tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-55357841891417286312024-03-05T09:19:08.456-08:00WORLD OF BLENDO75A world of never-ending happiness and the home of Chuck and John Brunello's C64 reviews.blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.comBlogger80125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-78767541236092993922017-03-16T12:53:00.001-07:002017-03-21T07:32:55.613-07:00Shooting Gallery (c) 1983 Rensoft<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-xDJZPcJx2Zo/WMiPmwO8j6I/AAAAAAAAJ0o/ROqmhoGZfwYanGV7IuNmKaxyKo5MnrJCwCLcB/s1600/2017-03-14_15-29-01.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="190" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-xDJZPcJx2Zo/WMiPmwO8j6I/AAAAAAAAJ0o/ROqmhoGZfwYanGV7IuNmKaxyKo5MnrJCwCLcB/s400/2017-03-14_15-29-01.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Good morrow everyone. Today we're discussing Shooting Gallery, published in 1983 by Rensoft Software Systems and coded by Pete Lobl and Vin InGrao. Why the name Rensoft, I wonder? And why call it Rensoft Software, when Software is implied by the "soft" in Rensoft?<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> They're big Renny Harlin fans, most likely.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-D82QlH7jHkg/WMiSyDTd7ZI/AAAAAAAAJ04/q8fZw1lhdQ4M5hZf61C7TGsLnwoYVajKgCLcB/s1600/a-nightmare-on-elm-street-4-the-dream-master-behind-the-scenes-27.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="241" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-D82QlH7jHkg/WMiSyDTd7ZI/AAAAAAAAJ04/q8fZw1lhdQ4M5hZf61C7TGsLnwoYVajKgCLcB/s320/a-nightmare-on-elm-street-4-the-dream-master-behind-the-scenes-27.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Mmmmm.. OK. Who isnt, really?<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> Actually there are about a hundred companies called Rensoft. There's even one that made some public-domain-looking PC games in the early nineties but it had nothing to do with Pete and Vinny. They dont seem to have made any other commercial software for the C64, although Lobl did have a stint writing programs for the magazines at the time.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> Well look at you doing some research. Apparently Pete was the president of the Long Island VIC users club, so he was probably a VIC20 man before the C64 came along. I imagine he was an early adopter and had a head start on how to program the C64. The bi-directional scrolling in Shooting Gallery is certainly a neat trick for a game this early.<br />
<br />
It's easy to be cynical and say that Rensoft was one of these no-name, no-budget software companies that ripped off other people's ideas, made quickie cash-in garbageware and sold it through the mail. And maybe Rensoft truly was some flash-in-the-pan, here-today-gone-tomorrow, fly-by-night-away-from-here type of operation. But look closelier and you will see something more. Rensoft was the dream of <u>15-year-old</u> Pete and Vinny. From the looks of it they were starting their own software publishing company. At 15! These kids were real go-getters. They managed to get an ad in Compute! and everything. WE DONT CLAIM ARCADE, WE ARE ARCADE.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfJ3lUFJbUwxqKaplcpIlzaM-3CqcST22iFzyHIEDOkFfboP-TPpw48wrTYMXADOCUUeAf_fHUkdtV29FCdz5OqcyiAoq9OO7rD_wpQHYvvvUi1h3fNnAXMxLHuzGVTM5NegKNVJGYCPU/s1600/2017-03-14_15-27-58.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="451" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfJ3lUFJbUwxqKaplcpIlzaM-3CqcST22iFzyHIEDOkFfboP-TPpw48wrTYMXADOCUUeAf_fHUkdtV29FCdz5OqcyiAoq9OO7rD_wpQHYvvvUi1h3fNnAXMxLHuzGVTM5NegKNVJGYCPU/s640/2017-03-14_15-27-58.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
This is the dawn of the C64 era and very close to the dawn of home computing as a whole. That's why they can claim "written in 100%" assembler as a feature. And GOOD PLAY ABILITY, that's always nice.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> Yeah this ad is great. Unfortunately every other game in the ad seems to have been lost. They arent in any archive that we have and there's no info on the net. You've got Pogo, the Q-Bert ripoff. Not to be confused with Pogo Joe, certainly. Kooky Climber is Crazy Climber, obviously. That's interesting, that one didnt get a lot of ports or ripoffs of any kind. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> Oh are you sure? Let's <a href="https://youtu.be/RLlUdxaRUbY" target="_blank">look</a>.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> LOL - Wow. That's.. that's something. That cant be our Kooky Climber could it?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> No. That's a type-in from COMPUTE! and not one from our subject Pete. (ed's note: not sure which issue).<br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>John: </b> Oh yeah, you can tell by how it has to load all the data at the beginning. Also on offer is Star Slayer. Destroy all the enemy bases... avoid asteroids... I'm guessing this is a Starmaster clone. They've got all the bases covered except for a Pac Man clone, or Frogger.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> The only one of these games we can find is the one we have, Shooting Gallery. We're not sure if the rest of them were ever released. I'm assuming Shooting Gallery made a few sales, which is why we have a pirated copy at all.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> Notice it's the only one of their games available on disk OR tape. Still, even Shooting Gallery is very obscure. No gameplay videos except for <a href="https://youtu.be/pbBaLZQKKn0" target="_blank">a SID one</a> that we'll discuss later. It's got a <a href="http://www.gamebase64.com/game.php?id=9198&d=42" target="_blank">Gamebase</a> entry and that's about it. Lobl and InGrao are credited but only on this one game. I'm assuming they made the other games in the catalog so, if they exist, they are incredibly rare. The only thing we know for sure is that these games most likely blow.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Hey, hey, hey, let's be fair. It may be that only the programmer's themselves know what these games are like.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Uh huh. What are the chances that these are good games?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> There are two chances. Slim, and none. I'll bet Pogo is better than Q-Bopper, though.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> I'll bet you're 100% right about that. The prices on these games are pretty surprising. Spoiler alert for this review: Shooting Gallery aint that great. And it's $27.99. They top out at $36.95. That means Shooting Gallery was sold for about <a href="http://www.dollartimes.com/inflation/inflation.php?amount=28&year=1983" target="_blank">70 God Damned dollars</a> in today's currency. Holy Jeebus. Maybe the reason these games are obscure is staring us right in the face.<br />
<br />
I think these games were released, though. Somebody has them somewhere. This looks like a pretty legit advert, and somebody must have bought Shooting Gallery for us to have been able to get a pirated copy of it. Either that or the programmers just decided to set it loose in the wild one day after they folded up this company, which probably happened pretty quick.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Sure, they could exist and just not be archived. I'm always finding games in our collection that are variations of what exists in the <a href="http://csdb.dk/sid/?id=1855" target="_blank">CSDB</a>, for example. So these databases are by no means complete. Well, if you, the reader have these games please know that they havent been archived properly.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> OK so let's get to talking about Carnival. I mean Shooting Gallery.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Shooting Gallery is obviously a port of Carnival by Sega/Gremlin. Released in arcades in 1980, it is a fun and strikingly high-tech Space Invaders type shooter with Galaxian elements with enemies that break formation and fly towards you. It was programmed by Medo Moreno, Murphy Bivens (who also programmed the excellent <a href="https://youtu.be/6V9RVg0EIXU" target="_blank">Space Fury</a>) and Helene Schlein. I'm not surprised this needed a team of progammers, there's a lot going on here. The music in particular is far ahead of its' time. Carnival is a true classic that got some good home ports including a very respectable and fun Atari 2600 port. The C64 never got one though.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKJfijpg6QkzTfw6wVICmfDViO2rgjMd94VtTwAMcJoSRSy9b_5SRQHjpUMIxEyX_GyexLiNJ9jYTZYmZevW1f9EKeljOkGbGnP9XpAMaoy2BcyE_qOqNqBliCcZN9XwMWRYl7j27PyEQ/s1600/carnival-flyer.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="208" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKJfijpg6QkzTfw6wVICmfDViO2rgjMd94VtTwAMcJoSRSy9b_5SRQHjpUMIxEyX_GyexLiNJ9jYTZYmZevW1f9EKeljOkGbGnP9XpAMaoy2BcyE_qOqNqBliCcZN9XwMWRYl7j27PyEQ/s640/carnival-flyer.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> We are ALWAYS talking about Sega games around here. And we're not even big Sega freaks or anything.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Well they kicked a lot of ass back then. Sega had been in the game business already long before video games came about. They obviously know what they're doing arcade-wise and the influence of their game design is very far-reaching. Carnival is unfortunately a bit overlooked today, probably due to its' age and similarity to other shooting games from that era. People mostly want to play <a href="https://youtu.be/lPgI3Ep2BCg" target="_blank">Galaxian</a>, Galaga or Space Invaders these days. Something like Carnival, which was a very well made cousin to these games, is never going to be as well known or renowned because these days there isnt as much space available for it to exist in. <br />
<br />
Carnival is an example of early video game design that mimicked the electro-mechanical games of the previous era. <a href="https://youtu.be/OrXi0b9eSQA" target="_blank">Target shooting games</a> are among the oldest mechanical games featuring moving targets, some of them are even steam powered. These games featured real firearms with specially made bullets that had real report and bell mechanisms to indicate a hit or simply had the sound of the bullet hitting iron or steel.<br />
<br />
Carnival really understands what it's based on and plays it to the hilt. Instead of a simple Galaxian ripoff it has limited ammunition that can be resupplied by shooting the correct targets. There are targets of varying color and size and plenty of ways to earn bonuses. The coup-de-grace is the music and sound effects. The clanging of the target bells and the soundtrack are fantastic. Bravo.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> I love how the ducks spring to life and fly toward you. If they reach the bottom they'll eat your ammunition. This absolutely freaked me out as a kid. And speaking of the soundtrack, "Vals Sobre las Olas" is the featured track, which is the <a href="https://youtu.be/QzCCQZFDkJk" target="_blank">most recognizable carnival theme</a> there is. It's one of the most famous Latin American works worldwide, keep that nugget of information in your brain for later.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> So, it's a great game, and a good candidate for a clone. That's where Shooting Gallery comes in. First, let's examine this wonderful title screen.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-e9yyV-h_Eis/WMmSaHiL2zI/AAAAAAAAJ1k/6DPWK16BPKoF2T5pp9ra8WsbWFFhIVv7QCLcB/s1600/2017-03-15%2B10.04.07.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="419" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-e9yyV-h_Eis/WMmSaHiL2zI/AAAAAAAAJ1k/6DPWK16BPKoF2T5pp9ra8WsbWFFhIVv7QCLcB/s640/2017-03-15%2B10.04.07.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<b>John: </b> Amazing. This one really is great. There's two screens, let's tackle them one at a time.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> OK, first of all you get to hear a monophonic SID version of Chopsticks, which you can find on youtube right <a href="https://youtu.be/pbBaLZQKKn0" target="_blank">here</a>. And the first thing you see is the Rensoft title. And.. and I cant wrap my mind around what we are looking at here.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> There's a TV sitting in a football field. It appears to be connected to and apparently receiving power from a goal post or perhaps a soccer net. The TV appears not to have rabbit ear antennae, maybe it's a menorah? All drawn in wonderful PETSCII with what appears to be a sprite pasted on the TV.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NTOR7VjFinQ/WMmSfKdvh9I/AAAAAAAAJ1o/sluR1jyShdwuvP_7b0LzVDPFDa6fxvCXwCLcB/s1600/2017-03-15%2B10.04.22.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="419" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NTOR7VjFinQ/WMmSfKdvh9I/AAAAAAAAJ1o/sluR1jyShdwuvP_7b0LzVDPFDa6fxvCXwCLcB/s640/2017-03-15%2B10.04.22.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<b><br /></b>
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-NF0uKl9cNuc/WMmSzOtK09I/AAAAAAAAJ1s/ldJINWirIlM72H-BVmJ1o7OU80NxTGjxACLcB/s1600/il_570xN.412018999_w48k.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="239" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-NF0uKl9cNuc/WMmSzOtK09I/AAAAAAAAJ1s/ldJINWirIlM72H-BVmJ1o7OU80NxTGjxACLcB/s320/il_570xN.412018999_w48k.jpg" width="320" /></a><b>Chuck:</b> Next we have the game title and the programmers. This is fantastic. This combined with the loping Chopsticks rhythm might make this the most quaint title screen of all time. Look at the lettering; this looks like vintage embroidery. This could just as easily say GOD BLESS OUR HOME. Listen to the music along with this, this feels like we're going to play a game from 1908.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> It's amazing. This was made by teenage boys. This is 1983. Arcade culture is in full swing. The confluence of video games, arcades, new wave music, 80's fashion, it's all peaking or about to peak.. and this is Little House on the Prairie.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> It's fantastic. And screenshots dont do it justice, you have to have the music to get the full effect. What kills me is SO MANY of these early C64 games have this same vibe. Home computing of this era just has such an old-fashioned bent to it. Perhaps due to the environment of total independence, this is video games as folk art? Now I realize we're talking about a privileged few that own computers at this point in computing history. But! The C64 was hitting middle-and-lower-middle classes with their pricing and there's a good chance mom and dad didnt go to college but could still afford one of these things. There's an even better chance the person writing this sofware didnt go to college, and in this particular case it's 100% true, this was made by kids. How many games from this era were made by high school students? This was the computer for the masses, not the classes.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Yeah, maybe you're on to something. There's a ton of non-commercial software for the 64, and I include the entire demo scene in this, as well as "trash" like <a href="https://youtu.be/7SxeEDE7tgc" target="_blank">Smurf Massacre</a>, that I would definitely consider to be folk art. Shooting Gallery is ostensibly commercial software, but so much of this early commercial software is so naive and obviously unprofessional that I think it qualifies anyway. It's debatable, because folk art is fundamentally non-commercial, non-professional. Stuff like this rides the line.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> This title sequence just says to me "OK , here's our little computer game here. Just a dash of color and music, something to make you feel nice and cozy. OK now you just wait a little bit for the game to load, it'll be right up. Nice day today isnt it? OK, on to the game with you, go on now. Dont worry, it's nothing too loud or exciting. Maybe get a cup of coffee first. That would be nice." It's the most staid, unassuming thing ever. This is the furthest thing from "woo hoo let's play some vidjer games!!".<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> WE DONT CLAIM QUAINT WE ARE QUAINT<br />
<br />
I think a lot of this could be Lobl trying to give this an old-timey shooting gallery vibe. Chopsticks doesnt fit into that though. Remember also, we're always saying that these games use music like this becuase it's public domain and easy to get the sheet music. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> What I'm saying is that so many C64 games have this vibe that it's gotta be more than that. It's not just that it's folky in the sense that it feels old-fashioned, it's a sense that it's completely divorced from mainstream video gaming of the time. This is like homemade vs store-bought food. It's like coming home and saying you played this great game at the arcade and then your parents whip up something similar for you on the computer that evening. <br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> I cant quite get to where you are on this, but I will say that the only thing that looks remotely like what you expect from a commercial video game in 1983 is their magazine ad. Maybe Star Slayer has a different vibe, very hard to see that one coming up with a Chopsticks-backed title screen.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> OK, on to the game itself.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Finally.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Let's talk about the layout of the play screen. Your score is in the top right, number of lives left, There's an analog clock face on the bottom right. Level/Round indicators at the bottom. The game assumes you're going to press fire to start. And when you do you hear this strange music. It sounds so familiar but you cant quite put your finger on it.<br />
<b><br />John:</b> Dont give it away just yet.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> OK. When the game starts there are six alternately-scrolling lines at the top of the screen. All are targets except for the second line from the top which are unbreakable barriers. There are gaps between the barriers that allow you to shoot the targets at the very top of the screen.<br />
<br />
All of the targets and wall blocks are character set graphics and each is as big as a single character. The targets in the first stage are your usual ducks and rabbits. Eventually you get to other stuff like little TV sets, little stick figures, bananas, Pac-Men(?), aliens and many various indecipherables. Your gun at the bottom is a small sprite, very similar to the one used in arcade Carnival.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-H9623I1DQgw/WMqJ7puL2QI/AAAAAAAAJ2k/_Rv9Gjnopa4wlUEDwmLPEovCRcIEnOOgACLcB/s1600/2017-03-15%2B10.07.49.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="211" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-H9623I1DQgw/WMqJ7puL2QI/AAAAAAAAJ2k/_Rv9Gjnopa4wlUEDwmLPEovCRcIEnOOgACLcB/s320/2017-03-15%2B10.07.49.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ijanXkJU70M/WMqJspt2sKI/AAAAAAAAJ2g/xODeM4QR6UEJd1iZvH4oanJToNZbdXWmACLcB/s1600/2017-03-15%2B10.12.56.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="211" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ijanXkJU70M/WMqJspt2sKI/AAAAAAAAJ2g/xODeM4QR6UEJd1iZvH4oanJToNZbdXWmACLcB/s320/2017-03-15%2B10.12.56.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
When you fire you'll notice that your bullets are very large, as large as the targets themselves. It's not a smooth travelling bullet either, it sort of hiccup-jumps up the screen. Similarly, some of the targets scroll smoothly across the screen where some are extremely jerky. Perhaps this was intentional, to make them more difficult to shoot?<br />
<br />
Not all targets are desirable. There are hash blocks that will reduce your score when shot by 50 points and there are minus signs which take time off the clock. Desirable targets include addition signs which add time to the clock and the letters B O N U S that gives you 100 points for shooting all the letters in order. The targets themselves are worth more the higher up they are, with the bottom row being 1 point each, second row 2 points, etc. That's a huge scoring discrepancy that we'll get to in a bit.<br />
<br />
There is a time limit to each round represented by a wall clock face. If you do not hit all desirable targets by the time the clock runs out the clock turns to garbage pixels and you lose a Rifle. Sometimes the game lets you by with one target remaining. If you lose all rifles the screen cyles colors and plays a long cymbal crash sound that I guess is meant to be the entire world exploding because you lost.<br />
<br />
If you clear all the targets then you earn bonus time based on the amount of tick lines left on the clock, 100 points each. Before the next round starts there is a "shoot the bear" sequence, which is a bonus round just like in arcade Carnival. Except I dont think this thing is a bear. Also he has something.. hanging down. There's something going on down there if you know what I'm saying.<br />
<b style="background-color: #3333cc; color: white; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: small; line-height: 17px; text-align: -webkit-center;"></b><br />
<b><br /></b>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2SD8wHzcM8U/WMqRTIu4aNI/AAAAAAAAJ24/H05OUaVwGZYCFslfmFkyIc7cUJlC281zACLcB/s1600/2017-03-16_9-15-06.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="249" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2SD8wHzcM8U/WMqRTIu4aNI/AAAAAAAAJ24/H05OUaVwGZYCFslfmFkyIc7cUJlC281zACLcB/s400/2017-03-16_9-15-06.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<b><br /></b>
<b><br /></b>
<b>John: </b> Oh I know and it's sexy. Actually I think this thing is an aardvark.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> In case you havent played Carnival, the shoot the bear sequence works by having the bear run across the screen and when you shoot it the bear turns around a moves in the opposite direction and speeds up. Your job is to shoot it as many times as possible until it gets too fast and gets to the edge of the screen, escaping.<br />
<br />
When a new round starts there will be a different set of targets and everything will move slightly faster. There are several sets of targets, not rolling back over to the first set from the first round until round 14.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> There are also "red zones" in the first two and fourth rows. When a target passes through this red zone it turns red and shooting it takes away points instead of earning them. I like the way the color of the target smoothly transitions when it passes through the zone. It reminds me of the old <a href="http://www.giantbomb.com/screen-overlay/3015-7386/" target="_blank">color overlays</a> used in ancient black and white video games to add color.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgZd9Y0_U1JMeGQ0GkFa7K8I_yooHyaaNVGErDZYuchNjtynigjQ_mnBjNbcLLsPHiBMADR1MMtZc6AvktQWXh8GDEd6lBNgnUFUKHcKcggmUouIITDUoOPCU5mfI2u68QJqLrBuQlvA3o/s1600/2017-03-15+10.07.32.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="211" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgZd9Y0_U1JMeGQ0GkFa7K8I_yooHyaaNVGErDZYuchNjtynigjQ_mnBjNbcLLsPHiBMADR1MMtZc6AvktQWXh8GDEd6lBNgnUFUKHcKcggmUouIITDUoOPCU5mfI2u68QJqLrBuQlvA3o/s320/2017-03-15+10.07.32.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> In the first round the clock takes about 3 minutes and 33 seconds to time out. With each subsequent round the clock moves faster. Each line on the clock face represents about 13 seconds and when the round is over the game gives you 50 points for each line the hand didnt get to. You'll notice that as the rounds pass by the clock gets faster and faster.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Well the game's secret is that the whole game gets faster, not just the clock, or the enemies. The targets move faster, your gun moves and shoots faster. What's happening with subsequent levels is just the speed of the entire game gradually increasing. This is why the game's clock isnt digital, so you cant see behind the curtain as easily.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Right. The game pulls the same trick with its' "shoot the bear" sequence. You'll notice that as the bear gets faster your gun moves faster and you shoot faster also. It's the entire game that's being sped up instead of a single aspect.<br />
<br />
OK, now you can talk about the game's music.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> This game features much more than Chopsticks during the title sequence, even though that's the only SID that's been archived from this game. Unfortunately, the archivists missed something. Something huge. Something mind-blowing. And no wise man has the power to reason it away.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiQ5w5WcmHI2qWVrp_OZauSNUlaVeJuHKNduR47T8xIHL_ruvPsozUcisataZ40ZYqQTFxg_hAuXdnch_KCF0UPupGcxmxarUhIFQIwAWg1XZGFjkmJPSZOQvhKNCpgvzVTod7EQtTi4N0/s1600/R-1520729-1282972784.jpeg.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="395" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiQ5w5WcmHI2qWVrp_OZauSNUlaVeJuHKNduR47T8xIHL_ruvPsozUcisataZ40ZYqQTFxg_hAuXdnch_KCF0UPupGcxmxarUhIFQIwAWg1XZGFjkmJPSZOQvhKNCpgvzVTod7EQtTi4N0/s400/R-1520729-1282972784.jpeg.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
This Carnival clone features a monophonic SID rendition of What a Fool Believes. It plays this while you shoot the little ducks and rabbits. Chuck, it plays What a Fool Believes by the Doobie Brothers. I'm serious.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Oh, I'm well aware.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> It's the most completely out of left field song choice imaginable. Remember, Carnival has Over the Waves, which is perfect. Shooting Gallery has WHAT A FOOL BELIEVES by the Doobie Brothers. A Micheal McDonald sung hit from 1978. Co-written by Kenny Loggins. A <a href="https://youtu.be/YNTARSM-Fjc?list=PLBEB75B6A1F9C1D01" target="_blank">yacht rock </a>masterpiece. It's this game's soundtrack! And that's not all.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> Nope.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> We also have "Jarabe Tapatio" otherwise known as the <a href="https://youtu.be/U6c9UZ3OxTw" target="_blank">Mexican Hat Dance</a>. So, this song begins right after Fool ends. These two songs play back-to-back in this game. In glorious monophonic SID. If you still have time left when Jarabe Tapatio is over then you just hear silence until the time runs out.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> If this isnt the most bizarre, incongruent soundtrack any C64 game has, I'll eat my Hat.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> <a href="https://youtu.be/PJtWDZSZZGI" target="_blank">Friday the 13th's soundtrack</a> is pretty bananas.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Ah, you're right. Cant wait to get to that one.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> We'll have to get a gameplay video of this up. It's probably very hard to imagine playing a game like this with mono-SID What a Fool Believes playing in the background. If I didnt hear it for myself I wouldnt Believe it.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> It's not even sped up to match the game, it kind of floats there. Jarabe Tapatio itself wouldnt turn any heads, there's probably 100 C64 games that have that in it. But Micheal McDonald? What a strange design choice. Kudos to Pete and Vinny, I really appreciate ignoring sense and reason once in a while. So, kudos to you.<br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>John:</b> As far as the sound effects go, it's far less special. You mentioned the bells you would shoot in original shooting galleries, and the sound effects Carnival uses. Pow - ding! That's what a shooting gallery sounds like. Unfortunately this game has none of that. There's no feedback at all for hitting the targets. For shame! <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> LOL - Hey we dont name and shame around here-<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> SHAME. There has got to be video game Commandments, and one of them has to be that shooting your target has feedback. Almost anything is better than nothing. At least your gun makes a firing noise.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Well, while we're shaming, let's talk about the game's other problems. When you first play the game you'll find that the tiny amounts of points you get for hitting targets is practically meaningless. The hash boxes that take away points are almost always right in front of a target you have to shoot to complete the round, so you just end up shooting them anyway. So, what little points you get usually get erased. Targets on the bottom row are 1 point. If you shoot the target within the red zone it takes away 1 point. Second row is 2 points, etc. OK, and when you shoot a hash block it takes away FIFTY points. That erases like 20 good targets you hit, potentially. <br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Well you could try to make that up by shooting the B O N U S characters.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> It's almost impossible to hit those in order. There are so many tightly-packed targets that you almost always accidentally shoot the letters out of order. So you might find your score climbing up only to get knocked back down to zero multiple times during a round.<br />
