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

[Cynicaster]

Come on man, seriously?

 

For the first time in the history of the Interent you have actually changed someones opinions and shown them "the way"

.

 

Good one!

 

Seriously though, let me ask you this. Suppose for a second that the arcade versions of these games were what you played growing up. The hardware was somehow affordable and widely available, and you played the classics in the arcade versions as we know them, for free all day long in your basement.

 

Then, there was this company that released a box (Atari 2600) that played "distilled" imitations of the games you loved, usually with at least a 1-2 year lag. Can you honestly tell me that you would play those versions and find them superior? Really?

 

I think I could honestly say that. I buy ports of the same arcade games for all my consoles. Since they have different strengths and weaknesses they aren't identical. They give similar but different experiences. These similarities and differences can make different versions of the same game feel like different games within a genre. For an example, the many ports of Space Invaders could almost feel like the difference between it and Galaxian. So, in a way a VCS port can be superior to the original arcade game in the sense that it offers a different experience or variation of the game. I couldn't honestly say it would be superior in the sense that it would render the original arcade game obsolete but having the ability to play the original arcade game on my computer wouldn't render VCS ports obsolete either. I can honestly say that the VCS ports along with all the other imperfect ports of other consoles are superior to the arcade perfect ports of an alternate reality though. In that reality the ports would be rendered obsolete by todays technology because they wouldn't offer a different experience and nostalgia would be the only reason to collect them. Imperfect ports are superior to perfect ports because they add variety.

 

Ok, I think now I see more clearly where I differ from most of you. The explanation above makes a lot of sense, even if it doesn't apply at all to me personally. Above, we have what reads as the thoughts of someone who is not only a player but also a gaming collector/completist/whatever.

 

I see what you're saying about variety, but I feel that most ports on classic systems are too different to satisfy me that they're channeling the arcade experience adequately, yet just similar enough to not stand on their own as carts that I have any desire to acquire or play when I have MAME available.

 

I should point out that I'm almost the anti-collector in the sense that I consider any console, controller, cart, etc. that I don't actually use with some regularity as just something to take up space and trip over. That's why my 2600 collection consists of only about 20-30 of my favorites, and that's it; my NES collection, even fewer than that. An extension of this for me is that even if a port is well done on a given platform, I don't really hunt it down or pay it much mind because I prefer to get my fix for that game in MAME. Like I said, the retro consoles hold appeal to me almost exclusively for the games that were designed as home games from the get go, because that's where they really stretch their legs.

[Godzilla]

Personally, I do not think more complex instantly implies superiority. I do believe many of the 2600 arcade ports capture the essence of their arcade inspirations and polish it. Much like an original, more geometrically complex but less aesthetically pleasing rock becomes a beautiful stone when put in a tumbler. Some people will prefer the original, harder, rougher rock and some will prefer the smoother, shiny stone. Shiny.

[potatohead]

There is a great Asteroids on the Stella CD. Never released for lawsuit reasons, Suicide Mission was the compromise.

 

I've got it somewhere, on the CD. I'm sure that it can be found somewhere online. If not, let me know via PM.

 

@spiceware: Good grief! Very nice work so far.

[Schizophretard]

Come on man, seriously?

 

For the first time in the history of the Interent you have actually changed someones opinions and shown them "the way"

.

 

Good one!

 

Seriously though, let me ask you this. Suppose for a second that the arcade versions of these games were what you played growing up. The hardware was somehow affordable and widely available, and you played the classics in the arcade versions as we know them, for free all day long in your basement.

 

Then, there was this company that released a box (Atari 2600) that played "distilled" imitations of the games you loved, usually with at least a 1-2 year lag. Can you honestly tell me that you would play those versions and find them superior? Really?

 

I think I could honestly say that. I buy ports of the same arcade games for all my consoles. Since they have different strengths and weaknesses they aren't identical. They give similar but different experiences. These similarities and differences can make different versions of the same game feel like different games within a genre. For an example, the many ports of Space Invaders could almost feel like the difference between it and Galaxian. So, in a way a VCS port can be superior to the original arcade game in the sense that it offers a different experience or variation of the game. I couldn't honestly say it would be superior in the sense that it would render the original arcade game obsolete but having the ability to play the original arcade game on my computer wouldn't render VCS ports obsolete either. I can honestly say that the VCS ports along with all the other imperfect ports of other consoles are superior to the arcade perfect ports of an alternate reality though. In that reality the ports would be rendered obsolete by todays technology because they wouldn't offer a different experience and nostalgia would be the only reason to collect them. Imperfect ports are superior to perfect ports because they add variety.

