Asteroids: why 8Kb and then such a bad port?

[Tinman]

It's not that bad! Game 4 with ufo's.

 

Now... What do you all think of starpath's sucide mission???

 

I like Asteroids better. For one thing, on Stella (which is all I have to play on at the moment), Suicide Mission is really glitchy and hard to see. But I miss having momentum when you use the thrusters and there is just too much flicker (rare for a Starpath game). Still, I like that they tried to give it a vector graphics look and it's cool how the Asteroids, or whatever they're supposed to be, change shapes as they fly around.

[+stephena]

It's not that bad! Game 4 with ufo's.

 

Now... What do you all think of starpath's sucide mission???

 

I like Asteroids better. For one thing, on Stella (which is all I have to play on at the moment), Suicide Mission is really glitchy and hard to see. But I miss having momentum when you use the thrusters and there is just too much flicker (rare for a Starpath game). Still, I like that they tried to give it a vector graphics look and it's cool how the Asteroids, or whatever they're supposed to be, change shapes as they fly around.

 

This game shouldn't be flickering in Stella. Make sure you're using OpenGL rendering with vsync turned on (both in Video Settings), and make sure phosphor mode is turned on (which is the default for this game anyway). What version of Stella are you using? Version 3.7.2 was just released; I recommend upgrading if you're using an older version.

[Tinman]

It's not that bad! Game 4 with ufo's.

 

Now... What do you all think of starpath's sucide mission???

 

I like Asteroids better. For one thing, on Stella (which is all I have to play on at the moment), Suicide Mission is really glitchy and hard to see. But I miss having momentum when you use the thrusters and there is just too much flicker (rare for a Starpath game). Still, I like that they tried to give it a vector graphics look and it's cool how the Asteroids, or whatever they're supposed to be, change shapes as they fly around.

 

This game shouldn't be flickering in Stella. Make sure you're using OpenGL rendering with vsync turned on (both in Video Settings), and make sure phosphor mode is turned on (which is the default for this game anyway). What version of Stella are you using? Version 3.7.2 was just released; I recommend upgrading if you're using an older version.

Turning on the phosphor mode did the trick. For some reason, auto-detect has never worked for me with Supercharger games, so I have to manually change the settings for them. I am already running the newest version. Nice job on it, by the way!

[+stephena]

Turning on the phosphor mode did the trick. For some reason, auto-detect has never worked for me with Supercharger games, so I have to manually change the settings for them. I am already running the newest version. Nice job on it, by the way!

 

Can you provide the ROM? It really should have defaulted to the correct behaviour.

[Tinman]

Turning on the phosphor mode did the trick. For some reason, auto-detect has never worked for me with Supercharger games, so I have to manually change the settings for them. I am already running the newest version. Nice job on it, by the way!

 

Can you provide the ROM? It really should have defaulted to the correct behaviour.

Sure. Here's my ROM of Phaser Patrol, one of the ones I have to manually set for it to work.

PHASOR.BIN

[Pioneer4x4]

Still, I like that they tried to give it a vector graphics look and it's cool how the Asteroids, or whatever they're supposed to be, change shapes as they fly around.

They are Virusesesis or Viruii or whateverthehell multiple is of virus.

Splitting DNA strands or something if I recall.

[+stephena]

Sure. Here's my ROM of Phaser Patrol, one of the ones I have to manually set for it to work.

 

OK, this looks like a bad dump. Supercharger ROMs have a file size which is a multiple of 8448 bytes (so 8448, 16896, 25344, 33792, etc). This one is one byte shy of 32K (32767), so the autodetection fails. Maybe try downloading the correct sized version?? I'm wondering, where did this ROM come from?

[ZylonBane]

Doesn't Meteoroid, the lawsuit-friendly prototype of Suicide Mission, feature much more Asteroids-like gameplay?

[Tinman]

Sure. Here's my ROM of Phaser Patrol, one of the ones I have to manually set for it to work.

 

OK, this looks like a bad dump. Supercharger ROMs have a file size which is a multiple of 8448 bytes (so 8448, 16896, 25344, 33792, etc). This one is one byte shy of 32K (32767), so the autodetection fails. Maybe try downloading the correct sized version?? I'm wondering, where did this ROM come from?

I have no idea. I didn't dump it myself so I'm sure I downloaded it somewhere, but I can't remember where. I will look for some better ROMs.

[NE146]

Here's the one i got.. I dunno how good it is or not.