<br />
You might say that I'm being a crybaby complaining about the game difficulty, but then when you complete the round you get a <i>huge</i> time bonus. You quickly realize that the best way to score is to not worry so much about what you're hitting, just clear the screen as fast as you can and get the big time bonus. Since the targets are so close together, and there's so many of them, this is just a turkey shoot. There's barely any thought involved. Only the targets at the top are hard to hit and most of the time it's because there are hash blocks "following" them across the screen. If you dont care about avoiding the hash blocks they're a lot easier to hit and you end up with more points anyway.<br />
<br />
While playtesting this and wanting to see the higher rounds I barely had to look at the screen while I was playing, firing blind worked fine for most of the round.<br />
<br />
Let me give a concrete example:<br />
<br />
Case 1: I start playing Level 1 Round 1. I carefully shoot around the hash blocks and avoid the minus sign that takes away a unit of time. After the time bonus I have 482 points total.<br />
<br />
Case 2: I start playing Level 1 Round 1. I shoot everything on the screen as fast as I can. After the time bonus I have 591 points total. <br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> OK, I want to make sure we're meeting this game on its' own terms. If you play the game carefully and skillfully you can avoid the hashblocks and pull of some pretty cool trick shots by shooting around them. For the most part, this game is fair with target placement. Sometimes you get bit by wonky collision detection.<br />
<br />
And playing the game this way is the most enjoyable way to do it. Yes, on Level 1 you can just shoot everything indiscriminately and never die and get a good score. On higher levels the time limit actually matters and with no time bonus your only way to score or even survive is to avoid the undesirable targets.<br />
<br />
If you hit F3 before starting a game you can change the Level number. There's no way to advance levels while playing the game, at least not that I know of. I managed to get to Round 15 before I had to quit because I couldnt stand playing anymore.<br />
<br />
So, while in your current game the game gets faster with each <u>Round</u>.<br />
<br />
Each <u>Level</u>, on the other hand, adds more minus symbols and hash blocks. On Level 9 there are tons of em.<br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>Chuck:</b> Yeah but then the game rewards you even more for wild shooting, you just get a lower score. You only "die" if the time runs out and there's no chance of that happening on the lower levels. On the higher levels you usually run out of time because the targets at the very top become almost impossible to hit due to the walls getting much larger.. and the walls are linked together with hash blocks. Ouch!<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-aNLLvZRcGEM/WMqWrog5CGI/AAAAAAAAJ3I/nFnGXGim3-orRYk1_xzJlRsrmR1NRSzSACLcB/s1600/2017-03-15%2B10.17.15.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="211" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-aNLLvZRcGEM/WMqWrog5CGI/AAAAAAAAJ3I/nFnGXGim3-orRYk1_xzJlRsrmR1NRSzSACLcB/s320/2017-03-15%2B10.17.15.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
That's how the game manages difficulty. It tries to strike a balance between losing lives because the clock ran out and getting a good score, and I feel like they didnt find that balance. <br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>John:</b> Even though this whole thing doesnt bother me as much as it does you, the real problem is that this isnt the way to manage difficulty in a game like this. The game is trying to reward you for hitting and avoiding targets in the shortest amount of time possible. That sounds fine on paper, but in practice you have to carefully manage the game clock vs the amount of time the average player takes to complete a level, etc., and it doesnt punish you at all for wild shooting. It just makes so much more sense to have Sega Carnival's ammunition mechanic where you have to watch your ammo count. That way you are naturally punished for wild shooting and every shot really means something.<br />
<br />
I find that I cant play this game for any great length of time. Fatigue sets in early, usually before I've lost my first life. It's not nearly as much fun to play as it is to talk about. The targets are sometimes charming but they're just too small and they all look the same after a while. Carnival has a variety of ways to get bonuses, bigger targets, better music and sound effects and better mechanics. Shooting Gallery loses nearly all the good stuff and is pretty dull to boot.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjgCGKkb8saU_zZIkiNZFagLWCCTAZerPBg_2gQjYww_InPGjsE7ZTGP4osv1MxRYK3wxHJ6Zplob254v_C0ivJBUKj4L2srEUNsioxZVAZyDjPOCIdiLe4e_k9wANuIhUrDaAkxWXEQfY/s1600/2017-03-15+12.11.36.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="210" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjgCGKkb8saU_zZIkiNZFagLWCCTAZerPBg_2gQjYww_InPGjsE7ZTGP4osv1MxRYK3wxHJ6Zplob254v_C0ivJBUKj4L2srEUNsioxZVAZyDjPOCIdiLe4e_k9wANuIhUrDaAkxWXEQfY/s320/2017-03-15+12.11.36.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<b>Chuck:</b> It is, and it's not an unfair to compare it to Carnival, or even Mastertronic's <a href="https://youtu.be/Yrg0XaoWuh8" target="_blank">Duck Shoot.</a> Look at Shooting Gallery's "shoot the bear" sequence and it's obvious this is meant to be a Carnvial clone. But the Atari 2600 version of Carnival is so much more fun than this. It's impossible for me to recommend this as a fun game, but the mystery, history and other epherma behind this game is fascinating. It's folk art man, I'm telling you.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> It's not a complete disaster or anything, there's certainly been some thought put into it. I had some brief moments of enjoyment trying to avoid shooting the obstacles on Level 9, in particular. Overall though it's just not fun. I had a hard time willing myself to play it for our discussion. It's got the right amount of kooky weirdness for an early 64 title, though! I hope the rest of Rensoft's library is discovered. Someday, I believe they will be.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> That's what a fool believes, John! I want to make it clear that EVERY C64 game is worthy of archival, comprehensive research and discussion. This game is awesome, Rensoft is awesome, and Pete and Vinny are totally awesome.<br />
<br />
With that, I'd like to leave you with some words of wisdom from Pete Lobl, as seen in Commodore Power Play in the fall of 83:<br />
<br />
"When the Commodore 64 was introduced, it drew comments from knowledgeable computer experts that shook the entire industry. By the time that you read this, there will be tons of quality programs available for the 64. But as I write, there isn't much out there in the way of 64 software, so my attitude is: why wait if I can do it myself? You can too, only don't be discouraged if everything doesn't make sense at first; in time it will all drop into place."<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lbj9Y7KQ0E0/WMqIHdH9NiI/AAAAAAAAJ2Y/Ku_mJAL4TiEKmaaFwISepfw_BHb5ynbkwCEw/s1600/2017-03-15%2B11.58.11.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="420" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lbj9Y7KQ0E0/WMqIHdH9NiI/AAAAAAAAJ2Y/Ku_mJAL4TiEKmaaFwISepfw_BHb5ynbkwCEw/s640/2017-03-15%2B11.58.11.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-52592581240715653192016-10-14T07:29:00.000-07:002017-03-27T10:00:55.085-07:00Gumshoe (c) 1984 A&F Software<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-cTazbl6TUJ8/V-RfZvxfP2I/AAAAAAAAJsY/opf0focVTXQD4Z_p-mxeQlxUa9BLGYcHwCK4B/s1600/gumshoe.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-cTazbl6TUJ8/V-RfZvxfP2I/AAAAAAAAJsY/opf0focVTXQD4Z_p-mxeQlxUa9BLGYcHwCK4B/s640/gumshoe.jpg" width="395" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Hello and welcome to our review of A&F software's Gumshoe. Programmed by <a href="http://www.mobygames.com/developer/sheet/view/developerId,163514/" target="_blank">Sean Townshend</a> and released in 1984. 1984, while including some mega-classics like <a href="https://www.c64-wiki.com/index.php/Bruce_Lee" target="_blank">Bruce Lee</a>, still sees the C64 in its' early stages of development. There are still Colecovision ports here and there, Atari and Apple ports are abundant, and most games do not feature the kind of music that would make the C64 and its' SID chip legendary. <br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Most? I'd say all. <a href="https://youtu.be/GrqDsbLMYaE" target="_blank">Pitfall II</a> has great music, but it's not much different than the 2600's music. There's nothing like..<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Let me stop you right there, because Alligata's Loco (1984) has a Ben Daglish tune, and it even plays throughout the game. (link: <a href="https://youtu.be/1LB6N2F9W_s">https://youtu.be/1LB6N2F9W_s</a>)<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> I stand corrected! Wow, that's very futuristic for a game of this year. The game we're looking at is much more typical of the music of this period, in that there's barely any at all.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-u23-DbMIuaY/WAA6Ay4IM5I/AAAAAAAAJs4/RS1vP3Z6uycDLPNjSv4hdB360k8lyK-ggCLcB/s1600/Thumb_Chuckie_Egg_-_1984_-_A-F_Software%255B1%255D.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-u23-DbMIuaY/WAA6Ay4IM5I/AAAAAAAAJs4/RS1vP3Z6uycDLPNjSv4hdB360k8lyK-ggCLcB/s1600/Thumb_Chuckie_Egg_-_1984_-_A-F_Software%255B1%255D.jpg" /></a></div>
<b>Chuck:</b> This is a very British affair. <a href="https://youtu.be/Qjp_ZAv9dL0" target="_blank">A&F</a> (Anderson & Fitzgerald) software is a pioneering British software house of some repute. They're responsible for publishing <a href="https://youtu.be/Z4zibcZDpHk" target="_blank">Chuckie Egg</a>, a BBC Micro game that got a <a href="https://youtu.be/Kutt-3QGkRY" target="_blank">C64 port</a> thanks to the same Sean that programmed Gumshoe. They loomed large in the BBC Micro scene, not so much on the C64. Gumshoe is one of their few C64 exclusives, probably owing to Sean Townshend himself who seems to have focused primarily on the C64 with some good games like <a href="https://youtu.be/uaBm4Mn4Ttk" target="_blank">Max Headroom</a> and the port of Atari's <a href="https://youtu.be/qdt1OHPto-8" target="_blank">Road Runner</a>. He's also responsible for an unreleased <a href="http://www.gamesthatwerent.com/gtw64/charlie-chaplin/" target="_blank">Charlie Chaplin</a> game which just got posted to the <a href="http://csdb.dk/release/?id=150902" target="_blank">CSDb</a> and Games that Weren't..<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Yes, Max Headroom is a particularly interesting, complex, almost Last Ninja-esque espionage game from 1986, probably programmed about two years later than this one. What a difference two years makes! I mentioned this in the Zaxxon review but I usually dont care about who programmed what, and now that I'm starting to pay attention it's been eye opening.<br />
<br />
They say when you're a a Jazz newbie and you're trying to figure out who and what you like, they say you should find out who played what instrument on a song or album you really enjoy and then go find more from that particular individual. You really liked the drums? That drummer also played on this, and that and so on, so go listen to that also. When you apply this logic to the C64 it's not so cut and dried. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> I've always taken note of the publisher and the names in the credits. It's not always good for digging up a hidden gem of a game, I agree, but sometimes there's an interesting individual or story behind this stuff. I bring these things up because I expect our readers to do further reading and study - A&F software, in this case, has an interesting story I'd recommend reading up on. And that unreleased Charlie Chaplin game is worth looking into. <br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-4Lbys6sqlt0/WAA83yPEFYI/AAAAAAAAJtA/3rrRJ567akQ5qg_r7YNZCcdAAfcHzGKYwCLcB/s1600/Clipboard01.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="153" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-4Lbys6sqlt0/WAA83yPEFYI/AAAAAAAAJtA/3rrRJ567akQ5qg_r7YNZCcdAAfcHzGKYwCLcB/s320/Clipboard01.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<b>John:</b> Of course, earlier games are less likely to be as spectacular as newer games, but there's still some head-scratching WTF type scenarios. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> I feel like we're kind of dancing around the subject. To be more straightforward: Sean Townshend has made, or has had a hand in making some good, interesting games, and Gumshoe is not quite one of them. This doesnt reflect badly on him as a programmer or as a person, though. LOL.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Of course. We're not naming and shaming here. But Chuckie Egg to Gumshoe to Max Headroom is a huge leap.<br />
<br />
So what's interesting, historically, about Gumshoe?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> Not much. I think it would be completely forgotten if not for being included in a charity compilation that was popular in the UK called <a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/ac/Softaid_ad_2.JPG" target="_blank">Soft Aid</a> that was targeted at African hunger relief. So if you played Gumshoe back in the day you probably have Bob Geldof to thank.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> And we had the <a href="http://csdb.dk/group/?id=3405" target="_blank">Commodore Convicts</a> to thank.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-at5Ou1BMfoM/WABBo2T-CwI/AAAAAAAAJtM/ipwwMQGEY4IBCDZoYWpO5WOqkLM-aYmBACLcB/s1600/IMG_4070.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="480" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-at5Ou1BMfoM/WABBo2T-CwI/AAAAAAAAJtM/ipwwMQGEY4IBCDZoYWpO5WOqkLM-aYmBACLcB/s640/IMG_4070.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Which is strange, because they're a US cracking group and this is clearly not an NTSC version of this game nor is there any evidence whatsoever that it was published in the US. They must have imported it via modem. And how do we keep finding cracks that arent in the CSDb?<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> You're asking me? You were the dirty software pirate, I just lived in the same house.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Right, you're completely innocent. I'm definitely obsessive about who-cracked-what-and-when but I dont want to get into that here. I dont want the cracking group stuff to overshadow the games. This is about the games and the hard working people that made them, not how they were stolen. Maybe someday in a different blog, though, we can dig into that side of things.<br />
<br />
But it's important to bring up that this is a PAL game. We arent playing this on an emulator, we're playing on an NTSC C64. There are some sprite issues where you see ghost bad guys once in a while but other than that it is very playable. We've compared our game experience to on-line videos and we dont seem to be having our play experience adversely affected but you (the reader) can take this entire review with a grain of salt if this bothers you.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://youtu.be/8p_qeqPhvwM" target="_blank">Gumshoe</a> is what you might call a platform shooter, a free-scrolling version of Taito's <a href="https://youtu.be/uoR3gaAsHFY" target="_blank">Elevator </a><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh7hYNec0U6rZJY9PiQF6iHA-88bgOjCfZPHxqUH608u6uWTft2zQZFiAOEPqjUz_f0PWlw7WkCn-fHHnkH_PMmQtEu8Xo538a1opI-75C-aVxisjIFkmUmh01ssXzFDiX5dHP7db4wtDs/s1600/426194-3389.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="175" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh7hYNec0U6rZJY9PiQF6iHA-88bgOjCfZPHxqUH608u6uWTft2zQZFiAOEPqjUz_f0PWlw7WkCn-fHHnkH_PMmQtEu8Xo538a1opI-75C-aVxisjIFkmUmh01ssXzFDiX5dHP7db4wtDs/s200/426194-3389.png" width="200" /></a></div>
Action. Elevator Action was very popular in 83/84 and has fans to this day. It's the first platform shooter that I know of and inspired several decent to good C64 games. <a href="https://youtu.be/f-rfRuV3Wpw" target="_blank">Mission Elevator</a> is probably the best and the actual C64 <a href="https://youtu.be/1q-_06EG9Nw" target="_blank">port</a> of Elevator Action is definitely the worst. Gumshoe is somewhere in the middle.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> It reminds me of <a href="https://youtu.be/u2ORXxDmLZM" target="_blank">Persian Gulf Inferno</a>, except that Gumshoe features Fisher Price Little People instead of terrorists.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Wow I havent thought of that game in years. Persian Gulf Inferno with the graphics of <a href="https://youtu.be/Xr9N0dVzfOI" target="_blank">The Heist</a>. Here's the difference between this and all those other games, though. In Gumshoe you have nothing to do but shoot the bad guys. No collecting. No jumping. No entering rooms. Nothing.<br />
<br />
A Gumshoe is a North American term for a private investigator and features prominently in the noir film genre. Noir features hard bitten detectives solving crimes in bleak urban environments with plenty of moral ambiguity. Dark, cynical stuff. <br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Gumshoe the game does seem to star a private detective. According to the cover art he appears to be preoccupied with thoughts of angry, shouting women, shadowy figures running up escalators and shooting a pistol. All while smoking, of course. This is actually a some really nice cover art, reminds me of Alan Parsons' <a href="https://youtu.be/JLvFbBR4XOg" target="_blank">Dont Answer Me</a> video. It definitely sets the mood for some detective work.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> Yes, except Gumshoe features exactly no amount of sleuthing. The events in Gumshoe seem to be taking place at the end of the story. You've managed to locate where the client's kidnapped daughter or whomever is located and then you move in for the rescue. Of course, if the building your hostage was being kept in was under guard by, like, a MILLION armed goons, like the ones in Gumshoe, then you might want to let a SWAT team take over at this point.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Also, by "rescue", I think you actually mean "wander around aimlessly before stumbling on the kidnapping victim".<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Right, finding the correct path through the level is part of the game. The layout of the building makes no logical sense. The floors are not arranged in stories. There are tiny, partial floors that hang in the air and are unreachable. There are escalators that lead to nowhere and change direction every 15 seconds or so. Floors that dont have doors. Garbage chutes that dont lead straight down to the trash room, but that transport you somewhere seemingly random. It's more like the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winchester_Mystery_House" target="_blank">Winchester Mystery Mansion</a> that an apartment complex, or whatever the heck this is supposed to be.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> It's a tower block, so yes, apartments. A block of flats, if you will.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-CbwML5AJVLA/WADehwemqPI/AAAAAAAAJuc/n1TDq0UrHSwvYHHm05TsyT4ofpIWp-etwCLcB/s1600/Rusland_Court.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-CbwML5AJVLA/WADehwemqPI/AAAAAAAAJuc/n1TDq0UrHSwvYHHm05TsyT4ofpIWp-etwCLcB/s200/Rusland_Court.jpg" width="150" /></a></div>
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Are there ladders everywhere in most tower blocks? OK, so there are ten of these apartment buildings each with a millionaire's daughter you must rescue. Are we talking about the same millionaire here, or is it 10 different millionaires? Are you a private eye who specializes in rescuing wealthy victims of kidnapping, or is it the same woman over and over again?<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> LOL. OK, I think you <i>might</i> be over-analyzing here. The detective bits are just there to add some context to the proceedings. It's just a very, very simple platform shooter.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> A very simple platform shooter it is. You enter at the bottom left of the tower, you wander around, up and down escalators and elevators while dodging hailstorms of gunfire from bad guys that randomly pop out of random doors. Find the victim, on to the next tower.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> And you were expecting what?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Right on the title screen it says that it's not just a game, it's an EXPERIENCE. I thought we were going to play a real detective game. Then it turned out to be just an arcade game. And that's fine, and that doesnt mean you cant feel like you're having a "detective" experience. But Gumshoe does not deliver that.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkPNj1dhxQcw3caf_OpqcGGmYeZYwTSrm2WAA9bexvOvBjihjJhSjN1k-6tIpW-cAM-i3UPtTdddx6IxQ1d5rq9AvhYz2B2byq1cF-i2VmsIvwYgBNGPwddP5_YI6EZYtkRZOPElfEk-A/s1600/IMGP8429.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="419" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkPNj1dhxQcw3caf_OpqcGGmYeZYwTSrm2WAA9bexvOvBjihjJhSjN1k-6tIpW-cAM-i3UPtTdddx6IxQ1d5rq9AvhYz2B2byq1cF-i2VmsIvwYgBNGPwddP5_YI6EZYtkRZOPElfEk-A/s640/IMGP8429.JPG" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
Consider <a href="https://youtu.be/HlqOLYSmKk0" target="_blank">Mission Elevator</a> (1986), same genre, and you play as a spy, same as Elevator Action. Makes sense, since you get the idea that you're sneaking around, gathering intelligence and shooting to kill because that's what spies do in pop culture. In Gumshoe it's a total free-for-all shootout with absolutely nothing else going on except for the maze-like level layout. You cant even duck into a room. <br />
<br />
Gumshoe doesn't even rise to the barely-there conceit of Elevator Action, where it actually felt like you were a spy, you could shoot the lights out, you had to go into rooms and grab secret documents, etc. Replacing Spy with Private Eye is perfectly fine. The term "gumshoe" comes from the sneakers that detectives wore, to sneak around. But Gumshoe isn't about sneaking around. It's practically Contra. Gumshoe should be the name of a detective game, and this game we're playing here should be called SWAT Rescue.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Ha, well, you gotta review the game that is, not the game that you wanted. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> I see "experience" and I think, OK, this isn't going to be some simple Colecovision game or average arcade experience, this is a sophisticated Commodore 64 computer here and we're gonna play something meaty and complex. It feels wrong that you cant enter rooms to find clues, get keys to unlock doors, etc.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> I think you're getting way too hung up on the whole experience thing. But there is one aspect of the game that does make it seem like Sean, or whomever, wanted to squeeze more out of the detective concept, or maybe wanted the game to be more elaborate than it turned out. It's time to discuss the real wack-factor of this game.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Oh yeah, the scoring. Instead of scoring this simple action game in the usual way, you have a budget. You earn money by killing the bad guys, who have a whopping $10 bounty you can collect from each kill. You start with $500 in your account and go from there. OK, so to digress..<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> LOL<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> I mean is $10 really a proper value to put on a life? I know these guys are probably violent criminals, so that's why there's a price on their heads, but TEN DOLLARS? What did they do, what could they possibly be wanted for, that dragging in their dead corpse earns you a measly ten dollars? I cant even comprehend this. Who would bother? Who would trade in piles of bloody corpses for $10 a pop?<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-TBKTK2LEY6k/WADVAXjAEnI/AAAAAAAAJtg/Zz8wbkDeTi4GLyV0CweTdVWy0ZTu3rxVACLcB/s1600/IMGP8434.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="420" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-TBKTK2LEY6k/WADVAXjAEnI/AAAAAAAAJtg/Zz8wbkDeTi4GLyV0CweTdVWy0ZTu3rxVACLcB/s640/IMGP8434.JPG" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<b>John: </b> LOL<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> Either they are dangerous murderers who are not expected to be taken in alive, for which the bounty should be a lot higher, or they're wanted for maybe skipping bail on a DUI in which case you cant just murder them and drag their body into the police station and expect to be rewarded. And these guys are legion, there's an entire army of them. Bullets in the game cost $2 a piece. You are risking your life for a profit of exactly $8 per kill. Now, if you rescue the kidnapped woman you earn a lot more, but the chances of you getting shot are extremely high. No one is going to go for this deal. <br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> If you accidentally touch a bad guy you get into a cartoon-style fight with him (shades of the <a href="https://youtu.be/JLvFbBR4XOg" target="_blank">Dont Answer Me</a> video, again) in which you have a 50/50 chance of being victorious. Even if you win, I believe you incur a $150 penalty, so getting into a fight is never a good idea. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> This is all presented to you as a balance sheet you see at the end of a round. I'm not sure why it strikes me as so goofy. It's a good idea to make your score reflect how many times you hit rather than missed a shot, and to penalize you for shooting wildly. But at 8 points a kill it doesn't matter much in your overall score. You have to miss 4 times to negate one good shot and you are CONSTANTLY killing bad guys. If you're really that bad at hitting the targets then you wont last long in this game anyway. So unless you just stay in one place and shoot at a wall this is not really going to affect your score. The only way it would matter is if you upped the price of bullets to at least $5. Sure, it wouldnt make sense economically, but nothing about this makes sense anyway.<br />
<br />
You start the game with a $500 credit, but again there's nothing to spend it on besides bullets and fighting. If you just want money you can sit in the bottom left corner at the beginning of the game and have yourself a turkey shoot with the bad guys streaming out of the nearby door and down the nearby ladder. You pay for ammunition but you dont actually buy it nor can you ever run out. There's also no time limit, so you can rack up the money as high as you want without effort.<br />