 

Ok, I think now I see more clearly where I differ from most of you. The explanation above makes a lot of sense, even if it doesn't apply at all to me personally. Above, we have what reads as the thoughts of someone who is not only a player but also a gaming collector/completist/whatever.

 

I see what you're saying about variety, but I feel that most ports on classic systems are too different to satisfy me that they're channeling the arcade experience adequately, yet just similar enough to not stand on their own as carts that I have any desire to acquire or play when I have MAME available.

 

I should point out that I'm almost the anti-collector in the sense that I consider any console, controller, cart, etc. that I don't actually use with some regularity as just something to take up space and trip over. That's why my 2600 collection consists of only about 20-30 of my favorites, and that's it; my NES collection, even fewer than that. An extension of this for me is that even if a port is well done on a given platform, I don't really hunt it down or pay it much mind because I prefer to get my fix for that game in MAME. Like I said, the retro consoles hold appeal to me almost exclusively for the games that were designed as home games from the get go, because that's where they really stretch their legs.

 

Yes, I'm also a collector but I was speaking from my gamer half. I'm not just looking for the arcade experience but the entire experience of the game. Experiencing it on the VCS, NES, SNES,.... Experiencing the different ports, sequels, remakes, hacks, clones,... If you are a fan of a game then you want to experience more of it and experience it in different ways.

[Tin_Lunchbox]

In response to the general request, attached is a picture of my high score at Asteroids variation 4 (both switches at "expert"). It's 68,480.

 

Perhaps the most important part of scoring well is to not lose any lives early. The game is of course easier early, and you need your original lives and bonus lives for later in the game when the play is more intense. But then you have to balance that against the urge to hit reset when you mess up early. I'm not saying never do it, but if you fall into that trap too often, you'll be a resetting lamer playing fractional games in mass quantity.

 

Another important strategy is to focus like a laser on the UFOs and drones when they show up, because those guys are firing photons with your name on them, and if you can reliably go to hyperspace when their lightning shots are on target, you're faster than me.

 

Finally, I thinks it's prudent to pick off the smaller asteroids when you have a choice. If you just break up the big ones, you wind up with a crazy amount of asteroids flying around the screen.

[+SpiceWare]

If you just break up the big ones, you wind up with a crazy amount of asteroids flying around the screen.

 

Per this disassembly by Thomas Jentzsch, there's a max of 14 asteroids that can be flying around in the 2600 version.

NUM_ASTEROIDS_2 = 9 ; size for 9 asteroids in up and down list each,
				;  but only 7 are allowed (one is used for wrapping
				;  asteroids and one is wasted for marking the end
				;  of the list

 

If you truly want a crazy amount, go try Space Rocks - it maxes out at 48 asteroids

[Tin_Lunchbox]

Per this disassembly by Thomas Jentzsch, there's a max of 14 asteroids that can be flying around in the 2600 version.

 

There are four hulking asteroids when one starts the game. Each hulking asteroid splits into two medium asteroids, each medium into two small asteroids. 4 x 2 x 2 is 16.

[NE146]

When I used to play the game as a kid my goal was to get all the small asteroids on the screen as I could.. so it could be a nice crazy playfield.

[+SpiceWare]

There are four hulking asteroids when one starts the game. Each hulking asteroid splits into two medium asteroids, each medium into two small asteroids. 4 x 2 x 2 is 16.

Sure, it starts with 4 large that each split into 2 medium; however, the medium do not split into 2 small - they just shrink when hit.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UXlqk7NGdY

 

Later levels can begin with 8 large asteroids, 4 going upward and 4 going downward. However, it maxes out at 7 per direction so if you've already got 7 then the last large asteroid will just shrink into 1 medium asteroid.

; - As stated above, the game only supports 2x7 asteroids. So if you destroy
;   all four large asteroids moving in one y-direction, the last one only
;   creates one single medium sized one.

 

I haven't tested this myself, but I trust Thomas' expertise.

[+FujiSkunk]

I haven't tested this myself, but I trust Thomas' expertise.

