User Reviews (1 - 11 of 29)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

TKO

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 0 / 1
Date: December 05, 2001
Author: Amazon User

I really like the game, but I wish the opponent's attacks were just a little more telegraphed so that I, as a player, would have a better fighting chance against the computer that is obviously connected to whatever button I press when it comes to its defensive tactics.

Knockout Kings 2000 quite entertaining, but some flaws

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 3 / 3
Date: November 19, 2001
Author: Amazon User

Knockout Kings 2000 is overall a pretty good game. After first playing it with my friend, I got hooked on it. The music is awesome. The Career Mode is a good idea, and I love that there are so many legendary boxers to choose from.

However, I agree with other reviewers in that the game is not so true to real-life boxing techniques. (Of course, one can argue that realism in a video game is unimportant, just as in the movies...) I can win too easily just throwing combos. Not much strategy involved. Also, defense is impossible in the game. All you can do is evade once the computer starts swinging; bobbing and weaving are useless. This really annoys me. Another thing that bothers me is that the computer can throw just as many combos as you, but still have nearly a full tank of stamina.

I wonder why George Foreman or Mike Tyson aren't included? I mean, Jack Dempsey, but no George Foreman? Come on! And Ken Norton and Joe Frazier are underrated in the game. This really bummed me out. Also, it seems odd to me that I can beat Muhammad Ali with, say, Leon Spinks, easier than I can beat Larry Holmes or Evander Holyfield, using the exact same strategy. And Holyfield--while a great heavyweight--is not as good as the game makes him out to be, in my opinion.

But all in all, the game is good for hours of enjoyment. There are more things I like about it than dislike. I recommend it favorably.

Knockout Session of the Centery

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 0 / 1
Date: August 30, 2001
Author: Amazon User

Battle with Rocky, Ali, Frazier, practilly all the really good players of 2000, slugfest, knockpeople down and make'em do a back flip, cuts, cool graphics, awsome, awsome, awsome. Creat a boxer train'em. You want boxing. This is the game!

KO--A Knockout or Keel OVer?

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 3 / 3
Date: May 27, 2001
Author: Amazon User

I have watched boxing for many years and even competed in the amateur ranks. IF you share the same experience as me, then you can see glaring mistakes a mile away.

I will start out by saying that this is perhaps the best boxing game going today. Mike Tyson's Boxing for teh PSX sux bad. Ready to Rumble was just incoherent. I have not tried HBO boxing yet. The music is good. The career mode is good. There are a lot of good things about this game. BUT.

Anyone that has ever had a MINUTE of training knows not to start off a fight throwing combos. The rule of thumb is to stick with your jab and let the combos flow. Do not force them. I can put the game on HARD and literally win within two rounds by doing nothing but combos. The best combo is circle, triangle, triangle, triangle. This totally goes against boxing logic.

I wish EA would have put a little more stock in defense. The only way to do defense is literally hit and RUN. When the computer starts swinging, run and circle to the left. Bobbing and weaving dont work. This is depressing.

I also wish EA would develop a "watch mode." I know this may sound wierd, but I LOVE commentating games. My freinds will swear that my commentary is the only reason they play the game. I would just love to commentate Chavez v Hagler. Oh well.

The game is worth 20 bucks, but not much more than that. Seriously, it is not very challenging. I played the 2001 version, but dont remember much about it. BTW, Mike Tyson's Punchout for the Nintendo (1987) was the best boxing game ever--barnone.

All the Glitter at First, but no real substance after....

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 3 / 4
Date: January 08, 2001
Author: Amazon User

I have been following boxing for about 18 years and even boxed amateur. I was watching when Macho Camacho was 6-0 and being featured on an undercard of a regular network boxing event- you know, the kind before pay-per-view. I watched not only Hagler-Hearns (I think it was this fight) but also the undercard which to me was the greatest fight of all time even if the fighter I was pulling for lost - Wilfredo Gomez-Lupe Pintor.

So, I know a little about what I speak. I guess I use too much strategy when I play, because I always go to the body before going to the head. I always wear a guy down - "Kill the Body, and the head will follow".

Minuses 1. I was very disappointed that even after you wear a fighter down by reducing his stamina, they were still able to throw combinations and flurries constantly. Not very realistic.

2. I am very disappointed that you have to press four buttons very, very quickly to throw a combination. I am sure the computer does not have this problem judging from the amounts it throws.

3. I am very disappointed that when you start a combination or a flurry, the computer can stop you in your tracks with a punch while you do not have the ability to do so... usually, after he starts a combination, you cannot get a punch off until he is through punching.

4. I am very disappointed that you can max out your speed and power on career mode and someone like Marlon Wayans of all people still hit as hard as you. He's a comedian for crying out loud. You should knock him out with the first punch you throw. You also get beat to the punch in many fights even with 100 in speed.

5. If you have ever paid attention to the punch stats, you will find that the other guy hits on about 90-95% of his punches. The only way to keep him from doing that is to constantly bob and weave and you still get hit more than 50% doing that and you can't really punch out of the bob and weave on this game. I on the other hand am blocked very consistently and hardly ever land more than 50%.

6. The commentators hardly get any punches right. Many rounds, all I have thrown is left hooks to the body and the other guy has thrown the occasional punch to the body back, and usually at the most inappropriate moment, O'Grady says, that's was a nice cross there. Someone in the stands must have thrown the right cross because no one in the ring did.