<br />
Getting into a fight might as well just kill you, I think the score penalty is only there to add another row to the balance sheet, which is pretty sparse. <br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Maybe there should have been other costs, like gas for driving to the tower? Lunch? Taxes?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> Ha, yeah why not? It almost seems like they were reaching in that direction, like maybe you were supposed to have some sort of "running a business" aspect to the game, like in David Crane's <a href="https://youtu.be/X1jKHHeufS0" target="_blank">Ghostbusters</a>, that didn't get fleshed out. Maybe you were supposed to be able to purchase things, etc. As it is it's just another weird aspect of this game. What's this doing in a paper-thin shooter?<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> But that's what makes it notable, like a lot of these more obscure C64 games, they are quirky and that's what we love about them. <br />
<br />
Go ahead and talk about the graphics and the presentation.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Well there's a nice title screen based on the box (or rather, cassette case) art, except here there's a woman emerging from a trapdoor(?) which doesn't feature in the game. The attract screen that also shows the high scores is nothing special but notably looks a lot like Chuckie Egg's title screen with the same high score table. And speaking of Chuckie Egg, the characters all look like the Chuckie Egg player character, who himself looks like <a href="https://youtu.be/5JF9gTknSK8" target="_blank">Bounty Bob</a>. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-fG6-C3rSz3Q/WADYw9o05vI/AAAAAAAAJt4/0N7xqF_-KuMbn3IF_tWrJ_KjMRBy9WqtQCLcB/s1600/IMGP8436.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="419" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-fG6-C3rSz3Q/WADYw9o05vI/AAAAAAAAJt4/0N7xqF_-KuMbn3IF_tWrJ_KjMRBy9WqtQCLcB/s640/IMGP8436.JPG" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<b>John: </b> So this game is Miner 2049'er III: Bounty Bob Massacre? <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Sure. All the characters have those dead-eyed doll faces with permanent grins that were most common in early platformers on graphically-challenged systems. This is where <a href="https://youtu.be/X-1OqbKNmzE" target="_blank">Donkey Kong</a> really succeeded, giving Mario a mustache instead of a stupid grin. Or an expressionless face like <a href="https://youtu.be/F7khL9Ms4ow" target="_blank">Miner Willy</a>'s. Or a mask like <a href="https://youtu.be/bpzN0fagzi8" target="_blank">HERO</a>'s Roderick. Oh my God, do I hate this weird permanent grin look. It's disturbing, frankly. It gives me the heebie jeebies.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-O9bNVOZKsTo/WADbNe62S-I/AAAAAAAAJuI/hf_6b_8rMcUOWjjS5tWOdWF5FZtqfu-vACLcB/s1600/maxresdefault%2B%25281%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-O9bNVOZKsTo/WADbNe62S-I/AAAAAAAAJuI/hf_6b_8rMcUOWjjS5tWOdWF5FZtqfu-vACLcB/s1600/maxresdefault%2B%25281%2529.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<b>John:</b> You'll be alright.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> The level graphics are purely functional. There's lots of colorful doors, but instead of adding flair they just look haphazard and strange, which I admit has its' own kitschy kind of appeal. The structure is made up entirely of red brick walls and floors, which is fine, but every tower looks exactly the same. It's a jarring lack of variety when the game relies on maze navigation. If the navigation were straightforward then it wouldn't be as noticeable. <br />
<br />
The elevators look OK but it's weird not having cables on them. I don't like the look of the escalators and it adds to the "cheap" look of the game. Even the escalators in <a href="https://youtu.be/jeY1ML0d3CI" target="_blank">Keystone Kapers</a> had railings. The ladders look fine.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFaE977eBIH4Pf1unaD5bnjd8Mh50OXh2izAIu2h8sHmTZeqbIzAr9YX6bTgzovnVgEHeqVztUXWgfQ3z1veJvGNEdzcXPaC59OxKwxmnEvoaxHvFuC8G-u8hXlxf2zNmPqWMI-WMCxrQ/s1600/keystone_kapers.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="177" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFaE977eBIH4Pf1unaD5bnjd8Mh50OXh2izAIu2h8sHmTZeqbIzAr9YX6bTgzovnVgEHeqVztUXWgfQ3z1veJvGNEdzcXPaC59OxKwxmnEvoaxHvFuC8G-u8hXlxf2zNmPqWMI-WMCxrQ/s400/keystone_kapers.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
The character animation is alright. The characters die very similarly to Elevator Action. Same with the door animation. The scrolling is smooth enough but it doesnt match the speed of the shooting action. All the characters on-screen make their "ladder climbing" animation when you rescue the hostage. It's weird.<br />
<br />
If you sum everything up the game just has an unappealing look to it. It makes the game look and feel worse than it really is.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> As far as the sound goes, wow, this game is something else. Why you need to hear the doors opening is baffling, and the fart noise it makes is annoying. Bad guys constantly pour out of all of the doors surrounding you so you gain no play advantage in them making a sound. And that's all you're going to hear, forever and ever, is the percussive sounds of the guns shooting and the low "zip" of the doors opening, constantly. It sounds like an unfinished Autechre tune. <br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-q488tZtvxEk/WADYZBHizhI/AAAAAAAAJt0/hg1jhlCnq9koyzU1pIiWAcvwAPtzY8ZeQCLcB/s1600/Autechre-Amber-Frontal.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-q488tZtvxEk/WADYZBHizhI/AAAAAAAAJt0/hg1jhlCnq9koyzU1pIiWAcvwAPtzY8ZeQCLcB/s200/Autechre-Amber-Frontal.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> What?<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> No, I'm serious. Listen.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> Well.. Well I'll be damned. OK. First C64 game with an IDM soundtrack. Sure.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> LOL<br />
<br />
The game has a little jingle that plays when you complete a level. It's nice enough. Very short. Nothing that I recognize.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Sounds like we're wrapping it up?<br />
<br />
There is one area where the game does deliver, and that's frantic shooting action. It doesn't gel with the theme or the graphics but there's a challenging shooter in here somewhere. You have to constantly scan the screen for bad guys, duck their bullets and return fire very quickly. The kooky environment makes hiding all but impossible so there is rarely if ever a break in the action. The problem for me is that the game looks disturbingly weird, sounds annoying, doesn't match up with it's theme and feels too much like you're wandering around aimlessly. <br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Yeah, I agree, but the bizarro look and nature of the game are more appealing to me. In fact, the game could use more quirky weirdness. As it is, the game doesn't really stand out in such a dense game library as the 64's, either as a curiosity or otherwise.<br />
<br />
I know you've asked something like this before, do you think we might be being too hard on a game from 1984? A game that may have been a budget release?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Maybe? I feel like we try to compare games with their contemporaries, earlier games and with a game like this, the arcade game it's based on. It's not a disaster or anything, it's typical of games of this period. I cant recommend seeking it out and playing it, though, and that's the real test we put our games to.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Right, I cant either. I'd definitely recommend Chuckie Egg, Max Headroom and Road Runner though. Good night all you amateur detectives out there!<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgaACr59sfvoSM3ft19Gvmu9m0Gd7jsJ65W-6hqzk1AahQtnKR3mxoyjL5WoQJvx7_OEiilmmfM3hpy0RAlgyZRrHecvei2mbHMW4kf7ZjhhB5w8KodfoFo8vN6rNZhj1r6iMwonQt07E4/s1600/IMGP8423.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="420" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgaACr59sfvoSM3ft19Gvmu9m0Gd7jsJ65W-6hqzk1AahQtnKR3mxoyjL5WoQJvx7_OEiilmmfM3hpy0RAlgyZRrHecvei2mbHMW4kf7ZjhhB5w8KodfoFo8vN6rNZhj1r6iMwonQt07E4/s640/IMGP8423.JPG" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Smoke if you got em!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-48199286830324085492016-07-27T15:22:00.001-07:002016-12-11T17:43:12.768-08:00Zaxxon (c) 1984 Synapse<br />
<div style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;">
</div>
<div style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjOr36ZHtUBdFS3jIER4plRJ2tYzVDZ-uKAatsj9tEsOXVa9quuaRutsF0ejDSq38ms3jB5-bLtce8qCWOA_tNqYyQw1EEkzlsfpfza98603p3kGIdiekS80AIaJstEHvILJyGmOz9HU7M/s1600/Image.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjOr36ZHtUBdFS3jIER4plRJ2tYzVDZ-uKAatsj9tEsOXVa9quuaRutsF0ejDSq38ms3jB5-bLtce8qCWOA_tNqYyQw1EEkzlsfpfza98603p3kGIdiekS80AIaJstEHvILJyGmOz9HU7M/s640/Image.jpg" width="476" /></a></div>
</div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>Chuck:</b> Welcome to our Zaxxon review. As is tradition with arcade ports, we will begin by analyzing the <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=616FSz1NLOg" target="_blank">arcade</a> version. Zaxxon was released by Sega into arcades in 1982, the first game to have an isometric (axonometric projection) perspective along with the first to have a television commercial. As we mentioned in our Congo Bongo review, Zaxxon may have been created by the same team of programmers responsible for Radar Scope / Donkey Kong, which is a strong lineage. As Donkey Kong brought life and vibrancy to platformers, Zaxxon brought a new perspective and a serious jolt of technological wizardry to the space shooter genre. No one had seen anything like this.<br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>John:</b> Being arcade rats in 1982 this game was like a bucket of cold water being thrown on you. It's very hard to get it across to the under 40 crowd what this was like. You never knew what you were going to run into when you went to the arcade. You'd walk in in 1982 and see <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHFeJOlSdLc" target="_blank">Moon Patrol</a>, <a href="https://youtu.be/2Mvkb14IkgQ" target="_blank">Bump n Jump</a>, <a href="https://youtu.be/nW-j2qlMfxg" target="_blank">Jungle Hunt</a>.. then BAM, suddenly there's the most awesome graphics you've ever seen with a play style that you've never experienced before. It felt like stepping into the future. This would happen a lot at the arcade, there was always something more advanced to blow your mind, but it seems like Zaxxon is the first time I remember it happening.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjGd_FCf-5vJR3pfcvrJUkdjspKE4Mbze71-UoBskGxOdSsKJlbEDcfwXXbjZc55wQ0BT_NINoeFeHWsJckl29x4dO8BJP1N3HySYezQEU64CTU2SHh5dUshOaS680LakSzSadaZyF4PhU/s1600/download.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjGd_FCf-5vJR3pfcvrJUkdjspKE4Mbze71-UoBskGxOdSsKJlbEDcfwXXbjZc55wQ0BT_NINoeFeHWsJckl29x4dO8BJP1N3HySYezQEU64CTU2SHh5dUshOaS680LakSzSadaZyF4PhU/s400/download.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> For me that game was Donkey Kong, how appropriate that these games are related. Obviously there is enormous programming talent involved in Kong and Zaxxon, I really wish we knew more about who made these games.<br />
<br />
The arcade environment did wonders for video game development and evolution. In 1982 there was already a crowded game market and the pressure to have something stand out was enormous. Some were adding voice to spice things up, like in Sinistar, and some were using visuals to rock your world. You're right, it always felt like you were on the crest of a wave, always at the bleeding edge of technology. It's still like that in some ways but games that are tent-poles, as it were, are much more rare. Zaxxon is one of them, a technological masterpiece.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Buuuuuut...<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> Oh yeah there's a big but. We cannot lie. Zaxxon's unique perspective makes it very difficult to play and its' skill set that doesnt translate from or to other games of its' era. This is one of those graphics vs gameplay situations. Zaxxon still looks great today, but modern gamers may not want to stick with it long enough to get good at it. It's definitely still a name that means something to gamers of a certain age but nostalgia glasses will only take you so far with this game. You've been warned.<br />
<br />
Zaxxon imagines you are flying through two fortresses floating on islands in space. This could have very well been set on land or over a river (which Sega would later do in the spiritual sequel called Future Spy) and it would have made much more logical sense, but having it set in space really worked toward the hi tech / space crazed environment we were living in at the time.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Well, "<a href="https://youtu.be/25Z32y9OOBk" target="_blank">space games</a>" were all the rage at the time and that's not the only reason. I feel like a big part of this was that early games had little to no background graphics capability and using a background color other than black could make things hard to see so... most games were set in space by default really.<br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>Chuck:</b> The fortresses appear to be made from concrete blocks and are replete with dangers such as surface to air missiles (very Scramble-esque), gun turrets which can only hit you when you're skimming the surface, fuel tanks you shoot a-la River Raid to get more fuel and the "boss" character Zaxxon, who is some sort of hovering robot that shoots missiles. Zaxxon is the only "character" in the game. There is no story or marketable cartoony hero, the pilot you play as is completely anonymous and frankly your space craft is entirely uninteresting. The star of the game is the beauty of the setting. It really is gorgeous and it still looks great today. I love the high-tech look of the fortress, the walls the floors with their circuit-like designs. The colorful gun turrets and fuel tanks. The hexagon-patterned floor that Zaxxon floats over. The perfect angle at which you view it all from. Fantastic. If it looks this good today can you imagine how it looked in 82? <br />
<br />
For such an elaborate presentation the game is actually very simple. Owing to this game's perspective you are granted an altimeter of sorts. Although you cannot fly too low and crash into the ground, the altimeter gives you a visual reference of where you were when you flew through a gap in a wall or when you blew up an enemy allowing you to plan ahead in the future. So the game is mainly trial and error, knowing which position to be in at the right time. Because it's so visually elaborate the game is very short without much variation save for a middle section between the two fortresses that is a free-flying dogfight vs several other spacecraft which I venomously hate, hate, hate with all of my being. Still, it adds very much needed variety to the proceedings. <br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> The sound design is very cool. It seems like your ship has some sort of exhaust sound that is ever-present and sounds really good. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> In Zaxxon's literature they call it the sound of "space wind".<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> The zaps of your laser fire, the pulse of the force field gates, the launching of the surface-to-air missiles, the explosions all sound great. And I agree that after you get over Zaxxon's presentation the game lacks meat. Can you imagine if Scramble was as short as Zaxxon? I also agree that the design of your spacecraft is pretty dull. It's just a regular airplane or space shuttle, which doesnt match up with the shoot em up nature of the game. However it does match up with the flight stick used to control the game in the arcade. So does the "space wind", come to think of it. They're really pushing the flight aspect of it.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> In the literature they push the game as a flight simulation, basically. It wouldnt surprise me at all to find out the game wasnt originally space-based. It seems like the design of the ship is made to assist the player with the (at the time, brand-new) controls and also to make it a more simple shape for scaling purposes.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> Right, it does look good when it's pitching and yaw-ing. So, what we have here is a graphical powerhouse that controls pretty effectively for what it is and is short on content and variety. Par for the course for a game like this.<br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>Chuck:</b> It depends on if you "get" this kind of game design. Some folks will play this and pick up on the subtleties with the altitude quickly and have a blast playing it. Some will be way too frustrated. It's like a more-playable Congo Bongo.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Well it was made to eat quarters. It's amazing how many people bought this game for the <a href="https://youtu.be/fOhCFE17YWo" target="_blank">Colecovision</a> (which is a fine port) who couldnt play it at all. How many parties did we go to as kids where people were sitting around a TV playing Zaxxon, dying over and over and over again? Just seeing Zaxxon himself felt like such a huge accomplishment. The game never felt too short because nobody could play it well enough. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Yes but it's no fun constantly dying either. I'm content to be bad at Zaxxon because I can usually see what the game has to offer in about 10 minutes or so. I marvel at the graphics and design and then set it aside, satisfied. You're better at it than me, what do you think?<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Like you said, it's trial and error, figuring out what altitude to be at and when. You really gotta love the game to get good at it, you have to play it a LOT. Most wont put that effort into it, especially not in 2016. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> I love the idea and the spirit of Zaxxon more than the game itself. And that middle dogfighting section. What they were thinking with that I have no idea.<br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>John: </b> It's the real test of your Zaxxon depth perception, you have to innately know your position on the altimeter by the size of your aircraft and that of the enemy's. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> It's unbelievably annoying. <br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> So how about that C64 version?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Oh yes! Our reason for the season. Welcome, welcome to the fold, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synapse_Software" target="_blank">Synapse</a>. I thought <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWiH7yReD1I" target="_blank">Fort Apocalypse</a> would be our first Synapse game but here we are.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> Well Zaxxon ties into our Congo Bongo review very neatly. It tying into Synapse is just icing on the cake.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Synapse software is a giant among early C64 publishers. Active until 1984 they provided much-needed quality to the early C64 lineup. They were mostly Atari ports and although that usually gets under my skin they're mostly good games so it doesnt matter. I love how they advertise other Synapse games on Zaxxon's title screen: coming soon - <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBSW6r9-lQo" target="_blank">pharoh's curse</a> - <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Htde_5c1Zs" target="_blank">drelbs</a> - <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVFVQ85uB-E" target="_blank">zeppelin</a> - <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeJICtypNMo" target="_blank">necromancer</a> and many many more! Yes, they mis-spelled pharoah.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhH7oe7_DoxuOW45TTAeUGzu5x6wex732pEtPmSP2WNw8XvLBDsL0PKBGsiz-SUkWyzPLmZVLTpGTfzKRv92LdKnlJ6zOhSU29rrSAm2I6nN9AaJuf5q2ddtP_daeMcO80VZwb-Hn2gNhc/s1600/Image.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhH7oe7_DoxuOW45TTAeUGzu5x6wex732pEtPmSP2WNw8XvLBDsL0PKBGsiz-SUkWyzPLmZVLTpGTfzKRv92LdKnlJ6zOhSU29rrSAm2I6nN9AaJuf5q2ddtP_daeMcO80VZwb-Hn2gNhc/s400/Image.jpg" width="300" /></a><br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> So how did Synapse get to make such a high-profile arcade port? <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=Uu1MAgAAQBAJ&lpg=PA249&ots=JqikPww18N&dq=zaxxon%20lawyer%20deal&pg=PA249#v=onepage&q&f=false" target="_blank">Dealings with a shady lawyer working for Sega at the time</a>. Seriously.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Wow. OK.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> Zaxxon here was programmed by Peter Adams, who programmed the C64 port of Blue Max right before this. He's also responsible for Panther which was released by Mastertronic in 1988 and is also an isometric shooter. This genre is definitely his bag, baby.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Clearly.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> Zaxxon was released in 1984 near the end of what I consider to be the C64's early years. It had already made a big splash at home with the Colecovision version, but the C64 version is certainly not unwelcome. However, coming after Blue Max it seems like a bit of a step backwards. Blue Max is arguably better, with more gameplay elements, etc. But if you're looking for your isometric shooter to be set in space rather than WWI, Zaxxon is the better way to go.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> Zaxxon for the C64 is a very sturdy port. Smooth scrolling. Responsive controls. The skills you build playing the arcade game apply well and the game scores the same as the arcade. You'll notice that the scores on the C64 version match those of the arcade version if you play it the same way. Pretty impressive. It's a little easier because it's a little slower but I wont count that against it.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Yes, please dont because that's definitely a huge plus in my book. I can enjoy playing it on the 64 even if it doesnt wow me with its' presentation like the arcade version does. <br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> They definitely paid attention to the arcade version when creating the port. Notice how you can shoot the cannons on the ground by flying slightly higher so that you hit the red spot on top while at the same time avoiding their shots. That's attention to detail you dont find in other versions.<br />
<br />
There are two major differences between the 64 and arcade version:<br />
<br />
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>1. The controls. The arcade versions controls are floaty. The spacecraft has momentum and pushing the stick to the left and then stopping will cause the ship to tilt (bank) left then continue to travel in that direction briefly before straightening out after you've stopped moving the stick. In the C64 version the craft does not bank left or right but rather strafes left and right and stops immediately when you stop moving the joystick. It's not a problem, necessarily, but if you're used to the arcade version you will definitely notice the difference and have to adjust your play accordingly. In the end I believe you'll find it's easier to control the 64 version.<br />
<br />
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>2. The perspective has changed. In the arcade version of Zaxxon you can move left and right along the entire length of the fortress. In the 64 version you seem to have a zoomed-in perspective of the left side of the fortress and you can only fly to the right to what feels like the middle of the screen. It's strange but not a dealbreaker, the game feels very much like the arcade game anyway. And it's not because of the aspect ratio difference between home TV vs the arcade, the C64 version is the only version like this that I could find. All the other major versions have a "right side".<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-hHhCC4hW_30/V5kV3e7-urI/AAAAAAAAJq0/eNFqWnFLKnUVzhmp51nO3PIKBKbxQ9N-ACLcB/s1600/gsj12-zaxxon2.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-hHhCC4hW_30/V5kV3e7-urI/AAAAAAAAJq0/eNFqWnFLKnUVzhmp51nO3PIKBKbxQ9N-ACLcB/s200/gsj12-zaxxon2.gif" width="175" /></a></div>