 

I've seen that happen in action. In fact I believe in the arcade game would do that if there were too many rocks flying around already.

[Tin_Lunchbox]

Sure, it starts with 4 large that each split into 2 medium; however, the medium do not split into 2 small - they just shrink when hit.

 

I specifically referred to variation 4 in the post you responded to.

[+FujiSkunk]

Sure, it starts with 4 large that each split into 2 medium; however, the medium do not split into 2 small - they just shrink when hit.

 

I specifically referred to variation 4 in the post you responded to.

 

The game variations don't change how the asteroids split.

 

Actually that's not entirely true: in #33 and #66, the "children's versions," the big rocks always "split" into 1 medium rock. But in all the other variations, the big rocks always split into 2 medium rocks unless there are 14 rocks already on screen, and the 2 medium rocks always "split" into 1 small rock.

[+SpiceWare]

I specifically referred to variation 4 in the post you responded to.

I tried out the first 8 variations before replying to see if the medium ever split - it does not.

[Tin_Lunchbox]

I specifically referred to variation 4 in the post you responded to.

I tried out the first 8 variations before replying to see if the medium ever split - it does not.

 

Sure, it starts with 4 large that each split into 2 medium; however, the medium do not split into 2 small - they just shrink when hit.

 

I specifically referred to variation 4 in the post you responded to.

 

The game variations don't change how the asteroids split.

 

Actually that's not entirely true: in #33 and #66, the "children's versions," the big rocks always "split" into 1 medium rock. But in all the other variations, the big rocks always split into 2 medium rocks unless there are 14 rocks already on screen, and the 2 medium rocks always "split" into 1 small rock.

 

You guys are 100% on this point?

[Tin_Lunchbox]

Bah, nothing but love here. I guess it might be some emulator failing or version discrepancy.

[Tin_Lunchbox]

Bah, nothing but love here. I guess it might be some emulator failing or version discrepancy.

 

Heh heh, unbelievable (well, to me anyhow), I stand corrected. The medium asteroids do not split into two. They shrink to one. Sorry!

[+stephena]

Bah, nothing but love here. I guess it might be some emulator failing or version discrepancy.

 

It's extremely unlikely that any emulator error could cause such a specific change in behaviour as you mention. If an emulator wasn't accurate, I could see it not showing a rock at all, or drawing them at the wrong place. But to change behaviour that specifically would probably point to the game itself working that way.

[Bakasama]

Yes, I'm also a collector but I was speaking from my gamer half. I'm not just looking for the arcade experience but the entire experience of the game. Experiencing it on the VCS, NES, SNES,.... Experiencing the different ports, sequels, remakes, hacks, clones,... If you are a fan of a game then you want to experience more of it and experience it in different ways.

 

It does sound you would give the Taco Bell version of Asteroids a shot. I got a CD from my niece and nephew and tried that out and I do love the glow effects that game has.

[Lord Helmet]

I actually love 2600 Asteroids simply because I've always SUCKED at the arcade game. That said, many of the hacks over the years have greatly improved the experience to make it more like the arcade game. I've always wished that someone could find a way to hack the delay between levels and the reseting of the background 'music' to the slower beat when the level starts.

[+FujiSkunk]

I've always wished that someone could find a way to hack the delay between levels...

 

Funny thing is, the manual was written like that delay does exist. Check out the first helpful hint (section 7).

[Austin]

I can understand people being disappointed with this when it was new, but I find it to be a fun game. Considering the hardware, I have no complaints with it being the way it is. It's still a solid VCS title.

[+SpiceWare]

In fact I believe in the arcade game would do that if there were too many rocks flying around already.

That would be interesting to find out. If it's true then Space Rocks would outdo the arcade version. I have exactly enough sprites to show both players ships, saucer, tether and 48 asteroids If you ever hit 48 asteroids (by hitting all large and medium asteroids before shooting any small ones) the explosion would be skipped as there wouldn't be enough sprites for it to show up.

[+FujiSkunk]

If I have some time to kill I'll see if I can prove it. That means playing it in MAME, and video capture in MAME is tricky, especially with vector games, but I'm still willing to give it a shot.

[ZylonBane]

If I have some time to kill I'll see if I can prove it. That means playing it in MAME

 

Or, y'know...

[+FujiSkunk]

I have even less experience recording from a Flash app than from MAME.