PHASORPATROL.BIN

[Ranthulfr]

I thought Asteroids was a better-than-average game back in the day. Had no idea how many "k" it was at the time. The bar simply hadn't been raised to the point it's at now.

[NE146]

Had no idea how many "k" it was at the time.

 

Now that you mention it.. I guess I did have an inkling that it was a more "advanced" cartridge. Simply by the price of it. Wasn't it like $32 or something outrageous like that? Wheras other 2600 titles (e.g. Bowling) could be have for 10-15 bucks if I recall correctly.

[Ranthulfr]

It probably did cost more but I would have chalked that up to the fact that it was the mighty "Asteroids".

[ZylonBane]

I thought Asteroids was a better-than-average game back in the day. Had no idea how many "k" it was at the time.

 

Asteroids' ROM size was pretty big news at the time, since it was the first Atari 2600 cartridge to use bank switching.

 

The bar simply hadn't been raised to the point it's at now.

 

What on Earth does this even mean?

[Ranthulfr]

Asteroids' ROM size was pretty big news at the time, since it was the first Atari 2600 cartridge to use bank switching.

Huh. I missed that news.

[+FujiSkunk]

The bar simply hadn't been raised to the point it's at now.

 

What on Earth does this even mean?

 

Definiton #8

 

Back in the days before Ms. Pac-Man, Solaris and Thrust+, Asteroids was a highlight of the library. Now, it pales in comparison to what has been achieved since its release. So the bar, or standard, of what makes a "better than average" game is higher.

 

Was that really so hard to parse?

[MagitekAngel]

Personally, I've always sucked pretty hard at arcade Asteroids, so I welcome the mellowed out 2600 port with open arms. I can actually play that one for more than ten minutes. Compared to other 2600 ports that bit off more than they could chew (Tempest) or just plain went off the rails (Pac-Man), I think Asteroids is a relatively decent conversion.

[Pioneer4x4]

I thought Asteroids was a better-than-average game back in the day. Had no idea how many "k" it was at the time.

 

Asteroids' ROM size was pretty big news at the time, since it was the first Atari 2600 cartridge to use bank switching.

I had ZERO idea what the 2600s limitations were back in the early 80s. I did not buy/read gaming magazines. I mainly started getting stuff when it was getting discounted, I think the 1st console I bought new was a 7800 or a Jr, but it might have been a light 6. I didn't know anything about the size of the roms, lack of ram or anything. I was just pleased for sound and color compared to my TRS-80 Model III game wise, and to this day, nothing has changed my opinions.

Console for easy flashy graphics, actual computer for complexity of games/programs.

[ZylonBane]

I had ZERO idea what the 2600s limitations were back in the early 80s. I did not buy/read gaming magazines.

 

. . .

 

Congratulations?

[Godzilla]

as is well known (maybe,) 'round these here parts, I generally prefer the atari 2600 versions to the arcade originals. A game designed to take my money versus a game designed to give me value for my money (like tons of cool variations/play modes; I love shields in asteroids,) is a no-brainer contest to me.

 

I think most 2600 arcade ports do a great job of distilling the gameplay of the arcade versions into a more accessible, fun version.

[Cynicaster]

as is well known (maybe,) 'round these here parts, I generally prefer the atari 2600 versions to the arcade originals. A game designed to take my money versus a game designed to give me value for my money (like tons of cool variations/play modes; I love shields in asteroids,) is a no-brainer contest to me.

 

I think most 2600 arcade ports do a great job of distilling the gameplay of the arcade versions into a more accessible, fun version.

 

Heh, you sound like some kind of weird retro gaming spin doctor.

 

Allow me to paraphrase: “Due to hardware limitations, most arcade ports on the Atari 2600 were grossly simplified, sometimes completely cutting out major features and levels, leaving only the skeletal remains of the original gameplay mechanics. Usually, if allowed three guesses, the player would be able to identify what game he or she was looking at without reading the cartridge label. In a time when youngsters considered any home video game at all to be better than nothing, some of the ports actually managed to be moderately entertaining. “

[Pioneer4x4]

as is well known (maybe,) 'round these here parts, I generally prefer the atari 2600 versions to the arcade originals. A game designed to take my money versus a game designed to give me value for my money (like tons of cool variations/play modes; I love shields in asteroids,) is a no-brainer contest to me.

 

I think most 2600 arcade ports do a great job of distilling the gameplay of the arcade versions into a more accessible, fun version.

 

Heh, you sound like some kind of weird retro gaming spin doctor.