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-SpUvcz-THBc/V5kV5K1TczI/AAAAAAAAJq4/wdADDeJLaQEGwlo-fS1DSQCGF1dCzlpuACLcB/s1600/maxresdefault.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" height="180" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-SpUvcz-THBc/V5kV5K1TczI/AAAAAAAAJq4/wdADDeJLaQEGwlo-fS1DSQCGF1dCzlpuACLcB/s320/maxresdefault.jpg" width="320" /></a><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> The graphics in the C64 version are just average. I miss the arcade version's colors. The blues of the surface and the white lines drawn overtop look so much more "futuristic" than the C64's. The surface in the C64 version is actually made up of alternating lines, it's actually a pattern of grey and blue, and there's too much of this same gray color on everything. It looks too dark and I'll dare say it - ugly. There are bright spots though, the dreaded dogfight section has a cool space background with color shifting planets and galaxies. It's good stuff.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Compared to other versions the 64's looks very good. The explosions are very well done.<br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>Chuck:</b> They are but they also reveal "seams" in the background's character set graphics.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> Getting a little nit-picky there.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Wanna pick nits? Go ahead and talk about the sound design.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> OK. Well it kind of sucks.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> I said pick!<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> It's very early-period C64 sounding. Lots of taps, ticks, wooshes, dirty cymbal hits. There should be zaps when you fire your laser, dammit. Not this tippy-tap-tap crap. It's completely missing the background noise of the arcade game also, which makes the game feel very quiet, which is also a common feature of this era of 64 games.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> As a side note there is also a <a href="https://youtu.be/kVgoJXx4jjA" target="_blank">different port</a> than the Synapse version, from Datasoft(?). The background graphics are definitely better but in videos the gameplay looks choppy (we have not played this version). My conclusion is that Zaxxon is best played on an arcade cabinet. The C64 version is very competent but doesnt have the wow factor. I'd go with Blue Max instead.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b>Well, sometimes you want to play Zaxxon, and this is one of the best, if not THE best ports of it. I give it a thumbs up. So Zaxxon gets a half-recommend. I'd say that's about right.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> But dont go yet dear readers because it's time for a ** BONUS REVIEW ** !!<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> Oh, be still my beating heart.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Up next is SUPER Zaxxon. Because we just cant get enough punishment.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhP_RcZhEohmZGRDAgST4QIwoHJrGD65j4dKS62iMA3xDw6fZWmGQW7H70RhwJyapy5lFA35PRhiC-PFE-M6Q4vz-2ZT3Gst6CBkP7bp2tauj7s_jjdsJXA12F5BXkXIi1l32ConbPxtes/s1600/Super-Zaxxon--HesWare---USA-Cover--HesWare--Super_Zaxxon_-Hesware-14900.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhP_RcZhEohmZGRDAgST4QIwoHJrGD65j4dKS62iMA3xDw6fZWmGQW7H70RhwJyapy5lFA35PRhiC-PFE-M6Q4vz-2ZT3Gst6CBkP7bp2tauj7s_jjdsJXA12F5BXkXIi1l32ConbPxtes/s400/Super-Zaxxon--HesWare---USA-Cover--HesWare--Super_Zaxxon_-Hesware-14900.jpg" width="285" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> Punishment is correct. The <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cKf8HZYqTw" target="_blank">arcade version</a> of Super Zaxxon came out very quickly. It is NOT a sequel. It's meant to be a cheap conversion kit for existing Zaxxon cabinets that provides an extra hit of adrenaline for Zaxxon junkies by making the screen scroll unbelievably fast. It is a "hard mode" for players getting bored with the original Zaxxon.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> It's ridiculous. It's literally impossible to play.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> This was a good move on Sega's part. Strike while the iron is hot, as they say.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> I like the tunnels instead of the space dogfights even though they dont add much variety to the game. I really like how the tunnels look, with the road and the TUNNEL IN!! flashing message. It's got the same future-cool look as Zaxxon but everything is lime green instead of blue. <br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xonBbyvMTIQ/V5kI9rtp1iI/AAAAAAAAJqI/8X4JrqlZ2WsvVm0LKgpU1hV_hQldF8COgCLcB/s1600/superzaxxon_%252814%2529.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xonBbyvMTIQ/V5kI9rtp1iI/AAAAAAAAJqI/8X4JrqlZ2WsvVm0LKgpU1hV_hQldF8COgCLcB/s1600/superzaxxon_%252814%2529.gif" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Super Zaxxon (arcade) mixes things up by making the playfield green instead of blue.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<b>John:</b> The tunnels are there, I think, because the speed of the game wouldnt make any sense regarding the dogfights. And instead of facing Zaxxon you face a mighty, fearsome space dragon!<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> LOL<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> LOL<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Yeah it's about as fearsome as Barney the dinosaur. It looks like a parade float. It looks NOTHING like the dragon in the game's literature. It literally looks like a Muppet Babies version of the dragon on the cabinet.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6LRi0hDD5yQ/V5kIJNqUkkI/AAAAAAAAJqA/VoNVAQ7a2sc50EBgu4ttCYtlc44oH9XbwCLcB/s1600/Super_Zaxxon_dragon.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6LRi0hDD5yQ/V5kIJNqUkkI/AAAAAAAAJqA/VoNVAQ7a2sc50EBgu4ttCYtlc44oH9XbwCLcB/s1600/Super_Zaxxon_dragon.png" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Drogon, this aint.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<b>John:</b> It looks like a Disney mascot costume you'd see walking around the Magic Kingdom. I will admit when I played this game on the C64 many years ago I thought it was some kind of joke or hack or something. Nope, it's real.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-CREYfmZHF8c/V5kIguwYEzI/AAAAAAAAJqE/s0OyeJOyPMM6GcYnPmlsfB4fa24DIVEAgCLcB/s1600/Super_Zaxxon_1.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-CREYfmZHF8c/V5kIguwYEzI/AAAAAAAAJqE/s0OyeJOyPMM6GcYnPmlsfB4fa24DIVEAgCLcB/s1600/Super_Zaxxon_1.gif" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The C64's terrifying dragon.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> So, Synapse had nothing to do with this C64 port. It was programmed by <a href="http://www.lemon64.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=40586&sid=7e84ac3f2d7b35003f342a6ccaee8c14" target="_blank">Micheal Cranford</a> and <a href="http://www.totallygames.com/about/" target="_blank">Lawrence Holland</a> for <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Engineered_Software" target="_blank">Hesware</a> (who published many of <a href="http://minotaurproject.co.uk/jeff.php" target="_blank">Jeff Minter</a>'s games).<br />
<br />
There is also another version of Super Zaxxon which does maintain the green color of the arcade version and was published by US Gold. It looks and sounds pretty awful according to this video right <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1fCwEE0ZbA" target="_blank">here</a>.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> That is one of the most annoying games I have EVER heard. <br />
<br />
Normally I'm not big on who programmed what and when. That's more your department. But I have to say I was surprised to find out that this was (at least partly) programmed by the guy responsible for The Bard's Tale. What a big leap in genres.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> That's Micheal Cranford. He also designed Dark Seed, so yeah he did a lot of genre hopping. I'm more surprised that Lawrence Holland also programmed <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBQED08kB-4" target="_blank">Spike's Peak</a> for the 2600. Not sure why I'm surprised, it's just such an odd (and technically advanced) 2600 title, it's unexpected to see it mentioned anywhere for any reason. <br />
<br />
<b>John: </b>It's probably the C64 version of Spike's Peak, not the 2600 version. <br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>Chuck:</b> There's a C64 version??<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHdeMFFEd8w" target="_blank">Yes</a>.<br />
<br />
And I think you might be brushing right by his huge involvement in the Star Wars X-Wing and TIE Fighter series? Some of the most renowned games of ALL TIME?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> Damn, this stupid Super Zaxxon port has some serious genes.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Stupid, I can agree with. It's as slow as the arcade version is fast. The only reason Super Zaxxon exists is to be a lure for Zaxxon freaks who are too good at the game. The 64 version removes that reason. So now it has no reason to exist.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> They completely ignored the arcade version's art style. There's no green to be found. It's all grey and blue like the first Zaxxon. <br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> At least it has decent sound effects. An actual laser sound, a nice siren to warn of the Dragon approaching. Oh and it has a nice little title tune that the aracde version lacks. I actually think it would be interesting to have a real home port of Super Zaxxon but this isnt it. Super Zaxxon is supposed to be very fast, period.<br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>Chuck: </b> The most interesting thing about Super Zaxxon is its' heavy-hitting programming lineage. Two mighty game franchise creators have such humble beginnings. Who knew?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> OK, so we both agree that one can pass on Super Zaxxon. Overall, though, Zaxxon in any incarnation is one of the more playable of the "graphical flash vs. gameplay" designs, with a unique and beautiful backdrop. I imagine it will be remembered for years to come. By old people. Like us.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Synapse's 64 port is very playable but lackluster in the audiovisual department. Super Zaxxon is a bit brighter but is too slow to be considered an actual port of the arcade game. Stay away from the US Gold (or whomever) versions of the games we didnt cover here and Zaxx off everyone, good night!<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> Sigh.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-21051514654710576832015-11-14T22:37:00.000-08:002018-04-01T23:56:14.984-07:00Yes we're still aliveHowdy folks, this is blendo75 here with an update as to what's going on.<br />
<br />
We've gotten a lot of nice correspondence from our readership that we surely do not deserve on account of our lack of updates and replies, but I do have time to address most of your questions right now. Hopefully this covers a lot of ground.<br />
<br />
Yes, we're all alive here. Yes, it sucks that there were major life upheavals right as we were finding a groove. Yes, we're going to get back to it ASAP.<br />
<br />
We are a very close group. We are related. Chuck and John are brothers. No we are not on Facebook under any names you see on this page. We value our privacy so we arent going to say much more. As for the picture of "us", is it really us.. there's hints to this whole thing all around you and more clues on our twitter (blendo75).<br />
<br />
Our experience, both unique and combined, covers a broad spectrum of games both old and new, from systems previous to the C64 and post.. The focus here is Commodore 64 games but they are approached from the perspective of 40 years of gaming, beginning with the Odyssey 2 (with a brief experience with the Odyssey 1 beforehand). The Commodore 64 is definitely our favorite system and the one with the most impact on us, and certainly not just because of games but for the world that it opened for us with regards to all aspects of computing - BBSs, hacking/phreaking/cracking, etc.<br />
<br />
We're all familiar with the 64's capabilities and have played more games for this system than any other platform and that will probably stand until the day we all die. We absolutely love all of them, even the very rotten ones, as they all have something to teach you about the system and about how C64 games and games in general should be designed. But more importantly, they all have a bit of magic and mystery to them that is granted to them by the unique hardware capabilities of a system created in 1982 and by the fact that they are usually the vision of one individual or a small team. The C64 is a system with uniquely crafted hardware that does so much with so little that it very nearly IS magic. Only the Atari 2600 and Amiga 500 can compare, in our estimation.<br />
<br />
Yes we do want to review games for other systems, the aforementioned 2600 and Amiga. Maybe a modern one once in a while. But we want the content of the blog to be mostly C64 and we dont have a lot of C64 content at all, yet.<br />
<br />
No we do not enjoy hating on games. Reviewing these C64 games is about more for us than just giving thumbs up or down. It's about cataloging our experiences with them. It's about conveying to others, to strangers from all over the world, those experiences. We'd like to think that our perspective is uniquely our own and is, hopefully, valuable to the Commodore community and to those who also love and want to further understand what makes games fun or not fun, what makes them important or throwaways What makes them an art form. Sometimes we do take bad games personally. Our time is limited and precious, and games that are mediocre and/or that were made to trick you into buying them are stealing that time.<br />
<br />
We realize that most of our readers are either exclusively C64 gamers or exclusively 8-bit. But if you're insterested in modern games, yes, we do play them. Not as many as we'd like to. Some recent ones we hold in high esteem are Civ 5, Skyrim, Minecraft, Resident Evil 4, Guitar Hero, Boom Blox, Final Fantasy X / XII / XIII, Luigi's Mansion and Katamari Damacy.blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-40589225788203822202014-09-30T19:38:00.004-07:002017-03-21T06:38:47.969-07:00Omega Race (c) 1982 Commodore / Midway<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEitwz2ssPixeMBGcdZBgLCcigpldOuJqcRuukasZ4Ja431nxvd5bpad0C6tNOSa0ChypJZbWI8g19z_haQo0FYXIGM4XV3LCn__1wX1o9CdOZBH8Q6m9tFYKCqkzM0VOR2QPhr7wJhegEY/s1600/Omega_Race_-_1982_-_Commodore_Electronics_Ltd..jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEitwz2ssPixeMBGcdZBgLCcigpldOuJqcRuukasZ4Ja431nxvd5bpad0C6tNOSa0ChypJZbWI8g19z_haQo0FYXIGM4XV3LCn__1wX1o9CdOZBH8Q6m9tFYKCqkzM0VOR2QPhr7wJhegEY/s1600/Omega_Race_-_1982_-_Commodore_Electronics_Ltd..jpg" width="473" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
(thanks gamesdb)</div>
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Thanks for waiting! After a long but necessary hiatus we're back with Omega Race, an in-house effort from Commodore themselves. It's another good arcade port from the company you'd least expect. Back in 1982, though, there werent many other publishers pumping out C64 software, and Commodore wanted to emphasize the entertainment aspects of the machine.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> Perhaps to lure in VIC-20 owners who mostly used their computers as fancy consoles? VIC-20 users seem to go bonkers for Omega Race in particular.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Perhaps. Omega Race began life in the arcades of 1981 as Midway's answer to Asteroids. It was the first and last vector graphics game Midway would ever make.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> Faaaascinating...<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> Indeed. It was programmed by Ron Haliburton who is an old, old, ooooold school game designer that began his career in the electromechanical era and went on to create Pong and Tank knockoffs, and some very early racers. He claims to have created the first skiing game.<br />
<br />
His real claim to fame, though, is Omega Race. Remembered by lots. Fondly remembered by most. And almost completely removed from the modern (retro) gaming scene.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> I dont remember ever seeing it in a Midway collection, or in any sort of re-release.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> That's because there are none and never were any. Released for most PCs and consoles pre-console crash, it fell completely off the map afterward. I have a feeling Ron or another company he worked for kept the rights to it. Either that or the game just doesnt make sense in any other context beyond its' early 80s heyday.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> That's what I'm thinking. The game is very strange. I dont know if the general gaming population has an impression of Omega Race other than that it's an Asteroids knock off. Or rip off. Or "Midways' answer to Asteroids" if we're being diplomatic. It lacks a cohesive theme.<br />
<br />
For example:<br />
<br />
ASTEROIDS - You're stuck in an asteroid belt! Shoot asteroids to survive! <br />
<br />
OMEGA RACE - In a distant galaxy, a race of fierce warriors known as the <b>Omegans</b> have preserved their independence and won the respect of their enemies by developing their fighting skills to a deadly precision. To train their warriors, the Omegans stage a challenge known as the <b>"Omega Race"</b>. Over the Omegan city of <b>Komar</b>, android-piloted fighters relentlessly pursue the best of the Omegan warriors and yadda yadda yadda, holy crap. It goes on and on.<br />
<br />
And it has a very odd gameplay hook. It's all the fun of Asteroids with a <b>big box in the middle of the screen</b>. Do you "race" around the box? No, it's just a big obstacle. I'm not sure how they came up with this. It probably was supposed to be some sort of vector racing game, where you raced around the screen Rally-style, until they decided it would make more money as a shoot em up. "Race" is right there in the title, there may even have been some drastic last-minute changes made. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Mmmm,.. perhaps Race is just referring to the fact that you're engaging in some sort of contest rather than an actual battle...? Or it's referring to the race of the Omegan peoples, as in the definition of race as a social concept? It's there in the documentation, "a <i>race</i> of fierce warriors".<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Oh that's deep. If it wasnt supposed to be an actual racing game then why is there one large obstacle that's so obviously the infield of a racing track? Why not multiple, smaller boxes? Why not long rectangles making corridors? Why not change the layout on subsequent levels? It is a fun game, for sure, but it feels like two different concepts being pulled in different directions.<br />
<br />
What really annoys me though, and this goes for lots of games out there, not just this one, is that in the context or story of the game this is supposed to be a <i>training mission</i>, or some sort of <i>simulation</i> of combat. Why do video games ever, <i>ever </i>do this? You're already interacting with a metaphorical representation of reality, why cant you be fighting <i>real</i> enemies per the story? Why's it gotta be a <i>simulation</i> of a simulation?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Just so we're all on the same page here, Omega Race, like Asteroids, has you piloting some sort of space ship, spinning it left and right and using a button to thrust and another to fire. The enemies are numerous circular objects (<b>Droids</b>) that mostly move together either clockwise or counter around the big box in the middle of the screen. One of the enemies (<b>Commandos</b>) will be faster, and smarter, and attempt to seek out and destroy you with lasers while at the same time dropping mines which you must avoid.<br />
<br />
Your job is to clear out all enemies. When you do this you will notice that enemies you do not shoot will take over for the "leader" when it is destroyed. If you do not shoot the leader(s) or clear the level fast enough it will turn into a fast moving death machine (literally called the <b>Death Ship</b>) that will kill you quickly. As the difficulty increases you will have to deal with multiple leaders at once, that move faster, drop more mines, etc.<br />
<br />
So, basically you want to kill the slow guys first so they dont graduate to more dangerous forms.<br />
<br />
Other gameplay elements include invisible walls on all sides of the screen which light up when shot or touched by your ship. You will bounce off these walls and the square in the middle. You only crash if you touch an enemy. You and the enemies have the ability to fire rapidly in a very satisfying pew-pew video-gamey kind of way.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> That's what I enjoy about it. It has these arcadey elements down to a science. Great "music" (a few repeating notes) that get faster to ramp up tension. Great arcadey sound effects. It's a very well-done vector shooter. This isnt a review of the arcade version, though!<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Right. The C64 version was programmed by Andy Finkel and Eric Cotton, who created the celebrated VIC-20 version, which is actually a bit better than this one. They're responsible for the rest of these Commodore-branded Midway ports of this time period such as <b>Gorf</b>, <b>Wizard of Wor</b> and <b>Lazarian</b>.<br />
<br />
The C64 version retains some of the great things about the arcade version while being easier, overall. That's typical for a home translation and not necessarily a strike against it. However, the reason it is easier is because there are changes to the way the enemies behave, and it's a bit of an issue.<br />
<br />
Playing the C64 version feels very similar to the arcade, particularly the way you and the enemies fire at each other. The difference comes in the way the enemies move toward you. In the C64 version they tend to bounce their way toward you; off of the walls and the center box. All of the enemies do this, but it's most noticeable in the Death Ship. It falls a little flat when it languidly bounces its' way toward you, as opposed to the frightening way it quickly homes in on your in the arcade version. In fact the entire experience is slowed down, perhaps to make it easier?<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> What?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> The game does gradually get more difficult but still feels slow. I dont know though, if you arent overly familiar with the arcade version you may not even notice the difference. If you're a big fan of the arcade version, or even the VIC version, you'll find the C64 version lacking in oomph.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> The Death Ship doesnt move like that at all. Well, it does bounce around more but it's very fast and there's a blaring siren sound and... ? What's going on here?<br />
<br />
<b>Marco:</b> **** Later that day ****<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> OK. Permit me to blow you minds, readers: There are two distinct versions of Omega Race for the C64. We each played a different version without realizing it. Not only that, but there is a third version! It's the version for the Ultimax though, so that doesnt count as far as I'm concerned.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Let's call them the Fast and Slow versions, since that's the most distinct feature that's different. The fast version's enemies move quicker, more fluidly and take a more direct path to reach you rather than haphazardly bouncing around. But the easiest way to tell them apart? Like this:<br />
<br />
The <b>Fast</b> version has a very Omega-Race-looking font on the title screen and in the box during the game. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgkCNnTTA-lcqIh02hYaRXh5r4249Ha6YLkWUACsWkAM6d1Iic8VoQB19QE2-sJwve0vguLlZXdRKzh71fUhIVHqTlmobPsnGmRIwamyMxUm0P979JulvW5VH5phqlAVhBb5MovSy09S6o/s1600/2015-04-03+20.39.14.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="420" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgkCNnTTA-lcqIh02hYaRXh5r4249Ha6YLkWUACsWkAM6d1Iic8VoQB19QE2-sJwve0vguLlZXdRKzh71fUhIVHqTlmobPsnGmRIwamyMxUm0P979JulvW5VH5phqlAVhBb5MovSy09S6o/s640/2015-04-03+20.39.14.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-3JcvJ6eo0-E/VXJJibu8BNI/AAAAAAAAJiE/cLgzi_hYld8/s1600/2015-04-03%2B20.40.46.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="420" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-3JcvJ6eo0-E/VXJJibu8BNI/AAAAAAAAJiE/cLgzi_hYld8/s640/2015-04-03%2B20.40.46.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
The <b>Slow</b> version has a bitmapped title and uses the default C64 font.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-WJ1vMZ37Bms/VXJJFFeOxcI/AAAAAAAAJh8/RXUdGF_X5nw/s1600/2015-04-03%2B20.38.11.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="420" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-WJ1vMZ37Bms/VXJJFFeOxcI/AAAAAAAAJh8/RXUdGF_X5nw/s640/2015-04-03%2B20.38.11.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhR9-zst3MOxbe4Ssy1Z-4ZP6y989W1L-sLUXqkeMPPhELEIH82eQDgqd03pRcQlk0liJPzTnSntRkSutQzZVxoPJ22lo1RCRn4650nK1yj4sqCDQdv2_N4cmpk7hHq6qyTh8r21XrzEdA/s1600/2015-04-03+20.38.27.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="420" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhR9-zst3MOxbe4Ssy1Z-4ZP6y989W1L-sLUXqkeMPPhELEIH82eQDgqd03pRcQlk0liJPzTnSntRkSutQzZVxoPJ22lo1RCRn4650nK1yj4sqCDQdv2_N4cmpk7hHq6qyTh8r21XrzEdA/s640/2015-04-03+20.38.27.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
You can check out the differences here, on this wonderful website: <a href="http://c64preservation.com/ultimax">http://c64preservation.com/ultimax</a><br />
<br />
And here's a lot of gameplay footage of the slow version: <a href="https://youtu.be/40LANg3m2pE">https://youtu.be/40LANg3m2pE</a> (note: you get a good glimpse at the Commodore paddle controller at the very beginning)<br />
<br />
I still dont understand how these two versions came to be, but I am certain that the "slow" version with the default 64 font is worse.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> I agree. Although the slow version is good if you want a lesser challenge. I'm having a hard time with the fast version. <br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> I'm not seeing any reason to play the slow version. It's a shame that it's out there mixed into everyone's collections and libraries. It really shouldnt exist. And yet it's so ubiquitous it even made it into the <a href="https://www.c64-wiki.com/index.php/Omega_Race" target="_blank">C64 Wiki</a>, which doesnt even mention that another version exists. Even the <a href="http://csdb.dk/release/?id=130554" target="_blank">CSDB</a> has the slow version as the only version.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Well, we were unaware of it and we've played every game under the sun. I'm sure we've played both versions in the past without even realizing it. It took us both playing different versions, unaware, separately, for the different versions to be exposed.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> After that truth bomb I'm not even sure where we're at in the review.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Let's just say that the fast version is a very respectable arcade port. Great gameplay and sound effects. The controls work great. Push up to thrust, left and right to spin. Makes sense. And it makes me wonder of the necessity of <a href="https://youtu.be/qoSJsd5l9Mg" target="_blank">the accessory that comes with the Atari 2600 version</a> of the game that gives you a second button to thrust with.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> The behavior of the Death Ship in the fast version really matters and is what truly sets it apart from the slow version. In the slow version it's a joke. In the fast version it's a real threat and the blaring alarm siren that accompanies it really gets you on your toes. It's almost as if the slow version wasnt finished.<br />
<br />
The graphics in the two versions are very similar. I dont like that the shape of the player's ship is simplified to a triangle. I always liked the original ship design. Hell, it's even on the 64's box cover.<br />
<br />
As I mentioned earlier, the VIC-20 version is venerated by VIC users. I see praise for it almost everywhere VIC games are discussed. You dont hear as much about the C64 version. I suppose that could be the result of higher expectations. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> It's certainly above average. It's one of the first C64 games ever in addition to being a port of a game from 1980. I have no problem giving it my recommendation. So, Johnny, does Omega Race cross the finish line?<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> Sure.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> Well, with that hearty recommendation I pronounce Omega Race to be Good... Enough!<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Wd7mLu9gBcg/VXI-cS2tPSI/AAAAAAAAJhc/GFctT1dXu_A/s1600/john%2Boates.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Wd7mLu9gBcg/VXI-cS2tPSI/AAAAAAAAJhc/GFctT1dXu_A/s320/john%2Boates.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Big Bam Boom!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-83342812498050146142014-09-14T07:17:00.001-07:002014-09-16T09:40:29.587-07:00C64 Review - Congo Bongo (C) 1983 Sega<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_lrVf2PTDU4/VBWjOiYIlyI/AAAAAAAAJc8/XV4nMlNMl74/s1600/1102154909-00.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_lrVf2PTDU4/VBWjOiYIlyI/AAAAAAAAJc8/XV4nMlNMl74/s1600/1102154909-00.jpg" height="640" width="435" /></a></div>
<div>
{thanks Moby Games}</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;"><b>Chuck:</b> Today we have Sega's not-so-classic, not-such-a-big-arcade-hit Congo Bongo. Long considered Sega's answer to Donkey Kong (and probably programmed by some of the same people), Congo Bongo is a graphically intense isometric platformer made to stand out in a crowded 1983 arcade market. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">The C-64 port was programmed by Beck Tech, another Berkely/Silicon Valley-type tech startup that sprang up like weeds in the late 70's and early 80's. Beck Tech has a good track record with me. Their version of <a href="http://youtu.be/92fFHVxYiHk" target="_blank">Tapper for the Atari 2600</a> is an amazing technical achievement and one of the best port jobs in the 2600's library. Hell, their <a href="http://youtu.be/IdRHTQ19a5s" target="_blank">2600 version of Congo Bongo</a>'s pretty impressive too. They <a href="http://youtu.be/74VPFoS18TU" target="_blank">ported Tapper to the C-64</a> as well and did a pretty good job of that; it could be because Sega at least let them put that on a disk. Congo Bongo got squeezed onto a cart and according to one <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=nC4EAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA37&lpg=PA37&dq=beck-tech+video+games&source=bl&ots=HJuBJCsHT8&sig=MKnBgebVLtG7xNJJkq1iLWU8Uv8&hl=en&sa=X&ei=cYwVVMK_IIqtyATxqILQCA&ved=0CCAQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=beck-tech%20video%20games&f=false" target="_blank">article</a> I read it's cut down to 24k. It's understandable. The high cost of memory at the time, manufacturing costs, low C-64 user base... why take a chance? Why invest time and resources into something that might not sell?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-J7KENycXeho/VBY2JgUpxVI/AAAAAAAAJdo/3w7h9mJxv0w/s1600/2014-09-14%2B19.46.53.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-J7KENycXeho/VBY2JgUpxVI/AAAAAAAAJdo/3w7h9mJxv0w/s1600/2014-09-14%2B19.46.53.jpg" height="263" width="400" /></a></div>