7. In the lightweights, you have a guy 115 lbs? Come on, Be more realistic. This isn't 1900 when there were only about four weight classes and everyone under 130 or so fought lightweight. And a hint to the programmers, A 115 lb guy could never hurt a guy 140 even if his record is 38-2-0 with 26 knockouts. And the speed difference wouldn't be enough to overcome that disadvantage.

8. How do you throw specialty punches? The little book doesn't even mention them. The little book only mentions signature punches. And I get nailed everytime I am winding up to throw my signature punch, so I stopped trying. It is also very, very difficult to press the triangle button at the same time as the "o" button. You almost have toput the controller down.

9. Overall, I am agreement with everyone who states that this is just a "press the button faster and more times and you will probably win" game. What fun is that? I can buy Street Fighter or something if I want that. I kept looking for steaks or something for "powerups".

Pluses- Not many, but the wide range of fighters was pretty good, I guess. It was cool to fight Boom Boom Mancini and then right after that fight Arguello. Arguello killed me. It's fun to throw an illegal punch or elbow back when a fighter does it to you. I sometimes do it when I try for 40 seconds or so to hit the guy but he keeps covering up because he is about to go down. I was once stopped on cuts even though I had knocked my opponent down about 4 times and was leading on all the scorecards. That was OK.

I am not going to buy the 2001 version because it sounds like it was more of the same of this game. It sounds like they added more glitter but no real gameplay.

Here are suggestions to the makers (EA) if they keep trying.

1. Have purses and have offers to fight several opponents thereby making you have to make a decision on who you will fight. Will you fight the mandated opponent, or will you fight the big money Champion coming up from the next lowest weight division. Have a fighter be stripped of one of the belts if he doesn't fight the contender mandated by the governing body.

2. Every now and then (ay like maybe .001% or slightly more) have a fight stolen on points cards by dumb judges.

3. Have fighters have styles that give more depth to slugger and boxer like "starts fast but finishes weak", "gets stronger as the fight goes on", and other styles - there are plenty.

4. Have the ability to match up two fighters and have the computer fight for both of them.

There are other things but these are the main ones I had...

Backward step from the original K.K.

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 0 / 0
Date: January 04, 2001
Author: Amazon User

I was and still am a big fan of the 1st K.K. because it was a fairly lifelike boxing game.I rushed out and bought K.K. 2000 thinking that they could only improve on the original but how I was wrong.The only improvement was the boxers faces and physiques but everything else made playing the game worse.The boxers are far too wooden like and look like they have their feet tied together K.K. 2000 is like an arcade beat em up,press every button till someone drops game.I can only hope that KK 2001 recaptures what the original tried to achieve but I'll be renting first this time.

Exciting At First.

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 1 / 1
Date: October 29, 2000
Author: Amazon User

A fine game for starters in this limited game field,but doesnt grow in time.A wide range of boxers throughout it's history could be chosen(with the omission of Mike Tyson & George Foreman)& is quite good with the array of punches one could throw,though fairly limited in scope.The commentary is fine,but could have been better if worked on.A career mode is an added plus,though like the game grows tiring after a while,especially with a player having to labor over the created boxer's fighting skills.Classic bouts are featured with one being able to choose which boxer to fight in.Overall a fine game that hopefully will be bettered in Play Station 2.

I'd give it a 3 and a 1/2.

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 1 / 1
Date: September 07, 2000
Author: Amazon User

It's kewl when you first get it but the career mode is way to easy until after the champ! Not a single soul, not even the champ, went more than 1 round against my boxer! Either My stratogy ROCKED or the game was to easy. My strat was:

1st KnockDown: Go to the body until they block down there then go up top till they fall

2nd KD: Make something up. If they block everywhere Hit em with the "Rib Buster"

3nd KD: Low blow (MWA HA HA HA!!!) then Finish em!

Mmkay I'm done yakkin' now

Ho-hum Knockout Kings

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 5 / 5
Date: August 15, 2000
Author: Amazon User

Overall, Knockout Kings 2000 is a disappointment. Although the selection of boxers has improved--like the addition of Sugar Ray Robinson and Joe Frazier, the boxing action has taken a step backwards from its predecessor, Knockout Kings. In that game, a fight could end at any moment with one good punch, and the action wasn't as frenetic--like regular boxing. Here, to make it more "exciting", the programmers simply turned it into a glorified karate punching game with loads and loads of punches being landed. The computer does not improvise any strategies, and hence all the fighters seem the same on computer mode. When it's energy is low, it covers up. When yours is low, even if the computer's is, it comes out you--and is easy to knock out every time. Better to hold off and wait for Mike Tyson Boxing from Activision which promises more realism and strategies. Hey EA Sports--where are Gerry Cooney, Jerry Quarry, Thomas Hearns, Roy Jones, Prince Naseem Hamed, George Foreman (a young and older version), Riddick Bowe, and Kid Gavilan? Put some more classic fighters in there as well!

Game Play = Terrible

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 2 / 2
Date: May 27, 2000
Author: Amazon User

At first you open the game and start to play, it acctually is a cool game intill you decide to play career. It should take you about 3 hours to beat it then there is nothing to do. you start to play other peopl in regular mode but it gets dull. It took me about one week to stop playing the game allogether. SPEN YOUR MONEY ON A MORE ENTERTAINING ITEM

Review Page: 1 2 3 Next 

Actions