeping differences between the PS and N64 games again reflects the respective philosophies of CPU help and total player control.

The other thing of note that stands out is ISS 2000's sound.  It is far superior than Evo or Evo2's in terms of quality and even quantity.   Very surprising given the CD based PS versions, but its dynamism and variety truly adds to the atmosphere.  Graphically, ISS 2000 is smoother, and blurrier with the anti-aliasing poorly used, just like most N64 games.  Animation quality is about equal, but N64 has extra antics both for players and incidental people like referees, crowds and flags.  Anyone that has read previous N64 ISS reviews will no doubt realise there are many other extra inclusions that the PS version have traditionally missed out on - nothing too critical mind you - and they don't need to be re-listed again.   But what can be recalled again is all the wonderful customable tournaments that the PS games have always had that the N64 has lacked.  ISS 2000 has finally come to the party with a small multiplayer league and tournament, but is nothing compared to what the Pro games have to offer.  Evo is the better party game.

The heart of ISS has always been the gameplay, however, and this is where judgments on the two games must be made even though, that philosophically, the two games, whilst seemingly about to merge when comparing the original Evo against ISS 2000, are actually now more farther apart than ever before meaning any comparisons are invidious.   Regular readers to the ISS Realm will no doubt be aware that we have always preferred the Nintendo version to the PS's Pro versions.  With these two recent versions changing very little, so too has our opinions.  The fluidity, intensity and non-stop action simply makes ISS 2000 more fun.  Having said that, a greater appreciation of the nuances of Pro and specifically the Evo games over recent months has made the decision much closer.  The discovery of the Press moves have removed the frustration out of the games when defending and made the experiences very satisfying.   But the thing that still holds Evo2 back from claiming overall supremacy is the rarity of goal feasts.   An example has been a regular match-up between France and Croatia recently.  The goal has been to score at least 2 goals in a game, and in about ten attempts on Normal difficulty, failed.   And that is not due to a lack of skill or familiarity either, it just worked out that way.  1-0s were the most common, followed by 0-0s and 1-1s.  For us, basically goal-fests never happen, and that is a minor blot on the game.

Overall
Again, no scores are given.  We all know how great ISS is, and in justifying a purchase, it all comes down to whether the changes warrant it, and the old personal preference line again.  This is the ultimate simulation, but you may not want that - you may want speed or goals galore.  If so, stick to Evo and Pro 98 respectively.  Or, the crazy arcade-style N64 versions could be more to your liking.   Facts are, this is the least changed of any ISS update ever, which is reflected in this shortest ISS Realm review ever.  And what has changed, is either minimal (AI, passing) or largely been condemned (speed).  No doubt any ISS fanatic would have it by now.  If you don't have it yet, this suggests you should heed your initial reservations and ignore it.  For sadly, and objectively, the speed-loss is significant enough to prevent an uncategorical declaration that this game is supreme amongst PlayStation ISS games.

To ISS Reviews