<span style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<b>John:</b> I'll tell you why, because you're charging the same amount of money as you are for every other version of the game. <span style="text-align: -webkit-auto;">Let's put it plainly: the C64 got the shit end of the stick.</span><span style="text-align: -webkit-auto;"> </span><span style="text-align: -webkit-auto;"> Regardless of the circumstances, Beck and Sega though this was good enough to release. It's barely better than the 2600 version, which at least has the benefit of looking great considering the system's limitations. The Apple II version is better, like a completely different game from this one. Even the Colecovision port is better. We got the same version the </span><i style="text-align: -webkit-auto;"><a href="http://youtu.be/oF2gIjvVfWU" target="_blank">Atari 5200</a></i><span style="text-align: -webkit-auto;"> did. It's bad. It's bad like cancer.</span></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<b>Chuck:</b> Yeah but I cant get too offended by it. I think a big part of the problem is the game it's based on, not the technical shortcomings of the port.</div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<b>John:</b> I admit I have a soft spot for this game. I mean the real game, <a href="http://youtu.be/Dok9ahpSacc" target="_blank">the arcade game</a>. The whole point of the game is to be a technical wonder. A 1983 technical wonder, yes, but if you lived the arcade life like we did, when we did, you remember what it was like seeing this game for the first time. It made a lot of other games look absolutely ancient. A lot of the game's literature and ads describe it as "3-D" and it really did look that way at the time. The way the player and enemies interact with the environment, the way the coconuts tumble down the hill on the first level, the way the water appears to flow.. it all adds up to a very cartoon-like, living environment with depth. It still looks good today, particularly when it's in motion. And not only was it a more evolved platformer, one of the levels was entirely based on Frogger as well.</div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<b>Chuck:</b> It's programmed by the same folks that did Zaxxon and uses the same "engine". The isometric view did look pretty sharp at the time. This was the era of Dragon's Lair and the Star Wars X-Wing cockpit game, so it was getting harder for traditional raster games to surprise you with graphical fidelity. The gap between the arcade experience and the home experience was getting wider, also. </div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
You're right, no other game looked like this. It was seemingly the next step in platform gaming. It really looked the part and it was almost irresistably attractive. That was the whole point. Like Dragon's Lair it was meant to dazzle you into playing it. Also like Dragon's Lair you quickly realized it wasnt as playable as you were accustomed to.</div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
There's a trade-off to this perspective. It's hard to judge where you're jumping to and how far. So, of course, they make the game entirely about jumping and judging where you're going to land to the point where, as you pointed out, one of the levels is a Frogger-esque jump fest. It's maddening. It feels like the game isnt working properly.</div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
Another thing that bothers me, and I feel is an example of another trade-off, is that the game is very short. The elaborate graphics and environment leave you with little to actually do. All the levels are very brief point-A to point-B affairs. To the developer's credit there is variety between the levels but they dont leave much of an impression on their own. I watched <b>John</b> play the arcade version and he must have rolled through all of the levels at least 5 times. After the game was over I could have sworn there were only three levels in the game, not four. The second level is so inconsequential that I didnt even remember it after seeing it multiple times! The first level, the one that everyone remembers, only has two real jumps. The level with stampeding wildebeasts and you ducking into holes is pretty well thought out, but lasts less than a minute. The final Frogger stage is OK, but suffers thanks to the difficult controls.</div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
It's obvious that they had a very cool-looking concept (freeze Zaxxon in place) and they grafted a game onto it the best they could. It's not horrible or anything but it's more fun to watch than it is to play.</div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<b>John:</b> I agree that it's not for everyone and it can definitely be unfair. It certainly takes a lot of practice. It's not as immediately accessible as Popeye or Mario Bros, and history shows that this concept was pretty much a dead end. Mario Bros begat Super Mario Bros and platformers truly hit the next level. The first 2.5D, axonometric platformer was also pretty much the last, in the arcade anyway.</div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
Enough about the arcade version, let's discuss what we're all here for. The pile of puke that is the <a href="http://youtu.be/UKqjqb8YExM" target="_blank">C64 port</a>.</div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<b>Chuck:</b> Well, we're both making a point about how we approached the C-64 version. I wasnt sold on Congo Bongo in the first place, so I wasnt surprised to find that the C-64 port was awful. I know we played this a lot when we were kids and I honestly dont remember it being this bad. If you arent at least a fan of Congo Bongo, there is nothing for you here.</div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<b>John:</b> And my point is that this game was meant to be a state-of-the-art eye-popper and if you take that away, you arent left with much. But the C64 version does much worse than simply have poor graphics. <span style="text-align: -webkit-auto;">The first thing you'll notice is that the perspective is wrong. They've "turned" it further. Merely cosmetic? Nope, it negatively impacts gameplay.</span></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-extGn_6giVQ/VBYvgMtSguI/AAAAAAAAJdM/42Sn2vNR9nc/s1600/2014-09-14%2B11.10.19.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-extGn_6giVQ/VBYvgMtSguI/AAAAAAAAJdM/42Sn2vNR9nc/s1600/2014-09-14%2B11.10.19.png" height="320" width="280" /></a></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEIX6_tCFc1rW2fp-IMemdkgZn3nzU7OCHCO-xCqA2PJt70Gd6kIPTRUqsfBafIm-F2k9WHMo2uT9H32WNbHH25s-iBM9NzLqtFYhR4DbpauumVSKfuhr7rJ_M7MYoqtVhQddnPTBgQUg/s1600/2014-09-14+19.48.22.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEIX6_tCFc1rW2fp-IMemdkgZn3nzU7OCHCO-xCqA2PJt70Gd6kIPTRUqsfBafIm-F2k9WHMo2uT9H32WNbHH25s-iBM9NzLqtFYhR4DbpauumVSKfuhr7rJ_M7MYoqtVhQddnPTBgQUg/s1600/2014-09-14+19.48.22.jpg" height="300" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
They've completely botched the game's isometric perpective. <span style="text-align: -webkit-auto;">Instead of the nice axonometric Zaxxon view it just looks like a 2D platformer with an extremely poor attempt at field depth. </span><span style="text-align: -webkit-auto;">The perspective the arcade original uses allows you to understand where the coconuts are and where they are going. </span><span style="text-align: -webkit-auto;">The initial coconut volley is supposed to roll down the hill toward your entrypoint (bottom left) and you move left or right as you climb to avoid them. This version is so screwy that you actually have to move up and down to avoid them. Because the perspective is off the coconuts move right to left instead of down. You have to judge if they are in front of you (toward the screen) or behind you (away from the screen). It's awkward and unnatural.</span><br />
<span style="text-align: -webkit-auto;"><br /></span>
<span style="text-align: -webkit-auto;"> When you get to the top you cant really dodge them anymore because you have nowhere to move - they'll either hit your head or your feet. So you just wait until Bongo's not throwing coconuts to rush up the final steps. Congo Bongo doesnt make any sense with this perspective. This isnt what the game is supposed to play like at all.</span><br />
<span style="text-align: -webkit-auto;"><br /></span>
<span style="text-align: -webkit-auto;">Imagine if they took Zaxxon and made it a 2D side-scroller but still pretended to be 3-D by trying to fool you into thinking you're moving into and out of the playfield by simply moving up and down. That's the best way I can describe this mess. Without sprite scaling there's no way you can have the illusion of going deeper into the screen. Wouldnt it have been easier to just keep the game's original perspective? I'm guessing that it wasnt. I'm guessing that <b>drawing the playfield with right angles was the easiest way to do it on the Atari 5200</b>, and since this is a lazy port we got the same thing.</span><br />
<span style="text-align: -webkit-auto;"><br /></span>
<span style="text-align: -webkit-auto;">The coconuts move so slow and choppy it almost doesnt matter anyway, you could be half-way through the stage before the first one drops.</span><span style="text-align: -webkit-auto;"> </span><span style="text-align: -webkit-auto;">And do they have to be purple?? </span></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
Next up is the Hunter. The player sprite looks awful and if you look closely you can see that he has no eyes, just empty spaces through which you can see the play field. He's got the red nose but he's too tall and skinny.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GHIou-I6YYI/VBYvhsTQFfI/AAAAAAAAJdU/GraAz1gWUDg/s1600/2014-09-14%2B19.47.56-2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GHIou-I6YYI/VBYvhsTQFfI/AAAAAAAAJdU/GraAz1gWUDg/s1600/2014-09-14%2B19.47.56-2.jpg" height="240" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
The Hunter barely seems to be a part of, or interacting with, the environment and instead appears to awkwardly float over top. The monkees and the coconuts fare a little better but the way they move reminds me of a Tiger LCD game. Bongo looks absolutely nothing like he should. What the heck, Beck-Tech? I could swear the programmers read a description of the game and worked from that, having never played the arcade game before. Even the Bongo in the 2600 version looks more like it should!<br />
<br />
One moment that sums up the entire game for me can be seen if you move too far to the left while walking on the bridge. Instead of falling you immediately make a "splat" pose and die right at the edge of the bridge. That's just pure hackery.</div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
Once you make it through the first level you skip right to the last level which is the arcade's final Frogger stage. Not much to say about this one except that the horrible jump mechanic really rears it's ugly head here. Once again the perspective is off but at least it's consistent with the first stage. Jumping on the first lilly pad is hard to miss. It doesnt seem to matter whether the lilly pad is large or shrunken. You might make your second jump, it's pure luck. Your player sprite is so clunky and blocky you cant tell where you're standing. When you jump to the next little island it always LOOKS like you made it, but it's 50/50 whether the game give it to you or not. If you do make that second jump it's very easy to make it to the end. I dont know why you would try to take an alternate path through the level.<br />
<br />
After this you go back to level one with more aggressive monkeys. That's it. That's the whole game. It's a platform game with maybe six mandatory jumps. </div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<b>Chuck:</b> It's not really missing anything by not including the second level with the snakes since that one's a throwaway, but it really could have used the wildebeast stage. There's no meat to this game. Again, some of this is because of the original game, but this takes what little <i>was </i>there and cuts most of it out.</div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<b>John:</b> And it doesnt even have pretty graphics to fall back on. This really is a disaster. Something to note is that a couple years later someone whipped up a new version of Congo Bongo that looks a million times better. We cant comment on how it plays since we never played it but check this out: <a href="http://youtu.be/A8O_uUwMZ5U">http://youtu.be/A8O_uUwMZ5U</a></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
That looks a lot like the Apple II version which is what the C64 version should have been in the first place. <br />
<br />
I'll say it again, we got the Atari 5200 version on the C64. What a shame. At least it doesnt crash or do anything out of the ordinary. So at least it's a semi-competent, un-fun piece of crap.</div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<b>Chuck:</b> Eh. Early eighties isometric platforming isnt all it's cracked up to be on any system, but I can still appreciate what a kick in the crotch this game would be to a fan. Isnt there anything good about Congo Bongo? The color palette isnt too bad.<br />
<br />
John: The sounds are decent. Um... the music isnt completely horrible. Ugh. <span style="text-align: -webkit-auto;">Enough of this. I'm going to fire up MAME and play the real Congo Bongo while listening to the real Oingo Boingo.</span></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Tahoma; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; widows: 2;">
<b>Chuck:</b> Sounds like a party. A dead man's party, as it were. Ugh. Sorry folks. For everything.</div>
</div>
blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-350775143009132852014-08-23T22:14:00.002-07:002014-08-23T23:12:18.316-07:00C64 Review - Choplifter! (C) 1982 Br0derbund<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-2R5um2qHt9o/U_lUZA-rUGI/AAAAAAAAJbc/5n3abTLFCuU/s1600/choplifter-1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-2R5um2qHt9o/U_lUZA-rUGI/AAAAAAAAJbc/5n3abTLFCuU/s1600/choplifter-1.jpg" height="640" width="467" /></a></div>
(thanks Mayhem64)<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> After a bit of a looong delay we're back with <b>Choplifter!</b> Programmed in 1982 by Dan Gorlin (Apple) and Dane Bigham (C64). <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4UgXtqMh0QK7z3PU8cfs53Znizry6dT4382KfZJdFVAoincDf0E6RAT9rqW_awDWdam5GDmgQGeUlYI8R4xq18SGufL48WF1uETQZrbpED6PvaFrtZJUYlfJwuclOKeMyRRFtDj6c_G4/s1600/2014-08-24+01.06.21.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4UgXtqMh0QK7z3PU8cfs53Znizry6dT4382KfZJdFVAoincDf0E6RAT9rqW_awDWdam5GDmgQGeUlYI8R4xq18SGufL48WF1uETQZrbpED6PvaFrtZJUYlfJwuclOKeMyRRFtDj6c_G4/s1600/2014-08-24+01.06.21.jpg" height="300" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<b>John: </b>Are we going to offer any explanation as to why we stepped back a year to 1982?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Nope. Honestly, though, I'm not 100% convinced that it didnt hit the C64 until 1983.<br />
<br />
This is by far the most popular game we've reviewed yet, with sequels hitting consoles, remakes hitting arcades and popularity that continues nearly <a href="http://choplifterhd.com/" target="_blank">to this day</a>. Dan Gorlin struck gold with this idea. Initially intended as a realistic simulation of helicopter controls, it was carved into a super-tight action game that PC players were decidedly unused to experiencing on their home computers. This is straight out of the arcade.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Aside from how it scores you, that is.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> We'll get to that. Dan Gorlin was obviously an ace programmer and animator. My favorite game of his is the very unfortunately overlooked <b><a href="http://youtu.be/tPj_AmKCrLg" target="_blank">Typhoon Thompson</a></b> for the Amiga. Do yourself a favor and check that one out.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Been there and done that. It's a little too aggravating for me personally, but the graphics and animation are incredible.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> I was talking to the readers, dummy. One of these days we'll have to hash that out between us though. Dane Bigham is probably best known as the programmer of Carmen Sandiego. Br0derbund needs no introduction, surely! This game may be the one that introduced us to Br0derbund's go-to bad guys, the Bungeling Empire of Raid on Bungeling Bay and Lode Runner lore.<br />
<br />
It's hard to beat what these folks accomplished in 1982, especially on the C64. <b>Fort Apocalypse</b> may have made it out in 1982 as well, though, so I'm not completely prepared to say this is the very best C64 game of 1982, but it's way up there.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Definitely top 3. 1982 is a bit of a...<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> Crap-fest?<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> It definitely has some commercial releases that will make you question the sanity of all involved, including yourself. But there's <b>Axis Assassin</b>, <b>Zork</b>... I think <b>Omega Race</b> turned out pretty good.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> You're being extremely kind. 1982 is hell on the C64. Choplifter was one of the few exceptions. It's a AAA game among 100 other things that shouldnt have been saved to disk after they were programmed.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> And yet, it isnt perfect. It's got a bit of that Apple-itis. Maybe more than a bit.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> I agree. It's hard to get critical about it since this is 1982 and the power of the C64 is nearly entirely untapped. Still, the color scheme definitely leaves something to be desired. Red, white, blue and grey. OK, it's almost ugly looking.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> I honestly think the palette is deliberately chosen to make the tiny little people animate better. If you look closely at them they should be blobs of clashing colors, but they look perfect when they're waving, running, etc. Their level of detail is fantastic when you consider how small they really are. A nice big tube TV or a small CRT blends everything very well.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BBLbvyaZQSU/U_lzzYVIv_I/AAAAAAAAJcA/c8rOWpe09oM/s1600/2014-08-24%2B01.02.50.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BBLbvyaZQSU/U_lzzYVIv_I/AAAAAAAAJcA/c8rOWpe09oM/s1600/2014-08-24%2B01.02.50.jpg" height="300" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> It is all about the animation. This game looks and feels incredibly <i>alive. </i>It's fun to just watch the helicopter fly around and turn in different directions. The blue Jets look fantastic. The little tank treads are animated. The explosions have several frames. The stars in the sky are always twinkling. It's like watching a little living universe.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Ha, I dont know if I would go that far but yes, the animation is top notch, the scrolling is very smooth, the rate of fire is excellent. Things hardly ever slow down and when they do it's not bothersome. The controls are extremely tight and finely-tuned.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> The gameplay is nearly perfect. I mean, this is what people really love about the game. It's very basic in a way. There could have been more going on in the game, a la Defender, but instead it is stripped back to a single objective: dont let your little dudes die.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> Right. Take off, fly to the left, dont let the blue Jet kill you, bomb tanks that are too close to the hostages, pick them up and fly them back.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> The Jets are a little annoying. They fly extremely fast (duh) and sometimes shoot you down before you even know they're coming. The tanks pose little threat to you unless you're loading hostages. It's not worth it to shoot everything because there's no score. You dont even really feel like you've accomplished much unless you rescue all 64 hostages, and they are pretty easy to lose. The tanks pose the biggest threat to the hostages but you'll certainly kill a few of them yourself by landing too hard on them.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> The Jets are never worth shooting down. Another one is always nearby. They dont pose that much of a threat as long as you know where to land. The hostages, though, might be in danger from the Jet's missiles if the hostages are spread across the screen. Basically you should stay low to avoid the jets and bomb the tanks closest to the hostages. Learn how to land softly so you dont kill yourself or the hostages and get used to lifting off and landing rapidly, as if you are jumping up and down - dont wait for the hostages to come to you! Leap over to where they are and pick them up fast, there's always another tank on the way.<br />
<br />
As for the scoring, as you mentioned there are no points for shooting anything. You get one point per hostage delivered to the base which adds to the number next to the heart at the top-right. The number on the top-left counts dead hostages. The middle number is the number of hostages on-board. I think scoring the game this way was the right decision. It makes every hostage's life count. Getting points for shooting the Jets and Tanks would have created a distraction.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/--_fpH5BZZCo/U_lz_84QDdI/AAAAAAAAJcI/BTUl9_cutHI/s1600/2014-08-24%2B01.04.04.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/--_fpH5BZZCo/U_lz_84QDdI/AAAAAAAAJcI/BTUl9_cutHI/s1600/2014-08-24%2B01.04.04.jpg" height="300" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
The helicopter controls are outstanding. Very intuitive and fun. You can fly forward and backward without turning the helicopter and there is a near-perfect weight to the vehicle. When you stop pushing the stick the helicopter will keep moving in that direction in perfect proportion to how fast you were moving. It's very easy to see how this started out as a simulator.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> It's easy to under-state what a revelation this game was at the time. Animation: A++. Controls: A++. Gameplay: A++. All is not rosy in Choplifter-land though. John, tell them about the sound.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Ha, what sound? Seriously, though, the sound was not improved from the Apple II version at all. The whir of your blade in decent enough, and I like that it slows down when you're on the ground and speeds up when you're in the air. Your gunfire makes a you-have-to-be-kidding me plinky-plink sound that sounds like every Apple II sound effect you've ever heard. Everything else is almost as awful.<br />
<br />
There are two, maybe three different chirps that indicate a hostage has made it into the copter or that a hostage has died. They're distinguishable, but just barely. If you are new to the game you'll be killing hostages left and right and not even know it, such as when you land in a big crowd of them. There's no death animation for these guys (surprisingly), so the only indication that YOU killed one, as opposed to an explosion from a Tank shot which is more noticeable, is this slightly angrier-sounding chirp which sounds nearly identical to the hooray-you-rescued-me chirp. So did you rescue them or kill them? Better check the numbers at the top.<br />
<br />
The enemies make no sounds at all. The explosions make no sound. There's no sound when you die. I guess it goes without saying that there's no music. <br />
<br />
You can certainly chalk all this up to the era and you can definitely blame it on the Apple II, but really they knew they had an awesome game here.. would it have killed them to have some real sound effects?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> Another nit-pick would be your own death sequence. Your helicopter gets stuck half-way in the ground? It's almost like an afterthought.<br />
<br />
Sorry to end on a sour note folks but that's how our autopsies go. No stone un-turned and all that. So does it get our seal of approval? Does Choplifter soar as in Airwolf or crash and burn as in Twilight Zone: The Movie?<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> Oh man did you have to go there? Yes, of course Choplifter gets it. This is a phenom that goes beyond the era that birthed it and beyond the C64 itself. As classic as they get.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-5u1hNcTeKFE/U_l252T1TII/AAAAAAAAJcU/9Z_hvtITQe0/s1600/Krusty__s_Seal_of_Approval_by_KrnBgn.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-5u1hNcTeKFE/U_l252T1TII/AAAAAAAAJcU/9Z_hvtITQe0/s1600/Krusty__s_Seal_of_Approval_by_KrnBgn.png" height="320" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-43782458468149249582014-07-21T18:45:00.003-07:002014-07-22T06:25:13.561-07:00C64 Review - Rescue Squad (C) 1983 Muse Software<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjyLXYfZDELoSh4V3edxHBTScjSsEnA_1D31Tts22MDgrPdunHvvXe2K0jbbyVZP0VguFrhxDaUI8P0ko393YqcUpoE31HHXrmJp_x1q_RkcfcfL3lvQe6Jj-50cFqnqpeO7yoyJtH9mzw/s1600/2263100-rescue_squad.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjyLXYfZDELoSh4V3edxHBTScjSsEnA_1D31Tts22MDgrPdunHvvXe2K0jbbyVZP0VguFrhxDaUI8P0ko393YqcUpoE31HHXrmJp_x1q_RkcfcfL3lvQe6Jj-50cFqnqpeO7yoyJtH9mzw/s1600/2263100-rescue_squad.jpg" height="640" width="446" /></a></div>
<b><br /></b>
<b>Chuck:</b> Today we have Rescue Squad from the fabled software house of Muse. Actually I should say it's "from" John Kutcher and published by Muse. John was a junior in high school when he programmed this and found Muse in a phonebook by happenstance when looking for a publisher. John had never even heard of Muse. Muse was knee-deep in the Apple II at the time and turned out to be looking for a C64 programmer. If John's name rings a bell that's because he's much more well known as the esteemed programmer of Space Taxi, one of the all-time C64 classics.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhMreT90l7vMu2Fxy5qL70OlsgkGJKkk5t7YRUZ_AfkfZml4ybiaJeW_USjye6AIQ9oL4uGSqf0WsUzuuHb06hTb5GLME3AOhysBxoaNSKSFL8ZPZo2RZ3B8CKMEL-ILZxnlnTVYABOa8/s1600/2014-07-21+15.36.52.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhMreT90l7vMu2Fxy5qL70OlsgkGJKkk5t7YRUZ_AfkfZml4ybiaJeW_USjye6AIQ9oL4uGSqf0WsUzuuHb06hTb5GLME3AOhysBxoaNSKSFL8ZPZo2RZ3B8CKMEL-ILZxnlnTVYABOa8/s1600/2014-07-21+15.36.52.jpg" height="300" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> One of the all-time C64 classics is not how Rescue Squad is remembered.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> If it's remembered at all. It's a bit of a footnote in the Muse and C64 history books.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> It has a few fans. This is 1983 so the bar was lower when it came to gameplay, especially at home. That's why I remember having a good time with this one when we were kids. The concept, the graphics and the great music would mask its' faults to a gamer in 1983. Upon re-evaluation in 2014, though...<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Still, for a Junior in high school at what is practically the birth of the C64 and home computing in general, it's a good effort. There are three screens which are practically three different games. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-6Tdw25fiQpI/U820HBGiQFI/AAAAAAAAJaA/JKIrhbn4QM8/s1600/2014-07-21+15.53.49.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-6Tdw25fiQpI/U820HBGiQFI/AAAAAAAAJaA/JKIrhbn4QM8/s1600/2014-07-21+15.53.49.jpg" height="300" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