 

Allow me to paraphrase: “Due to hardware limitations, most arcade ports on the Atari 2600 were grossly simplified, sometimes completely cutting out major features and levels, leaving only the skeletal remains of the original gameplay mechanics. Usually, if allowed three guesses, the player would be able to identify what game he or she was looking at without reading the cartridge label. In a time when youngsters considered any home video game at all to be better than nothing, some of the ports actually managed to be moderately entertaining. “

LOL, I liked that!

[Torr]

as is well known (maybe,) 'round these here parts, I generally prefer the atari 2600 versions to the arcade originals. A game designed to take my money versus a game designed to give me value for my money (like tons of cool variations/play modes; I love shields in asteroids,) is a no-brainer contest to me.

 

I think most 2600 arcade ports do a great job of distilling the gameplay of the arcade versions into a more accessible, fun version.

 

I'm with Godzilla on this one. The VCS may not have looked as pretty as the Arcade games at the time did, but If I were hung up on graphics resolution and whatnot I wouldn't be a VCS fan period. I find almost ALL VCS ports better than the arcade versions. (with the exception of the later titles like Rampage, Double Dragon and Xenophobe where albeit they created playable games, they just bit off more than they could chew). I find that true for Arcade ports leading up even to the 16bit era.

As has already been said, the arcade games were designed to be fun, but at the same time be so hard you were DESTINED to get Game Over within a few minutes, otherwise it just wouldn't be profitable.

 

Some good examples on the VCS are Asteroids, Defender, and Missile Command; and from the 8-16 bit era, Rampage, Smash TV, T2: The Arcade Game and VS Fighters like MK/SFII.

None of those games 'Looked" as good at home as they did in the Arcade, but I could play for 10-15 minutes at LEAST before getting Game Over.

Two of my favorite examples are a game like T2: The Arcade Game, with practice you can easily beat the game with the few credits they start you out with. Sure the cart cost 50 bucks to buy but you could go the arcade and sink 50 bucks into it and you might have enough credits to play it through twice, IF you were really good at it; or VS fighters like MK/SFII. Unless you've already sunk about 50 bucks into the machine over the last week or so with practice play, you are gonna have your ass handed to you around 3 fights after starting/continuing because the machine is programmed to think "okay, he's played this long enough, time to just wipe him out so he has to put more money in, and he will because he doesn't want to start all over again", and those VS Fighter games always made the first guy you fought or the guy you fought right after continuing very easy just to give you a false sense of security that you had somehow 'learned' from your mistakes and now beat him with him being just as hard as the time he beat you.

Edited June 18, 2012 by Torr

[Torr]

as is well known (maybe,) 'round these here parts, I generally prefer the atari 2600 versions to the arcade originals. A game designed to take my money versus a game designed to give me value for my money (like tons of cool variations/play modes; I love shields in asteroids,) is a no-brainer contest to me.

 

I think most 2600 arcade ports do a great job of distilling the gameplay of the arcade versions into a more accessible, fun version.

 

Heh, you sound like some kind of weird retro gaming spin doctor.

 

Allow me to paraphrase: “Due to hardware limitations, most arcade ports on the Atari 2600 were grossly simplified, sometimes completely cutting out major features and levels, leaving only the skeletal remains of the original gameplay mechanics. Usually, if allowed three guesses, the player would be able to identify what game he or she was looking at without reading the cartridge label. In a time when youngsters considered any home video game at all to be better than nothing, some of the ports actually managed to be moderately entertaining. “

LOL, I liked that!

 

If you think what he said was true and accurate, and VCS games are only "Moderately Entertaining" and basically one step above having nothing, while Arcade Games are the Penultimate why aren't you guys at a MAME forum...

Not trying to sound rude or start a flame war, but shitting on the VCS in a VCS forum is, well, just stupid.

Edited June 18, 2012 by Torr

[NE146]

Well if you want to talk about watered down experiences, Mame is right up there. Especially when it comes to the classic arcade titles. Note this is not a knock on Mame.. of course we all love it and use it. But it's just the known fact that even with the most basic of classic games.. e.g. Space Invaders, Asteroids, etc. even when playing on a fancy pc case.. err, mame cabinet, they for many reasons fall short of playing the original arcade cabinets. This isn't really the case when you start getting to the JAMMA era, but for games like Space Encounters, Star Wars, etc. etc. it's fine for what it is, but obviously just can't compare to the real thing.

 

That said, the 2600 versions are as pure 2600 experiences as can be.