There is fantastic music by Silas Warner. Now there's a name that should ring a few bells! If it doesnt then, dear reader, you have some research to do. He's a pioneer in computer audio and quite a character. Oh and he's unfortunately deceased. We'll definitely be talking about him more when we get to Castle Wolfenstein.<br />
<br />
Let's start with the game's first screen in which you control an ambulance racing toward a burning building. It's a top-down perspective that reminds me a little of the grid in Crossfire, but it reminds me even more of the city in David Crane's Ghostbusters. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-P3BISUdD6CM/U828h-Rq7AI/AAAAAAAAJas/pcbrWqYx2LI/s1600/2014-07-21+21.05.54.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-P3BISUdD6CM/U828h-Rq7AI/AAAAAAAAJas/pcbrWqYx2LI/s1600/2014-07-21+21.05.54.jpg" height="300" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
So, you have to navigate this grid from the bottom left to the top right, avoiding psychotic motorists that come at you from every direction. Seriously, why the hell wont anyone yield to the ambulance?<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Why the hell arent you driving a fire truck to a fire?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Some cars are faster than you, some are slower but they all have no sense of self-preservation. They crash into each other as much as they crash into you. It's an absolutely brutal obstacle course. And, I'm sorry to say, it's completely unfair. As in, the game itself does not play fair with you.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> I agree with you on this one. When you drive at the bottom, top or sides you will get hit by an off-screen car without knowing it's coming or having any chance to avoid it. You cant avoid the outer sides completely because you start and end there. So, especially on later levels, this first screen is complete luck, no skill. You might as well have the computer run a RNG to decide if you're going to make it through. It is only an illusion of a video game, it is not the real thing.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Even in the middle of the grid you'll get slammed into by random lightning-fast cars that are practically unavoidable. They drive right in the center of the road and you cannot shift from lane to lane. You can only make 90' turns. It's a very awkard control scheme, or at least it is with regard to what the game wants from you.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Let me give an example. You can make a split-second decision, a correct play decision, to round a corner into a clear lane to avoid an oncoming car, only to get hit in the rear by an unavoidably fast car that wasnt there when you made that decision just a second ago. That is getting beaten by luck, not lack of skill.<br />
<br />
It's do able, over all. I mean, you'll get through it, it's not insurmountably hard or anything like that. It's just rediculously unfair and you actually lose a life when you crash. It wouldnt be so bad if this was a bonus round like the second screen, where you dont lose a life and are just going for points. The fire you are attempting to reach has a 1000 point value that decreases with time. So why not have a crash slow you down instead of kill you and have the points be the incentive to get through the level?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> In the second level you are faced with a burning building. Survivors are leaping to their doom, unless you can catch them first. Before they jump, though, they make sure to accidentally (?) drop a potted plant on your head. Every window has a plant and when a jumper appears the plant falls down, fast. When the jumper goes, the plant is replaced. So, you have to avoid the plants but catch the jumpers which potentially are right behind the plants.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-21gFG08jNAE/U820UINu0-I/AAAAAAAAJac/8nmhzHbX7V8/s1600/2014-07-21+16.45.41.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-21gFG08jNAE/U820UINu0-I/AAAAAAAAJac/8nmhzHbX7V8/s1600/2014-07-21+16.45.41.jpg" height="300" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> If the jumper appears at the bottom window of the row you happen to be standing in, you're guaranteed to be hit.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Right. This is a bonus round, though, you can take three hits without dying. On the third hit a fire truck comes along and extends a ladder which you proceed to climb up and into the building.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> This is the easiest stage and the one where you'll rack up the most points. You cant catch people from the side, you have to be standing under them when they get to the right spot. It works the same with the pots, and since you arent punished for missing jumpers, staying in motion works well here. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> The third level has you navigating a top-down maze, picking up survivors and delivering them back to the window you came in from. Two or more fireballs, depending on the difficulty, randomly roam around. Touch the fire and lose a life. If you manage to get all the people back to the window you are treated to some very royal-sounding fanfare and cycling colors, then it's back to the ambulance driving stage for another go with increased difficulty. Again you're doing the job of a firefighter, and now you even look like a firefighter, but apparently you're still the ambulance driver, I think?<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgw2AmAZwhLitooyneVyyDqasvHA5spdNrfh_rFRj6eSklLdB0D8q3srndW3AHBlKW3PmcDWATSP7x13nbEw-5nnNsKq5Knq5rWUCcQi5uS9Pu6YK4MwW-SN_xzwLReEg48IH94kTG-oDs/s1600/2014-07-21+16.42.18.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgw2AmAZwhLitooyneVyyDqasvHA5spdNrfh_rFRj6eSklLdB0D8q3srndW3AHBlKW3PmcDWATSP7x13nbEw-5nnNsKq5Knq5rWUCcQi5uS9Pu6YK4MwW-SN_xzwLReEg48IH94kTG-oDs/s1600/2014-07-21+16.42.18.jpg" height="300" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">That's the "firefighter" at the bottom, by the blue window.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> This screen's a little tedious. There are a lot of people to rescue and you can only rescue one at a time. The fireballs provide an interesting challenge. They dont seem random to me, just a little lackadaisical on the easier levels. This part should be the game's coup de grace but it falls a little flat. Compared to the near-manic action of the previous levels this one's nearly inert. The scoring on this level feels off as well. You get few points for picking up a survivor and even less for dropping them off. It takes a lot of effort to play this level, even on the easier difficulties the fireballs can be difficult to avoid because it's such a long path to get to the last few survivors and back, and this effort is not reflected in the points you earn. <br />
<br />
There are asbestos coats laying around that give you protection from the flames but they last a very short time and never seem to have an effective use.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> A better idea would have been to pick up fire extinguishers and fight the fires, temporarily putting them out and then new ones would take their place.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Let's talk about the graphics and sound, shall we?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> The graphics are pretty good. On the first level I like the look of the Ghostbusters-style city grid. It's simple but at least it's colorful. I like the variation in the vehicle types. The second screen is the standout.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Yeah, by far. This kind of reminds me of Ghostbusters also, when you're laying your trap in front of a building.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> The building looks good. The glowing windows look great. The falling people look a little like falling bananas though. The animation isnt anything special, but the ambulance that drives past, taking away the jumpers you catch, looks cute. The little fire truck is cool too.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> And its' extending ladder is a nice touch.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> The third level reminds me of Wasteland. It's a little too basic and the animation here looks the worst. Two-frame animation for the fireballs looks good, for the player character not so much. <br />
<br />
Overall the graphics look pretty good and there's a good amount of color. One thing that's noticeable though is that nothing is smooth. All sprite movement is jerky and aside from the exploding people and pots (yes, the people explode when they hit the ground) the sprite animation is usually two-frame. <br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> The sound effects throughout the game are pretty meh. As is typical for games of this era the explosions and crashes just sound like dirty cymbal hits. The music, on the other hand, is fantastic and perfectly fits the manic mood of the game. It's the best on the first level where when you die every new life is greeted by a different song. The songs are very short, though, and when they're done, they're done. This is very noticeable on the long second and third levels which feel too quiet. The great soundtrack is a bit of a tease when you get down to it. What a shame!<br />
<br />
It seems like there's a laundry-list of complaints we have for this game, so before we wheel Rescue Squad out on a gurney, let's consider that the game was made by a kid in high school on a computer that had been out less than a year, and then got pubished by freaking Muse before he even graduates. In that light the game looks fantastic.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> Yes. It's a very cool historical footnote. Is it fun to play? Only in fits and starts. Too much in the first stage depends on luck and the third stage is a little too dull. It's not a surprise this one exists as a fond memory for some, but it's definitely not as good as you remember. It's worth a play to hear Silas' score on a real C64 though. No emulator or java sid player does it justice.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-84lo5MOwtLE/U820KoKdR7I/AAAAAAAAJaI/eW9fkZGYzAg/s1600/2014-07-21+16.32.11.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-84lo5MOwtLE/U820KoKdR7I/AAAAAAAAJaI/eW9fkZGYzAg/s1600/2014-07-21+16.32.11.jpg" height="300" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Congratulations, Rescuers!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-32561649899370032162014-07-10T20:00:00.000-07:002014-07-23T10:08:45.318-07:00C64 Review: Crossfire (C) 1983 Sierra On-Line<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-LPOZHOJWHDo/U78kW90UGYI/AAAAAAAAJYg/yjnZ70dPQbw/s1600/440px-Crossfirecover1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-LPOZHOJWHDo/U78kW90UGYI/AAAAAAAAJYg/yjnZ70dPQbw/s1600/440px-Crossfirecover1.jpg" height="400" width="293" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> The Grid. A digital frontier.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Dfl2T8yUcLA/U78ktEbGUvI/AAAAAAAAJYo/rvhs4iiZ1oM/s1600/2014-07-10+18.47.12.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Dfl2T8yUcLA/U78ktEbGUvI/AAAAAAAAJYo/rvhs4iiZ1oM/s1600/2014-07-10+18.47.12.jpg" height="263" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Wrong grid. This is Crossfire by Sierra On-Line. Sierra On-Line. Quite a bit outside of Sierra's wheelhouse, this one.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> What did they look like? <i>Chips</i>? <i>Motor</i>cycles??<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Sigh. Programmed by Jay Sullivan, this is an <i>early</i> computer (as opposed to console or arcade) game that was developed when Sierra was still known as On-Line Systems. I'll state this up-front, I understand this was designed in 1981. This game was already a couple of years old when it showed up on the C64. <br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Tell me more, o wise one.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Apparently Chuck Benton had something to do with this one as well. He's much, much more well-known as the creator of <a href="http://youtu.be/yldz3aPhiRU" target="_blank">Softporn Adventure</a>.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> Well that's educational.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> The game's grid style has roots in the arcade. One of the pioneers of the video game industry, Exidy, was in love with top-down driving games since birth. Most of these games feature two cars or spaceships and are usually directionless with no roads or paths. You push things around or run over people. Then someone got the bright idea to force the vehicles onto a grid, limiting your movement and opening up a new dimension of gameplay. This idea brought us <a href="http://youtu.be/Bv3K96QfBJg" target="_blank">Targ</a>, a fast-paced arcade title where you drive a car along a grid and shoot at enemies in the direction the car is facing. The enemies crawl all over the grid and come at you from all sides.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> And thus, Crossfire was born!<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> There's a slight twist though. The enemies do not fire. Exidy released <a href="http://youtu.be/frB-JnQKLAo" target="_blank">Spectar</a> right after Targ and it did feature enemies that fire, although not nearly to the degree and consequence that Crossfire does. Another thing Spectar does is get rid of the dull blocky-looking grid and replace it with one that's animated and can change "shape" during the course of the game. Also, you collect dots a-la Pac Man. The fact that Exidy followed up on and refined this idea so quickly tells me that they recognized issues with the concept, which I'll get to later. Either that or they felt like they had to jump on the Pac Man bandwagon really quick.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Crossfire brought this experience to home gamers (that were lucky enough to own computers) and did a good job, for 1981. The ability for enemies to shoot and how they do it makes it a frantic twitch reflex experience. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Crossfire was ported to several systems and I believe it started as a monochrome <a href="http://youtu.be/dKHsjns2Pcs" target="_blank">DOS/Apple II</a> game as the graphics and text on the earliest versions look a lot like other Sierra games of the time like <a href="http://youtu.be/_Pv4nrNu744" target="_blank">Mystery House</a>. <br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> I really like the concept of Crossfire. There's nowhere you're safe, there are no breaks. You are surrounded right from the start, with enemies on the left, right and top of the screen. They are hiding directly behind the blocks on the grid where you cannot shoot them. Soon they peek out and begin moving and firing. Attempting to evade fire from one enemy will put you in the line of fire of another. Constant motion is the order of the day. You almost have to train yourself not to focus on your avatar, to see the entire screen at once. Enemies will sometimes pause as they are moving from their starting positions allowing you a free shot, but only if you're paying attention and not occupied with too many other enemies. This is a difficult game right from the very beginning. You can and will get caught in the crossfire.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> ...<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> ....yes?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Go on.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> For an extra dimension you have limited ammunition that you must replenish by running over an item. There are bonus items to collect for points but this one is critical for your survival. I like that little extra thing to worry about.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> ...<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Near the end of the level the enemies swarm and it's a fierce battle to the finish before you do it all over again the next round. OK go ahead Chuck before you pop.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> It's difficult right from the start because they didnt understand the concept of a gradual difficulty ramp. Some arcade games I can understand why they smack you across the face right from the start. That trial by fire, quarter eating quality can actually work in a game's favor. An arcade game, in an actual arcade. Home games should ramp up in difficulty. It's just aggravating. It's not fun.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> It has an easy mode.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> It's just a slow mode that makes the game a total bore. If there is a progression in difficulty I cant tell. Every level seems to be the same. And the ammunition mechanic, you never know how much you have. There's no ammo counter! What were they thinking?<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> I'll give you that one, that's something I'd definitely like to have.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> It doesnt matter anyway, have you ever run out of ammo?<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> Uh...<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Not likely. You fire so slowly you'll never run out. Or you'll game over first. There seem to be two variations of this game. One version features small bullets that look like dots and can be fired repeatedly, like the Atari 8-bit and VIC20 versions. The other version, like the C64 version, has wider, rectangular shots that have to expire before they are fired again. I hate that. <br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> It's just part of the strategy you have to bring to the game. Maybe they decided to re-balance the game on the C64 version to make it have less worrying about ammo and more about forcing you to think about where and when you are firing.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> Worrying about your ammo count would accomplish the same thing, wouldnt it?. But you are correct, I think, when you say it's a balancing decision. It's a valid design choice, I just dont like it. It makes the game less fun for me. They're just trying to make the game more difficult. For instance, you cannot fire while sitting still, you have to begin moving in a direction to fire in that direction and if you stop moving you cant fire at all. You should be able to hold the fire button and move the stick to fire in different directions while sitting still. You cant do this because, I think, pure difficulty is what the designers were going for.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BOzT4AbA4zg/U78jrwmo6oI/AAAAAAAAJYY/sGOXwmubnpw/s1600/Capture.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BOzT4AbA4zg/U78jrwmo6oI/AAAAAAAAJYY/sGOXwmubnpw/s1600/Capture.JPG" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
Just making a game difficult doesnt get a pat on the back from me, Al. <a href="http://youtu.be/3TRSOk6XZvw" target="_blank">Double Dragon for the 2600</a> is hard too, let's give that a medal.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Whoah ho there. OK, Crossfire is hard but it is balanced, tuned and perfectly playable. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> I'm not going to whine about the game being unfair. But is it really enjoyable? It's like the video game equivalent of doing pull ups.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> What does that even mean?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> Think about it.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> How about instead we talk about the graphics and sound. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Hello PETSCII title screen! How else would be know this was 1983?<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfeZhdddO3I41qvUebD8eYONQkBAmdyWjnmh7Fp2kE8pk_oTY2cotgveck6Ap7X4T7U5C0mMovMt7YdXfAwetPiOVKC-094VkI3NaKViv4YplqTwpcskX4YBEiRTq2LrCcQvu6-QP-5QQ/s1600/2014-07-10+18.45.54.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfeZhdddO3I41qvUebD8eYONQkBAmdyWjnmh7Fp2kE8pk_oTY2cotgveck6Ap7X4T7U5C0mMovMt7YdXfAwetPiOVKC-094VkI3NaKViv4YplqTwpcskX4YBEiRTq2LrCcQvu6-QP-5QQ/s1600/2014-07-10+18.45.54.jpg" height="263" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
The graphics arent completely horrible. The grid itself looks cool but having everything else the same color takes something away from it. Even the <a href="http://youtu.be/Zd-H6uJxeGw" target="_blank">VIC20</a> version is more colorful. It has a style that kind of works for it but it gets old looking at almost nothing but BLUE and RED after a while. Even Atari 2600 games would change colors of the enemies and the level to indicate progression. Here every level looks and plays exactly the same.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjbg2wnMeVEHC-6OdqoQdjOxnncU5_3UyT1VYcF0Fk9EtE9Jd4nzkX2iyZTv7_6vDhcsUG6xBforTRda5LRkstUHFAIfB9GJ80QriYblRSPVcvTqAoLXrYRC7-jB3DGi8AouxlXLfabppg/s1600/2014-07-10+18.46.45.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjbg2wnMeVEHC-6OdqoQdjOxnncU5_3UyT1VYcF0Fk9EtE9Jd4nzkX2iyZTv7_6vDhcsUG6xBforTRda5LRkstUHFAIfB9GJ80QriYblRSPVcvTqAoLXrYRC7-jB3DGi8AouxlXLfabppg/s1600/2014-07-10+18.46.45.jpg" height="263" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
And as for the box layout of the grid itself; like I mentioned earlier, Exidy realized with Targ that this wasnt an interesting "look" for a game and changed things up considerably in the sequel, with eye-catching incidental animations and environmental changes that change how you move across across the grid. Some of this extra vavoom would be extremely welcome here. I get minimalist design but, I dont know... There's flat and there's Flat with a capital F. Crossfire is Flat. <br />
<br />
I do like the placement and layout of the current and high scores. I realize they are the way they are because of necessity, but they look good. Nice font.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhoqBqeLRnnuL7JymeUxLPQ64dlxoaXyU-OQUV-_qGH1NeJmpjgbs4WMIPBHkqF05XeE14RAFbryGZTYkeCxCwqP5kOyHEBNy5An6U20d8NsGFl9F8r0pRayqEFxqAPTkDtonz2xdDHfLw/s1600/2014-07-10+18.44.20.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhoqBqeLRnnuL7JymeUxLPQ64dlxoaXyU-OQUV-_qGH1NeJmpjgbs4WMIPBHkqF05XeE14RAFbryGZTYkeCxCwqP5kOyHEBNy5An6U20d8NsGFl9F8r0pRayqEFxqAPTkDtonz2xdDHfLw/s1600/2014-07-10+18.44.20.jpg" height="400" width="262" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
The enemies are lifeless and so is the player character. They really could use some animation or at the very least some color cycling. Some flashing, some blinking, anything. The different types of enemies dont seem to behave in significantly different ways. It's good that they dont all look the same but there's no personality. And they can shoot multiple times, how unfair is that!<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> Hey, you said you werent going to whine. The graphics are the way they are because this was designed in 1981. They did kind of blow the opportunity to spruce it up a little but then it wouldnt really be the same game. I think the <a href="http://youtu.be/wK-b5PLhrEI" target="_blank">Peter Gunn</a>-esque soundtrack is the big standout in the sound design.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b>Oh come on they could've animated the enemies. As for the music, the programmers were definitely in love with it. It starts on the title screen and keeps right on keepin on, repeating forever.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> True, but it doesnt get old as quickly as you'd think. And it uses all three of the SID's voices!<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> It is pretty snappy.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> I hate to add to the criticisms here but I do have to comment on the sound effects. They are the definition of "meh".<br />
<br />
I do like how your "ship", or whatever it is, explodes, visually. Nice big explosion animation.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-pueOzLV0WJo/U78nC2zIlMI/AAAAAAAAJZI/WzGM_TQz4g8/s1600/2014-07-10+18.46.18.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-pueOzLV0WJo/U78nC2zIlMI/AAAAAAAAJZI/WzGM_TQz4g8/s1600/2014-07-10+18.46.18.jpg" height="263" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Now let's wrap this turkey up.<br />
<br />
Crossfire was made by talented programmers, no doubt, but it has the wrong sensibility, perhaps due to text adventure authors making an arcade game. Something that stands out to me is that you cant start the game by pressing the fire button, even though you game-over every few minutes. It's the kind of afterthought that someone who isnt used to playing challenging arcade games would miss if they were making a game like this.<br />
<br />
This is an odd title in general coming from Sierra. I dont think they were that serious about this kind of game, these simple arcade experiences. I remember Jawbreaker being pretty good though. We'll have to revisit that.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> It's obvious we're split down the middle on this one. I do see some of what you're pointing out in the game but I genuinely enjoy it.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Well our audience can find out for themselves. All you need to do is play it for a couple of minutes and you'll know whether you like it or not. If you must play it, for God's sake dont play it on an emulator. The music sounds terrible.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> We can agree on that. Hell, dont play anything on a C64 emulator unless you have absolutely no other choice. (For the record: We dont, and never will, review a game played on an emulator.)<br />
<br />
As for Sierra, little projects like this financed their PC Jr. efforts and gave birth to King's Quest. This new graphic adventure engine was a powerhouse and they were unwilling to sacrifice their graphical ambitions by porting down to the C64 and Atari. Nobody was buying those beefy 128k games at first because nobody could afford the hardware. They had to make it up somewhere. In fact, I believe several C64 titles contributed to the graphic adventure assembly line Sierra would become a few years down the road. And then... And then they abandoned us... Why... they <i>used</i> us. To hell with Sierra!<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> That's the spirit!<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> So the verdict is Me: yay, Chuck: nay which means no Krusty stamp for Crossfire.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> I just realized we made it through the whole review without referring to that awful marble shooting board game. Kudos to us! <a href="http://youtu.be/W9hW5gVaNJo">http://youtu.be/W9hW5gVaNJo</a><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-32553165467004704922014-07-01T20:25:00.000-07:002014-07-07T08:41:47.852-07:00C64 Review: Pooyan (C) 1983 DataSoft<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-iRHXPUNugAQ/U7Nj9sZ6x7I/AAAAAAAAJXw/Rq4KrLIy8BU/s1600/pub_pooyan.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-iRHXPUNugAQ/U7Nj9sZ6x7I/AAAAAAAAJXw/Rq4KrLIy8BU/s1600/pub_pooyan.jpg" height="320" width="233" /></a></div>
(thanks, Atarimania)<br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>Chuck:</b> Today we have Pooyan, published by DataSoft and programmed by Scott Spanburg.<br />
<br />
Pooyan is part of DataSoft's early foray into arcade ports which they would quickly abandon in favor of movie licenses. DataSoft is responsible for a few games that are considered classics and Scott Spanburg is frankly a giant in the world of the C64, who moved on to Microprose studios and is responsible for such greats as <b>Airborne Ranger</b>.<br />
<br />
Scott Spanburg did as good a job as he could with the Atari 800 version, I'm sure. DataSoft gave us an identical port of that. It wasnt designed with the 64's strengths in mind and it suffers for it.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Let's be fair. This is another one from 1983 and most every game didnt have the 64's strengths in mind. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> It's a decent home version of Pooyan but not a good C64 version of Pooyan.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b>Not every classic arcade game could be re-done in 1988 to fit modern programming sensibilities, so this is what we have.<br />
<br />
And let me remind you that this was the first game we ever played on the C64. Our grade-school friend Bobby's family was one of the, if not <i>the</i>, first people to have a C64 in the entire Ohio valley. At first they didnt have any games for it.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b>Yep, and we spent all our time on it typing words in different colors and pretending we were Matthew Broderick (this was right after Wargames came out). And then they picked up their first game, Pooyan. <br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Admit it, you were impressed.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> I was, for sure. Up to that point the pinnacle of home gaming was the ColecoVision, which we also got to play a lot of thanks to Bobby, and I could immediately tell this was superior. Of course, we would have been equally impressed by the Atari 800 version if we'd seen that.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Oh I knew you were going to say that.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> I'm not getting over the fact that this is a port.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Obviously! Anyway, Pooyan for the C64 also introduced us to DataSoft. And boy this game really has that DataSoft look to it. Chunky DataSoft fonts, chunky sprites. I really like the look of this one, but it's not going to be universally loved.<br />
<br />
It's just a fact that the C64 wasnt quite off the ground at this point in its' life cycle. Resources were conserved. I for one am glad we simply have a good version of Pooyan to play on the 64.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> And I would be even happier if we had a version of Pooyan that wasnt slow and looked like an Atari 800 game. But, I will concede, this is 1983 and this was sufficient for a home release.<br />
<br />
OK, on to the autopsy.<br />
<br />
The arcade version of Pooyan is a clever Konami title from 1982 with a unique gameplay style. In the most basic sense it is a vertical shooter based on the Three Little Pigs. It features great, but not atypical, graphics for 1982 with eye-catching pastel colors that I dont remember seeing much of in other games at the time.<br />
<br />
You play as a mother pig defending her piglets from a LOT of marauding wolves. As is typical of games of this time you are vastly outnumbered and it is only a matter of time until you are overrun and you and your family are consumed. Very bleak stuff.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> It's best not to get emotionally attached to the pigs.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> But while you live you can give it to the wolves with your bow and arrow. What you have set up is a pulley system on top of a tree(?) or hill (?) with which your piglets will raise and lower you in an open cage that permits you to move up and down the length of the screen, delivering your arrows to the wolves from right to left. Think of Hooper's shark cage in Jaws and you get the idea. And like Hooper's shark cage, you are a sitting duck in this thing. You can be bitten, hit with acorns and crushed by a falling boulder.<br />
<br />
The wolves descend from the top of a tree carried by helium filled balloons which you can pop with your arrows, sending the wolves hurtling down to what is surely a painfully slow death or permanent disability. You cannot shoot the wolves with the arrows as they have shields which they use to protect themselves and that they sometimes raise up to defend their balloon. You also have another weapon which is a slab of meat (hopefully not pork) that sometimes appears at the top of your rope. You fire this in an arc which can hit multiple wolves at once although what is supposed to be happening is that the wolves are so desperate to get to the meat they let go of their balloons and fall.<br />
<br />
If the wolves make it to the bottom they will climb your hill using conveniently (for them) placed ladders that give them a vantage point at which to snap at you. This restricts your up and down movement and when enough wolves have taken up residence on these ladders you will most likely find it too difficult to shoot the wolves while you avoid being bitten.<br />
<br />
To add to the difficulty the wolves will lob acorns at you which will send you falling out of your cage. You can shoot them or cause them to bounce harmlessly off of the cage itself but it's best to avoid them altogether until you've mastered the game more.<br />
<br />
Pooyan mixes it up a little bit on its' second stage where, instead of the wolves walking up to you and climbing your hill, use their balloons to float upward to the top of their tree where they will accumulate if not shot down. They will line themselves up and eventually will be strong enough to push a boulder over the side and onto your cage. This is accompanied by a neat little "drum roll" to build tension when there are almost enough wolves to push the boulder over the side.<br />
<br />
There are also bonus stages where your life is not at risk and you can simply accumulate points, although it is made difficult by, in one stage, taking away your bow and arrow and forcing you to only use meat, which while it can hit multiple wolves at once is less than ideal as a main weapon.<br />
<br />
Pooyan has other surprises in store, such as balloons that pop only to reveal another balloon within, glass balloons which are more difficult to pop and several incidental animations that add a cartoon quality to the game. It does a good job of building and sustaining tension and surrounding you with danger while still being playable. It is a fast and frantic shooter with a unique perspective that is memorable to all who have played and enjoyed it and has not been replicated since.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> On to the C64 version. What makes a good arcade port? As we know from many years playing Atari 2600 games, it's not as important to have arcade-perfect graphics as it is to capture the feel of the game. DataSoft's port of Pooyan definitely looks, feels and sounds as if you are playing Pooyan. It includes everything mentioned above with very little missing that is worth note. Well there's one thing I miss, your piglets dont seem to be able to be stolen, giving you bonus points for remaining piglets at the end of a round. <br />
<br />
DataSoft included several nice touches that add to the charm of the game. The piglets that raise and lower your cage are animated. The wolves have nice animations, wagging their tails as they float and doing a nice tumble in the air when they fall with a nice death splat.<br />
<br />
The graphics are good for home computers at the time. They are certainly not as detailed as the arcade game, which has wolves with actual eyes that bug out when they realize they're going to fall to their doom. The mama pig looks OK but is very static and a little lifeless.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> The baby pigs look like goat skulls. This is one of those thankfully rare cases where the Apple II version looks better. But of course no one could be bothered to draw original graphics for the C64 version. The Wolves look pretty good to me, though. The game is very RED and GREEN and WHITE. The pastels of the arcade version are gone for good. The C64 has other colors, you know.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-j81TTpK__tc/U7N42DVuchI/AAAAAAAAJYA/htog8kuLPME/s1600/2014-07-01+21.36.41.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-j81TTpK__tc/U7N42DVuchI/AAAAAAAAJYA/htog8kuLPME/s1600/2014-07-01+21.36.41.jpg" height="240" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b>The sounds are pretty good. I like the thunk of the arrows, the pop of the balloons, the loopy music. The sound the wolves make when they snap at you from the ladders. I even like the weird trampoline sound when the wolves hit the ground. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> I really dont have a problem with the presentation. Its' biggest problem is that it's an exact copy of a game created on an inferior platform. It's slow compared to the arcade version and has you firing arrows at a slower pace so that there are never too many objects on the screen, both due to the limitations of the system that birthed it. Because the game cant allow too many objects on the screen it forced the programmer to make the wolves float in predictable patterns that repeat themselves over and over. There are few to no surprises. After playing a few levels I find myself on autopilot and pretty much keep playing until I dont feel like continuing. Although the difficulty is moderate, there doesnt seem to be any progression in difficulty from stage to stage. <br />
<br />
This is the polar opposite of the arcade version, which has far more oomph. The quicker pace and randomization really do matter. The C64 version version makes all your actions feel very deliberate. So, even though it really isnt missing any physical elements from the arcade game that detract from the experience, the experience itself is slow, stiff and too much like a grind.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Maybe I like it more than you because I'm not as good at it as you are. I have no problem giving this game my recommendation but this isnt Siskel & Ebert, folks, we both have to turn our keys in order to launch the nukes. This doesnt get a recommendation unless we both agree. Is Pooyan a prize pig or does it roll around in its' own filth?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> It looks passable until you play it for a while and realize that it doesnt have that spark. This pig doesnt pass the sniff test.blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-48547711662080330562014-06-21T09:43:00.001-07:002014-07-02T08:10:07.669-07:00C64 Review - Trashman (C) 1983 Creative Software<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwh0X4hqDB2zzPo2W5zRCl86i0lKdwmgT6nHwsDbxhJtkFJPJccsZc7F3Zav4Nwee_uSAsfl8GMqBCY62tXL45N1m3XmPHDBv8lqFkuGar0yjq2UdX9DDf1O4dUZEhWSDUvapWX4-cKq0/s1600/trashmancover.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwh0X4hqDB2zzPo2W5zRCl86i0lKdwmgT6nHwsDbxhJtkFJPJccsZc7F3Zav4Nwee_uSAsfl8GMqBCY62tXL45N1m3XmPHDBv8lqFkuGar0yjq2UdX9DDf1O4dUZEhWSDUvapWX4-cKq0/s1600/trashmancover.jpg" height="320" width="235" /></a></div>
<b><br /></b>
<b><br /></b>
<b>Chuck: </b> Today we have a game from Creative Software, which in 1983 was in Silicon Valley. Definitely an exciting time to be an unknown technology company. They published a few good early games like Crisis Mountain, Save New York and Warp. The game was programmed by <a href="http://archive.org/stream/creativecomputing-1983-01/Creative_Computing_v09_n01_1983_January#page/n331/mode/2up">Marc-Thomas Clifton</a>, who doesnt seem to have had a long and storied programming career with the C-64.<br />
<br />
Trashman is a Pac Man clone with a trash collection theme, in case you havent figured that out. This review was inspired by Twitter's own @ausretrogamer. By an amazing coincidence, we had been playing this game for about 20 minutes when he posted the game's beautiful box art.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> That sealed the deal.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> And good thing, because this is surprisingly good.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> It has a surprising amount of charm. And low expectations definitely helped.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> As mentioned previously, if you are going to rip off a super-classic arcade game you'll be judged by that standard. Here's what I like to see in a clone:<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">1. Make it as fun as the game you're ripping off.</span><br />
<span style="color: red;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: red;">2. Put your own spin on it (change the theme, etc).</span><br />
<span style="color: red;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: red;">3. Have new ideas that branch off of the concept.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">#1</span> is obviously the most critical. <span style="color: red;">#2</span> and <span style="color: red;">#3</span> are nice but let's face it, in 1983 we would take what we could get. <br />
<br />
Pac Man clones are a dime a dozen, but <i>good </i>Pac Man clones are rare. Remember, actual ports of the real Pac Man game are often horrifically bad!<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> It's got some of those great early-C64 features like public domain music and all text in the default C-64 font.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Those are more things that I can live with rather than "features", but they do have lot of charm. <br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> The whole game is charming, for some reason.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Referring to <span style="color: red;">#2</span>, Trashman does a decent job of making its' own theme. Your avatar is a Garbage Truck that is continuously making what I believe to be a compacting-trash animation as you drive around. It's very "cute".<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5tular9pQJ1x9rNmVkMvbK6Up3GWJjYQoFvLk50NCymsSoBPN_p84BLenitBc0nZ4hIq0Y0LsWIItT0S41U0akBnStI_Nbw10GFCZTSYekDNGo8E_C-_1enJxsJZzBrng4SdNG7TUvUk/s1600/2014-06-20+22.51.16.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5tular9pQJ1x9rNmVkMvbK6Up3GWJjYQoFvLk50NCymsSoBPN_p84BLenitBc0nZ4hIq0Y0LsWIItT0S41U0akBnStI_Nbw10GFCZTSYekDNGo8E_C-_1enJxsJZzBrng4SdNG7TUvUk/s1600/2014-06-20+22.51.16.jpg" height="240" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
The enemies are Flies that emerge from the City Dump at the center of the screen. They are pretty well animated, with flapping wings and flashing eyes, although they bear no resemblance to actual flies at all.<br />
<br />
The dots are, of course, Trash. The power pellets are Trash Cans and, I'm assuming, there's so much trash everywhere that the flies are being attracted to it, and also are big enough to crush your trash compactor.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> And somehow picking up a trash can gives you the ability to trash-compact the flies?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> I'm assuming you run over them. It's very, very gross. When you kill the Flies they, I swear to God, turn into maggots and go running back to the dump.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> It's best not to think about the implications of this nightmarish universe Marc-Thomas has created.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Dc5BcFHZ0w0/U6W1frLa-tI/AAAAAAAAJTk/jsVWhEzr4hs/s1600/Trashman_1983_Creative_0000.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Dc5BcFHZ0w0/U6W1frLa-tI/AAAAAAAAJTk/jsVWhEzr4hs/s1600/Trashman_1983_Creative_0000.jpg" height="320" width="237" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
A game like this is going to live and die by the controls, the fluidity in the motion of the sprites, the "dance" that the monsters do with the player and the psychological reward gained by sweeping a level clean of dots.<br />
<br />
Trashman pretty much gets it all right. The Truck moves properly for the most part but you dont get a little slow-down when you're "eating pellets", so compacting the trash has no feedback beyond the squishy sound of the trash compactor (which does grow on you). The Truck and the Flies are always moving at the same speed as eachother, except when you pick up a Trash Can, then the enemies slow down. This makes the game feel a little more like Slot Racers than Pac Man, which isnt necessarily bad, it's just not what you might be expecting.<br />
<br />
Since the Flies all move at the same speed, which is the same speed as the player, it's good that they have an intelligence that makes up for it. The red and purple flies will target and attempt to surround you. The yellow one will take its' time then eventually home in on you and the blue one is the Clyde of the bunch, hanging out in the center the longest and later not giving continuous chase. There has been real thought put into the Fly behavior and it shows.<br />
<br />
I'm not completely sold on the level progression, though. The Truck gets faster as the levels progress. But, as the Truck gets faster the Flies all stay the same speed as the Truck, so if you're an impatient player like me and like the game nice and fast you'll actually find the game getting easier as you progress.<br />
<br />
But not that easy. The game has solid difficulty thanks to the Fly routines. The overall effect is a nice, fun Pac Man clone that you can replay without getting bored. I would say that Trashman pretty much nails <span style="color: red;">#1</span>.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> The maze design is good. It has the right amount of alleys, turns and death traps. The bonus "fruit" is a little disappointing, though. It's Trashman, so you'd think the bonus items would be cans, bottles, you know, garbage. Instead it's... ?<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-YINnA_UxjhE/U6UPNN910LI/AAAAAAAAJS8/p9EC3PKdbzg/s1600/2014-06-20+22.51.34.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-YINnA_UxjhE/U6UPNN910LI/AAAAAAAAJS8/p9EC3PKdbzg/s1600/2014-06-20+22.51.34.jpg" height="240" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Placeholder graphics they didnt have time to replace?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> There are six power pellets (Trashcans) instead of four, and the amount feels right for this game. It never feels like there's too many or not enough.<br />
<br />
The scoring is done properly, i.e. after you've played the game multiple times and compared your scores they make sense based on how you played. I know this sounds obvious but trust me, we will be reviewing games that will screw this up royally. This is a well-tuned game.<br />
<br />
And I understand why the Trash you pick up is represented as dots but.. I dont know, shouldnt they at least be brown or something? <br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> The sound design... OK, it's not that good, but it is charming. There's no background layer of sound, like Pac Man, so sometimes the game seems a little too quiet. There's nothing special, but there's nothing annoying either.<br />
<br />
It has a decent title tune that I dont recognize. It plays "<a href="http://youtu.be/S92bWBB0ymo">Buffalo Gals</a>" when you clear a level, as the Truck makes it's way to the Dump, and a bar of "<a href="http://youtu.be/pMAtL7n_-rc">Maple Leaf Rag</a>" when you earn an extra Truck. If only I had a dime for every C64 game that used Maple Leaf Rag.<br />
<br />
This era of games is virtually defined by having a single author, one that didnt always, or hardly ever, have musical chops. Public Domain music doesnt need to be licensed, it's instantly recognizable and the sheet music is available everywhere. It was very easy to use tunes like this to add a little spice to your game, and it was done to death. It makes games from this era feel even older than they really are, like they're artifacts from the late 1800's.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> So, Trashman gets <span style="color: red;">#1</span> and <span style="color: red;">#2</span> but falls short on <span style="color: red;">#3</span>, as it brings virtually nothing new to the table. Putting my 1983 glasses on and looking around at what else is available, though...<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Trashman is better than the Atari version of Pac Man. And I dont mean the 2600 version, I mean Atarisoft's C-64 port, which is worse than the Atari 5200 version. At least Trashman has multi-colored sprites.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Let's not review Atarisoft's Pac Man quite yet. But, yes, Trashman holds its' own, especially here in 1983. So, does Trashman get taken to the dump along with the muffin stumps?<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> Nope, Trashman gets a:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiE1a6t0_wJf1Johdcd3pDGnH34wT0D24zq5vh4r4HFsUmOaXBd6pb6bdgul52ul2rKJ2wXbUUfykbGW5NkIgUCRCw-0plLwQY-1B9arbeys2iRwioWw9uHlCJyiDvAZj-CvZF0oMmruwU/s1600/Krusty__s_Seal_of_Approval_by_KrnBgn.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiE1a6t0_wJf1Johdcd3pDGnH34wT0D24zq5vh4r4HFsUmOaXBd6pb6bdgul52ul2rKJ2wXbUUfykbGW5NkIgUCRCw-0plLwQY-1B9arbeys2iRwioWw9uHlCJyiDvAZj-CvZF0oMmruwU/s1600/Krusty__s_Seal_of_Approval_by_KrnBgn.png" height="320" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-8692823992226041902014-06-18T21:59:00.002-07:002014-07-02T08:16:50.271-07:00C64 Review - Over the Rainbow (C) 1983 Renegade Software<b>Chuck:</b> Today we have "Over the Rainbow" from Renegade Software, programmed by James O'Keane. From the wonderful year of 1983.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Eight years old, we were. Do you remember this one?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Very vaguely. And so does everyone else, apparently. Couldnt find much on the web, except for one thing we'll get to in a second. It's in the CSDB, and although it's not the crack that we have it's definitely the same game. http://csdb.dk/release/?id=89292. Should we be archiving this?? Ours says "BROKEN BY THE BANDIT"<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5jRq3zOpZILxe8O_MfpGtZ2R0cXUbP3Pb8LgxrASFp5o39QljawrWEaUVqVGaPK-p-BtO6Mvht6Un73Dvt61pTUdrr6I3LktMK_9RdbEDyxQ98kKHY8VpOUcrZKQ0QE9jmYBa_b-Ev14/s1600/2014-06-19+00.13.00.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5jRq3zOpZILxe8O_MfpGtZ2R0cXUbP3Pb8LgxrASFp5o39QljawrWEaUVqVGaPK-p-BtO6Mvht6Un73Dvt61pTUdrr6I3LktMK_9RdbEDyxQ98kKHY8VpOUcrZKQ0QE9jmYBa_b-Ev14/s1600/2014-06-19+00.13.00.jpg" height="240" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Focus, Chuck.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> This is another Q-Bert clone. Wait readers, dont run away! This is a good one. In fact this was on the flipside of the same disk we have Q-Bopper on. And it truly is the flip side of Q-Bopper. It rights nearly every wrong.<br />
<br />
(You'll have to excuse us if we get a little flowery when discussing this one. After Q-Bopper it was such a breath of fresh air...)<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> To put one issue right to bed: The game uses the proper Q-Bert controls (see the Q-Bopper review). So high-five for that.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Go Team Venture!<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> The controls work, the game is colorful and has some cool characters and ideas that branch off of Q-Bert, but dont ape it. There's good variation and progression in the levels. After a game over you immediately want to try it again. It's actually addictive. It's like playing a real video game!<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Yes, thank you Renegade Software!<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Thank you James O'Keane!<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Did you know, old James is still making video games?<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> You're kidding.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Nope, I found him working for Raven software as late as 2002. His bio even mentions Over the Rainbow! And he seems to be most famous for... <i>Soldier of Fortune 2</i>?? <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lDym3meLIVQ/U6JezcXqDUI/AAAAAAAAJR4/Yu8H5AiUWdc/s1600/256px-SOF2gamecover.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lDym3meLIVQ/U6JezcXqDUI/AAAAAAAAJR4/Yu8H5AiUWdc/s1600/256px-SOF2gamecover.jpg" height="320" width="224" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<b>John: Nooooooo! </b> A first person shooter? From Over the Rainbow to Rainbow Six? Oh, how the mighty have fallen.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Come back from the dark side, Jim. We're waiting for you with Atari 2600 joysticks in hand.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> We want a sequel to Over the Rainbow. We want music and sound effects this time!<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> OK dont jump too far ahead.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Well before I get into the not-so-good, let's stick to the good. I like what he did with the Q-Bert color-changing concept. Over the Rainbow is named so because it uses the C-64's color palette to great effect.<br />
<br />
Just like Q-Bert you jump from square to square, changing its' color. However, the object is not to change all the squares to a single color. The top square, or group of squares in later levels, turn red. As you jump down the level you change the descending squares to orange, yellow, green, blue, darker blue and violet. And there's your Rainbow.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-zeOZFaIedVw/U6JZKcU6zhI/AAAAAAAAJRo/xd3j5G11zv8/s1600/2014-06-18+22.35.56.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-zeOZFaIedVw/U6JZKcU6zhI/AAAAAAAAJRo/xd3j5G11zv8/s1600/2014-06-18+22.35.56.jpg" height="240" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Your enemies are colored balls (gumdrops) that rain down from the top and fall off the bottom, edging toward you if you are close. It has the requisite color-reversal enemy (The Rabbit) and enemy you stomp for points (Raindrop). Eventually a green ball appears, and it contains a Coily-like Witch character that will chase you. You have to get to an escape disc (grey cloud) to escape. When you do, the cloud moves above the Witch. It rains on her and melts her. Fantastic!<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> Bravo, Jim! <br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> Like I said, it's like a real video game. I think, obviously, he was going for a Wizard of Oz theme, but there's the clouds, the Raindrop, Rabbit, Frog and Bat characters, and whatever you're supposed to be playing as as well. So there's weather, nature and clown(?) elements mixed in also. He didnt really nail a theme too well here but it sort-of fits together anyway.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEihjGHMe97ryBL8rQZMZN_xQ9ggGkqGYsMQu-jBSm2PKRjpKbyNTe2INE8WU1d7Ko6Bbm1vnT1sj_CI6kZAkf7DO-LGOG_7bDnAJK1Pr-deCaU1afxnIsqotiTYmlgYPXvqF7AzNyIUCVE/s1600/2014-06-18+23.03.45.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEihjGHMe97ryBL8rQZMZN_xQ9ggGkqGYsMQu-jBSm2PKRjpKbyNTe2INE8WU1d7Ko6Bbm1vnT1sj_CI6kZAkf7DO-LGOG_7bDnAJK1Pr-deCaU1afxnIsqotiTYmlgYPXvqF7AzNyIUCVE/s1600/2014-06-18+23.03.45.jpg" height="240" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> The level design is very good. The layouts are symmetrical, for one thing. They're eye-catching and actually make sense from a gameplay standpoint. There are usually holes in the board that you have to jump around but the enemies can be led to fall in (except the Witch, she's flying). Some levels are small, not giving you a lot of room to avoid danger and will have your pulse racing as you rush to finish coloring in all the squares before you're killed. Just like a real video game! <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgzKZpt4zh9jTN94dzoOir010G4WghFBssMUoEoS9EdEBoW4tdFpB40a8exIJSEDVQcUI0MvrP19KzqXudjwCHc7f_lxLVF-WLoeWxfBEndFKH3pnAhHabLnHkgjhwfApjmu7_wbHA1z4g/s1600/2014-06-18+22.35.02.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgzKZpt4zh9jTN94dzoOir010G4WghFBssMUoEoS9EdEBoW4tdFpB40a8exIJSEDVQcUI0MvrP19KzqXudjwCHc7f_lxLVF-WLoeWxfBEndFKH3pnAhHabLnHkgjhwfApjmu7_wbHA1z4g/s1600/2014-06-18+22.35.02.jpg" height="240" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi8pOBPJBDEFn1wioG3FJ-6bALMlkApRi6QC74E9MLpkXmQ9il8d3Qm8cG7T-1l5Lfv98bc0rapm0gvkieRvPpRaZT1oC0O09T8i2q32Oqfntz_XHVNv6kkDbYCtkl7_X-vl2SKPKZo9dc/s1600/2014-06-18+22.32.26.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi8pOBPJBDEFn1wioG3FJ-6bALMlkApRi6QC74E9MLpkXmQ9il8d3Qm8cG7T-1l5Lfv98bc0rapm0gvkieRvPpRaZT1oC0O09T8i2q32Oqfntz_XHVNv6kkDbYCtkl7_X-vl2SKPKZo9dc/s1600/2014-06-18+22.32.26.jpg" height="240" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
The Frog enemy is well thought out. He sometimes jumps and lands so hard that he breaks through a block, leaving a hole in an unexpected place on the board, accompanied by a good screen-shaking effect. It's touches like this that make this game special. There are ideas here that would have worked really well in an actual sequel or spinoff to Q-Bert, even.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> I agree. I like how eventually you have to touch the squares multiple times, like Q-Bert, except here you're a little more confused because there are so many colors on the screen. By the fourth level or so you will find that you've turned the top two rows of squares red, and you'll have to hit the second row again to turn them orange. You have to remember you're working on a rainbow here, and think about which row isnt the right color yet. I like that little extra dimension, a little extra something for your brain to chew on. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> I dont know about that. I think it gets a little <i>too</i> confusing. I'll give it a pass, though, because it sure as hell is better than Q-Bopper.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Yeah I mean the game isnt perfect or anything, it shows its' age a bit. It's a little stiff. Alex, the Player Character, is a little drab. I think he's supposed to be a harlequin but he's a little grey and uninteresting and he doesnt have precisely the right weight to him. It gets a little repetitive after a while (that's normal for these types of games, they were meant for short bursts of play anyway) and the levels repeat themselves quickly. But my main beef is with the sound design. There's no music and the SFX are practically non-existent. Really, this is a <i>quiet</i> game, with very little fanfare or audio cues. When Alex dies it's a little... less than dramatic. There's not even any noise when you jump! I'll give it a pass though, because it sure as hell is better than Q-Bopper.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Seriously though, the good very much outweighs the bad. So congratulations Jim, you have conquered Q-Bopper and proven your worth as a C-64 Gamesmaker Extraordinaire!<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> OK let's not get carried away here, I mean it's not like he came up with a whole new concept or-<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> You shut your filthy mouth! The sweet gameplay and great ideas of Over the Rainbow have cleansed our souls of Q-Bopper forever, and we have Mr. O'Keane to thank. He should get the first seal of approval.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> You're right. We love you, Jim. Please come back to gaming platforms that matter, thank you. Over the Rainbow gets our first:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ZcXRUJqy4zg/U6JohE-V4oI/AAAAAAAAJSs/-GhSnV_0ZaQ/s1600/Krusty__s_Seal_of_Approval_by_KrnBgn.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ZcXRUJqy4zg/U6JohE-V4oI/AAAAAAAAJSs/-GhSnV_0ZaQ/s1600/Krusty__s_Seal_of_Approval_by_KrnBgn.png" height="320" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
(thank you KrnBgn.deviantart.com for the image)<br />
<br />
<br />blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-33496229646009562432014-06-16T17:10:00.001-07:002014-06-16T17:10:11.618-07:00Woo hoo!<br><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-T_vV2ituK2g/U5-HYVW7XcI/AAAAAAAAJRU/70vYRQ1TLWc/s640/blogger-image--2076266759.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-T_vV2ituK2g/U5-HYVW7XcI/AAAAAAAAJRU/70vYRQ1TLWc/s640/blogger-image--2076266759.jpg"></a></div>blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-83448241203839226972014-06-15T20:47:00.001-07:002014-08-01T06:39:33.658-07:00C64 Review - Q-Bopper (C) 1983 Accelerated Software<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWagOxA54sGXgL7NjjQKjfeuHwkGwiRjq4TLXoYHtPnJ-d-riLzKKYK5CydjZVxIs89FtXt5SJL41G30ZA3GF5GKV3inKxzt-v9ay9r-G-os7rwFQ3-DzZrsV9um8_M3So7n2ZyLLWcsk/s1600/C64QBopper-1-200.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWagOxA54sGXgL7NjjQKjfeuHwkGwiRjq4TLXoYHtPnJ-d-riLzKKYK5CydjZVxIs89FtXt5SJL41G30ZA3GF5GKV3inKxzt-v9ay9r-G-os7rwFQ3-DzZrsV9um8_M3So7n2ZyLLWcsk/s1600/C64QBopper-1-200.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<b>John:</b> Ooh another "classic" from 1983. Q-Bopper by Accelerated Software, Inc, who would later go on to release Dungeons of Ba, which is way, way, way, way better than Q-Bopper.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> This one's painful. But you know, I really love this era of C64 games, so I think we're going to stick with reviewing games from this era for awhile.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> It has an air of innocence about it. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> And an air of discovery. Lots of no-name software developers selling software in plastic bags. A few future big names just beginning to get their sea-legs. Console developers who were fearful of the future were only just beginning to turn towards the home computer market. So, we've got a lot of, I guess you would say, independent developers making computer games in 1983. <br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> This one fills quite a few early C64 cheapie checkboxes:<br />
<br />
Public Domain music - Check.<br />
<br />
No-name developer - Check.<br />
<br />
Terrible graphics and sound - Check.<br />
<br />
Ripoff of a famous arcade title - Check.<br />
<br />
Probably came in a plastic bag with a one-sheet "manual" - Check.<br />
<br />
Uses the default C64 font for all text and scores - Check.<br />
<br />
Title screen and/or game elements done using PETSCII - Check.<br />
<br />
I love this era too. So please know dear reader that when we say harsh things about a game from this era, we do it with love. If you love the C64 then there's an undeniable charm to games from this era. Even the crappy ones. And speaking of crap...<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<b>Chuck:</b> Q-Bopper bursts out of the gate blaring Dixie at you while the title fills the screen. Then it switches to some ear-splitting, out of tune piano roll kind of thing that wouldnt sound good coming out of an Odyssey 2. Right away you know what you're in for.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Why Dixie??<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Let me state this up front. If you're going to blatantly rip off a brilliant game like Q-Bert, right down to the name of the game, then by God you will be judged by that standard. If you're going to go down this road then you could at least do it properly, or take it in a unique direction like Pogo Joe. Speaking of, that is also from 1983 although you would never believe it if you only played crap like this.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> "As close to the Arcade feeling as you'll ever get". Just let that sink in.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Let's just get right down to the big problem. The Angry Video Game Nerd always says you cant explain bad controls, you must experience them yourself. Well, I'm going to give it a shot. Look at this:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-iMoyV8VV76U/U54yz8JYENI/AAAAAAAAJQk/GFTs5Q1AZMc/s1600/qbertcontrols.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-iMoyV8VV76U/U54yz8JYENI/AAAAAAAAJQk/GFTs5Q1AZMc/s1600/qbertcontrols.jpg" height="170" width="320" /></a></div>
This is from the Q-Bert 2600 version manual. This is how Q-Bert was meant to be played at home. Now, I'm not saying we held our joysticks like this; we just held them normally with the fire-button at top-left. But the controls just feel right and work extremely well, <i>especially</i> when you need to change direction quickly.<br />
<br />
Q-Bopper immediately shits the bed by making you move the joystick <i>diagonally</i> to jump in the four directions. There is a reason why no home version of Q-Bert controls this way. It's because IT. DOESNT. WORK. <br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> You'd think that it would. You would think that it actually makes more sense, since you are moving diagonally on the screen. But it doesnt. On our dear departed mother's soul I swear that it doesnt. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> She'd completely understand. <br />
<br />
If you try to change direction, especially the opposite direction, he may just sit there and do nothing. Why? Am I not pushing the stick exactly diagonal? Is the game just ignoring me? Also, Q-Bopper moves at lighting speed. So not only can you not direct him but he just whizzes across the board and usually right off the side before you know it. He has a tendency to move two blocks when you only wanted to move one. He does not move deliberately, like Q-Bert does. He does not have any feel of substance or weight, he just kind of floats around. <br />
<br />
So, right away you have a game that's a total pain in the ass to play. There's just no coming back from that. Everything else could be amazing and this would kill it We could just wrap this up right now.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Oh no. Full autopsy. The level design is atrocious. Instead of just copying the Q-Bert pyramid they haphazardly splayed blocks all over the screen. It looks and feels random. I'm pretty sure no thought went into it other than "uh oh we better not make this look <i>too much</i> like Q-Bert, but it needs to look enough like it so suckers will know what they're buying". If you're going to just make a random shape at least make the shape change on subsequent levels.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3Norur6B6eFnBHbY1VsttsupxfPnsSciMp-iCSUl4ez2G5kT8zPxengJR9WEQWRfBDHazr73EmgqFKRl6MXRYYRWUAsWgq1jmql4nOUnCpeo7Y4wx9OcxUIYVCLbvFK0qPmGPX6dJjUw/s1600/qbopperwholesystem.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3Norur6B6eFnBHbY1VsttsupxfPnsSciMp-iCSUl4ez2G5kT8zPxengJR9WEQWRfBDHazr73EmgqFKRl6MXRYYRWUAsWgq1jmql4nOUnCpeo7Y4wx9OcxUIYVCLbvFK0qPmGPX6dJjUw/s1600/qbopperwholesystem.jpg" height="472" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
The flying discs that Q-Bert uses to escape the bad guys are completely stationary in this game. When you hop onto one it just sits there and doesnt move. So you're supposed to hop on and wait for the bad guys to move to another part of the level then you jump back off. Zzzzz...<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Well, making the discs fly you to another part of the level would have taken, you know, effort.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Look, if you are missing features that the Atari 2600 version of Q-Bert has then you have failed. <b>Failed.</b> The enemies just kind of randomly bounce around the screen so I suppose they wouldnt be able to follow you when you escape, anyway. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> That's the best part of Q-Bert! Coily is so single-minded in his pursuit of Q-Bert that he just leaps off of the pyramid to oblivion. Q-Bopper has none of this. The enemies have no personality. They're just colored balls. And a square that changes the color of the blocks (the substitute for Slick/Sam). <br />
<br />
Q-Bopper himself is just another ball with poorly defined feet and.. I think he's wearing sunglasses? An eye-patch? Seriously, what's wrong with his face? <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BhcsaUZLP3o/U55M4jcyiRI/AAAAAAAAJQ4/HlcpGeWSA3o/s1600/qbopper.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BhcsaUZLP3o/U55M4jcyiRI/AAAAAAAAJQ4/HlcpGeWSA3o/s1600/qbopper.jpg" height="239" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
And there seems to be another character named Chancer?<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Oh, when you push your button you warp to an escape disc and you lose one "chancer".<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> So it's an "oh shit" button. Chancer, though?<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> Because you're taking a chance by doing something that immediately removes you from all danger?<br />
<br />
The sound effects are terrible. There's a bad laser sound whenever you start the game. Very unceremonious. You clear a level then a new one immediately starts, no fanfare. The laser sound does not count as fanfare. This is not how video games work, people. You are to be rewarded with pleasing sounds, flashing colors, something. How about a brief pause in the action, at least?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> When Q-Bopper dies it plays this weird bird warble (or "malfunctioning computer" noise?) and he disintegrates. When you fall off the "pyramid" it does the same thing. But when the game is over it plays a falling bomb sound with a crash. Why did they not use that <i>when you fall off the board</i>? This is iconic Q-Bert stuff and they are dropping the ball at every opportunity. Did they even play Q-Bert before making this? Maybe we're wrong. Maybe this is a wholly original idea and Gottllieb ripped it off. <br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Except Q-Bert came out in 1982. And if Jeff Lee saw this he would have dropped the concept immediately. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> It really makes you appreciate how great Q-Bert is, let's give it credit for that.<br />
<br />
I hope we're not being too unfair. If this were 1983, and dad picked this up from the computer store for a few bucks, we may have squeezed a little fun out of this one?<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Nope. Trainwreck. If you cant at least be as good as the Atari 2600 version then you should not bother. If this were typed in from a magazine then it might be acceptable. And we <i>did</i> play this one back in the day, we're playing our original (copied) disk as we speak (yes it still works). We copied and played everything. I'm sure we played this once and forgot about it.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Can we forget it again please?<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
Update: It appears one of our playtesters loves Q-Bopper and cant get enough. We believe in spirited debate here at WOB75, so here you go:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.blogger.com/video.g?token=AD6v5dy3hxzuBq6Z0CV3sWnRVnVJ9IBAUHTxBnOFWZzgyfzMyHxXoIcRwaTDZMRI-fG7OMP-fKzNyLsapzMb9fcGZA' class='b-hbp-video b-uploaded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-65144907520110675442014-06-13T13:45:00.002-07:002014-06-20T11:07:45.617-07:00Commodore 64 review - Wavy Navy by Sirius Software (1983)<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-jt2RSe2Qgq4/U5tw5BpSIiI/AAAAAAAAJPg/drnun8Uq3_Y/s1600/wavynavy1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-jt2RSe2Qgq4/U5tw5BpSIiI/AAAAAAAAJPg/drnun8Uq3_Y/s1600/wavynavy1.jpg" height="320" width="282" /></a></div>
<b><br /></b>
<b><br /></b>
<b>Chuck: </b>Alrighty John, today we're going to be talking about the C64, um, "classic", Wavy Navy.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Oh this one's alright. Definitely not in the upper echelons of the 64 library.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> It suffers a bit from port-weariness.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Please explain your clumsy wordsmithing to the audience.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> What I mean is it was ported to every system under the sun. Hard as it is to believe, the 64 wasnt the dominant platform in its' early days. It had to make do with Atari and Apple ports. <br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Right, even today one would prefer that the game they're playing be developed on the system that they're playing it on. Designed specifically for that system's strengths and weaknesses.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> A lot of these early 64 games look like Atari 400/800 games.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> I'd say Wavy Navy is indistinguishable from the Atari version, and we'll get a chance to talk about a lot of other games like that, I'm sure. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Like the godawful Atari port of Pac Man... <br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> OK let's' focus. Wavy Navy suffers from port-itis, port-weariness, whatever you want to call it. It's slow, choppy...<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> It's practically monochrome, and you're wrong about it being indistinguishable from the Atari version. The Atari version actually looks better, slightly <i>more</i> colorful. The Apple II version at least has a splash of color, what with having multicolored sprites. This game looks like an Atari game and plays like an Apple II shootemup, it's the worst of both worlds.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Sirius didnt bring their A-game to this one. I think their Bandits game came out the same year. Similar shootemup style, except Bandits looks like a proper C64 game. Multicolored "chunky" sprites, fluid animation...<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Bandits makes Wavy Navy look incredibly bland. It does have those Sirius-esque sound effects though. Nice and arcadey.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> They're a little annoying, not reaching the psychedelic heights they would get to down the road with games like Zodiac. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b>The only other thing I like about it are the hovering helicopters. Maybe it's reminding me of better games like Fort Apocalypse or Choplifter.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> As I said, it's "alright". It has some ideas that I like. It's a good Galaxian clone for systems that didnt get a proper Galaxian port.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> We did get a Galaxian port, and it sucked. I think you mean Galaga.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Right, for whatever reason Galaga didnt come home until the NES days, I believe. So, Wavy Navy is a decent enough clone of that, but it's not a straight-up ripoff, it has some original ideas that I'm surprised didnt get ripped off in other games. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck: </b> You mean the titular wave.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Right. Similar to Centipede, the player can move up and down and not just left and right like your usual Invaders game. Unlike Centipede your movement is limited by the crests and troughs of the wave. You'll move to the left to kill an enemy and find that you're also moving up or down. The playfield is continually changing, giving your brain more to deal with.<br />
<br />
The enemies cant shoot you through the wave, so you can use them to hide. Or the wave can spell your doom by forcing you to move when you dont want to. You feel exposed at the crest of a wave, but it gets you a little closer to the enemies and allows you to clear them out quicker. At the trough you're better protected from the hovering helicopters but the trough is always moving, so...<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> To me it's a little unfair. You're just trying to get a little shootemup action and the game keeps pushing you around.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Eh, somewhat. I think you're insinuating that it's bad design but when you die it usually feels like it's your fault, like you werent planning ahead. It's the least of this game's problems, anyway. I mean, it is what it is, it IS the game. <br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Yeah, otherwise it would be a pretty ordinary Galaga clone. Are you sure the wave isnt just a cheap gimmick that doesnt really work all that well?<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> It works good enough. Like I said, the problem with the game isnt the wave, it's the graphics, the choppiness, the collision detection.. The wave makes the game special, it gives it a dimension that Galaga doesnt have.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> I know you arent saying Wavy Navy is better than Galaga.<br />
<br />
<b>John: </b> Galaga is pure magic. If Wavy Navy had some more polish... nah it still wouldnt hold a candle to Galaga, but it sure does need more polish.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> I hate the monochrome explosions and I hate how they obscure your vision.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> I get a bit of a Missile Command vibe from the explosions. Eh, a little extra challenge for the gamer.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Or a little extra foot to the crotch area...<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> I like the progression in rank as you clear the levels. You'd think the highest rank would be admiral but you eventually get to be the president!<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Makes sense, the president is the Commander In Chief so I guess he's the highest ranking officer. Kind of anti-democratic though. <br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> But even when you're the president they keep sending you back into the field. Maybe you're just giving the orders and the ship has a regular crew, but still, doesnt the president have better things to do?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Better things than taking on an entire first-world country's air force single-handedly with some kind of weird little tugboat that shoots missiles?<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> The box art makes it look like a battleship.<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> Yeah, not even. I love how it leaps in the air when you die.<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> It does give you the feeling that it doesnt have much "weight" to it. OK, tugboat it is.<br />
<br />
Overall, Wavy Navy is a bit of a clinker. It's got some neat ideas, though, and it's worth a play or two. What do you say, Chuck? Does Wavy Navy sink or swim?<br />
<br />
<b>Chuck:</b> It sinks!<br />
<br />
<b>John:</b> Oh, good John Lovitz impression there.blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-26827165649505948422011-05-04T11:09:00.000-07:002017-03-21T07:13:31.700-07:00Review Index<br />
Recommended! = Both Chuck and John loved it!<br />
<br />
1/2 Recommended! = Chuck and John couldnt agree, but one of em liked it well enough.<br />
<br />
Boo-urns! = A real stinker. Chuck and John became angry, resentful and/or suffered greatly.<br />
<br />
Everything else = We cant recommend playing it but it's interesting for other reasons.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<a href="http://blendo75.blogspot.com/2014/08/c64-review-choplifter-c-1982-br0derbund.html" target="_blank">Choplifter! (c) 1982 Br0derbund</a> - Recommended!<br />
<br />
<a href="http://blendo75.blogspot.com/2014/09/c64-review-congo-bongo-c-1983-sega.html" target="_blank">Congo Bongo (c) 1983 Sega</a> - Boo-urns!<br />
<br />
<a href="http://blendo75.blogspot.com/2014/07/c64-review-crossfire-c-1983-sierra-on.html" target="_blank">Crossfire (c) 1983 Sierra On-Line</a> - 1/2 Recommended!<br />
<br />
<a href="http://blendo75.blogspot.com/2016/10/gumshoe-c-1984-software.html" target="_blank">Gumshoe (c) 1984 A&F Software</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://blendo75.blogspot.com/2014/09/omega-race-c-1982-commodore-midway.html" target="_blank">Omega Race (c) 1982 Commodore / Midway</a> - Recommended!<br />
<br />
<a href="http://blendo75.blogspot.com/2014/06/c64-review-over-rainbow-c-1983-renegade.html" target="_blank">Over the Rainbow (c) 1983 Renegade Software</a> - Recommended!<br />
<a href="http://blendo75.blogspot.com/2014/07/c64-review-pooyan-c-1983-datasoft.html" target="_blank"><br /></a>
<a href="http://blendo75.blogspot.com/2014/07/c64-review-pooyan-c-1983-datasoft.html" target="_blank">Pooyan (c) 1983 Datasoft / Konami</a> - 1/2 Recommended!<br />
<br />
<a href="http://blendo75.blogspot.com/2014/06/chuck-and-john-review-accelerated.html" target="_blank">Q-Bopper (c) 1983 Accelerated Software</a> - Boo-urns!<br />
<a href="http://blendo75.blogspot.com/2014/07/c64-review-rescue-squad-c-1983-muse.html" target="_blank"><br /></a>
<a href="http://blendo75.blogspot.com/2014/07/c64-review-rescue-squad-c-1983-muse.html" target="_blank">Rescue Squad (c) 1983 Muse Software</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://blendo75.blogspot.com/2017/03/shooting-gallery-c-1983-rensoft.html" target="_blank">Shooting Gallery (c) 1983 RenSoft Software Services</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://blendo75.blogspot.com/2016/07/zaxxon-c-1984-synapse.html" target="_blank">Super Zaxxon (c) 1984 HesWare</a> - Boo-urns!<br />
<br />
<a href="http://blendo75.blogspot.com/2014/06/c64-review-trashman-c-1983-creative.html" target="_blank">Trashman (c) 1983 Creative Software</a> - Recommended!<br />
<a href="http://blendo75.blogspot.com/2014/06/commodore-64-review-wavy-navy-by-sirius.html" target="_blank"><br /></a>
<a href="http://blendo75.blogspot.com/2014/06/commodore-64-review-wavy-navy-by-sirius.html" target="_blank">Wavy Navy (c) 1983 Sirius Software</a><br />
<a href="http://blendo75.blogspot.com/2016/07/zaxxon-c-1984-synapse.html" target="_blank"><br /></a>
<a href="http://blendo75.blogspot.com/2016/07/zaxxon-c-1984-synapse.html" target="_blank">Zaxxon (c) 1984 Synapse / Sega</a> - 1/2 Recommended!<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-27910191519110982642011-05-04T05:32:00.000-07:002011-05-04T05:32:56.361-07:00The Kid Who Trained with the Masters of Nintendo During a Gaming Golden Age<a href="http://kotaku.com/#%215794333/the-kid-who-trained-with-the-masters-of-nintendo-during-a-gaming-golden-age">The Kid Who Trained with the Masters of Nintendo During a Gaming Golden Age</a>blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-470701560038636522011-04-25T13:02:00.000-07:002011-04-25T13:02:22.032-07:00Remember, Rampage Monsters Are Naked People Too<a href="http://kotaku.com/#%215795481/remember-rampage-monsters-are-naked-people-too">Remember, Rampage Monsters Are Naked People Too</a>blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-746405185005053592011-04-25T11:48:00.000-07:002011-04-25T11:48:21.947-07:00The Weird And Wonderful World Of The Sega Genesis<a href="http://kotaku.com/#%215795188/the-weird-and-wonderful-world-of-the-sega-genesis/gallery/1">The Weird And Wonderful World Of The Sega Genesis</a>blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-37290194383381619552011-04-19T05:11:00.000-07:002011-04-19T05:11:09.014-07:00Let Us Now Praise the Computers of the 1990s<a href="http://technologizer.com/2011/04/17/let-us-now-praise-the-computers-of-the-1990s/">Let Us Now Praise the Computers of the 1990s</a>blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-36894090238620374122011-04-08T05:38:00.000-07:002011-04-08T05:38:13.923-07:00Remembering the Apple I<a href="http://technologizer.com/2011/04/08/apple-i/">Remembering the Apple I</a>blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-67506850809573305642011-04-07T09:33:00.000-07:002011-04-07T09:33:53.981-07:00The Father of the Game Boy Was Not Killed By Yakuza<a href="http://kotaku.com/#%215789740/why-gamings-most-tragic-conspiracy-is-bullshit">The Father of the Game Boy Was Not Killed By Yakuza</a>blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-39557195993633979852011-04-01T05:58:00.000-07:002011-04-01T05:58:55.060-07:00This Nintendo Was Inside A Television Set<a href="http://kotaku.com/#%215787855/this-nintendo-was-inside-a-television-set">This Nintendo Was Inside A Television Set</a>blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-4105590316509486902011-03-28T10:13:00.000-07:002011-03-28T10:13:47.308-07:00The Mathematics Of Seduction And Other Devious Solutions To A Spy Party's ProblemsA game I've been following the development of for a while now. Keeps getting more interesting...<br /><br /><a href="http://kotaku.com/#%215786334/the-mathematics-of-seduction-and-other-devious-solutions-to-a-spy-partys-problems">The Mathematics Of Seduction And Other Devious Solutions To A Spy Party's Problems</a>blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5535784189141728631.post-73084039608238787312011-03-23T11:24:00.000-07:002011-03-23T11:24:37.451-07:00Original GTA Design Docs, Dated March 22nd 1995 - Slashdot<a href="http://games.slashdot.org/story/11/03/23/0552200/Original-emGTAem-Design-Docs-Dated-March-22nd-1995?from=twitter">Original GTA Design Docs, Dated March 22nd 1995 - Slashdot</a>blendo75http://www.blogger.com/profile/02529184982792805347noreply@blogger.com0