Apple II games that're BETTER than their arcade counterpart.

[Keatah]

Yes indeed. Despite the Apple II's complete lack of sound and graphics chips, it is still possible to have games that are actually better than their arcade counterparts.

 

I give mention to Stratovox vs Bandits. Check it out. Aside from the lesser quality beeps and boops blips'n'clicks sound effects on the II, you'll find Bandits far more enjoyable and playable and approachable than Stratovox. Consider the title page, the difficulty and its progression, the larger collision detection "field" between your shots and the enemies. Consider the variety of items they steal. And the cute ambulance animation along with general feel and groove of the game.

 

I also bring up Sundance vs Star Dance. I don't know if one is better than the other. But the Apple II version was quite impressive and playable at the time. A little more colorful due to inadvertent artifacting in place of monochromatic vectors.

[Tempest]

On a personal level I like the Apple II version of Arkanoid over the arcade version.  The graphics and sound are weaker but it's actually playable for people without super human reflexes.  The game only gets so fast due to the speed of the Apple II instead of reaching the insane speeds like the arcade version does.  I can actually beat the Apple II version whereas I can't even come close to beating the arcade version.

[hwrd]

I contend Lode Runner Apple ][ is better than the arcade version.

I find not seeing the full layout is frustrating in the arcade version.

 

[+FujiSkunk]

5 hours ago, hwrd said:

I contend Lode Runner Apple ][ is better than the arcade version.

I find not seeing the full layout is frustrating in the arcade version.

 

The Apple II version came first, and is indeed the definitive version of Lode Runner, so it's not surprising people would prefer it over the arcade game, especially when arcade games are designed to keep play times as short as possible, rather than allow for some puzzle solving like the original did.

 

A case could also be made for Choplifter, another game that appeared on computers before going to arcades.  In Chopliter's case, though, the home version is actually a little too simple for arcades, and Sega did a very good job fleshing it out for quarter munching.  If you prefer the simple "rescue 64 people without killing anyone" plot of the original, though, you can't beat the Apple II version, just about the only one with dual fire buttons and analog controls.

 

I hesitate to call it "better" than the arcade game, but Apple II Mario Bros. is at least as good as the arcade game, and much better than any other home port, even Nintendo's own NES version.

[Keatah]

Most all arcade cabs had too-high a difficulty for me to continue enjoying past my youth. Not because of reflexes or speeds or anything like that, but because of annoyance, frustration, and simplicity. A testy tedium because of too many exacting timing elements if you will. I always wanted a wee bit more'n button mashing.

 

Chopliftter was one of our staple go-to's on the Apple II. Could play for hours.

 

I never got into Lode Runner much because I was too busy with BoulderDash. LR is a game still on my bucket list. BD was (I hear) the first game to be converted from home to arcade. I never played anything but Apple II and C64 versions till recently when I tried it out on Atari 8-bit.

[JamesD]

I never really thought the II or any other home computer was better than the arcades. 
Many home versions were easier to play but I'm not sure I'd say better all things considered.
The place where I though personal computers in general were better than arcade games were RPGs like Ultima, Wizardy, etc...
Instead of a frantic few minutes, you could play one game for days or even longer.

[doug0909]

3 hours ago, FujiSkunk said:

I hesitate to call it "better" than the arcade game, but Apple II Mario Bros. is at least as good as the arcade game, and much better than any other home port, even Nintendo's own NES version.

I like it, but I don't think Apple II Mario Bros is the best home version.

 

The best two versions to me are, by a long shot, the XE only 8 bit version (and the 5200 / regular 8 bit versions aren't bad), and the Famicom "classic serie" version, which has European and Japanese versions. 

 

The XE version has almost all of the features of the arcade game, but with somewhat altered graphics and colors, which I don't mind. It controls very well, but it's somewhat difficult. 

 

Even closer to the arcade was the Famicom version.  It's pretty much arcade perfect, but easier, particularly set to game A. You have the ability to change direction mid jump, which helps a lot.

 

But, yeah, that Apple II version is amazing and better than the regular nes version and so many others. 

 

The arcade game seems to be just too slippery and hard to control... And too hard. It's not surprising that the Apple II's limitations slowing it down make it a more enjoyable game.

[+FujiSkunk]

8 minutes ago, doug0909 said:

The XE version has almost all of the features of the arcade game...

One word: icicles.

[The Usotsuki]

I think the Apple ][ version has those.

[Tempest]

12 minutes ago, The Usotsuki said:

I think the Apple ][ version has those.

It does

[doug0909]

Famicom version has them too. 

[DeathAdderSF]

While I don't think it's a better game overall than the arcade version, I vastly prefer the sound effects of Robotron: 2084 for the Apple II. Sometimes as a kid I'd boot up the game just to hear & enjoy them.

[TheDevil'sCompass]

8 hours ago, Keatah said:

I never got into Lode Runner much because I was too busy with BoulderDash. LR is a game still on my bucket list. BD was (I hear) the first game to be converted from home to arcade. I never played anything but Apple II and C64 versions till recently when I tried it out on Atari 8-bit.

Had no idea BoulderDash got an arcade conversion. Will definitely have to check this out. I put a lot of hours into the Apple II version of BoulderDash. Lots of fun.

 

First arcade machine I bought was a dedicated Lode Runner. My favorite all time game. I've got 4 of the 6 games available as PCBs. One day I hope to get them all in one machine hooked up to a switcher.

[youxia]

The "easier" definitely doesn't automatically count as "better". Personally, I get bored quickly with ports which had the difficulty tweaked and almost always will prefer the arcade version. And I'm not some sort of twitch expert at all, more of a level 2-3 guy. It's just that easy games are really boring to play when you have to slog through the same levels before the difficulty ramps up. I'd much rather play the wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am version.

[hwrd]

12 hours ago, Keatah said:

I never got into Lode Runner much because I was too busy with BoulderDash. LR is a game still on my bucket list. BD was (I hear) the first game to be converted from home to arcade. I never played anything but Apple II and C64 versions till recently when I tried it out on Atari 8-bit.

 

I am in the 140's on Lode Runner on the C64 Mini.  There is a level that requires one to to remove a block move, then remove the next block repeatedly, quickly.  With one button, there is too much joystick waggle for old me to do that fast enough with success enough times.  I have to configure the C64 Mini for two buttons some day...   ?

 

The C64 version is very very clean looking though.  Nice version.

[TheDevil'sCompass]

This is a tough topic. To start with, I sat down tonight and tried to think of all the arcade ports that the Apple had. I'm sure I'm missing some. For instance, don't know if any baseball or football games were arcade ports. Not sure about the Tron game either. Was it just lightcycles or the whole arcade game? Some of these games I have more experience with than the arcade version simply because it wasn't available at my local arcade. Does that make it better to me? Not sure. Even though I have the arcade PCBs for Lode Runner, I still prefer the original Apple version, so I do think that one is better. I also really like the Apple versions of Pooyan and Buck Rogers, but I don't have much playtime on the actual arcade versions.

 

With some help from the internet, this is what I came up with for the Apple II:

 

Apple Invaders (Space Invaders?)
Ardy (Anteater?)
Arkanoid
Asteroids
Bad Dudes
Battlezone
Boulder Dash
Buck Rogers: Planet of Zoom
Burgertime
Carnival
Choplifter!
Commando
Congo Bongo
Crazy Climber
Crystal Castles
Defender
Dig Dug
Donkey Kong
Frogger
Galaxian
Gauntlet
Head On
Heavy Barrel
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom
Joust
Jungle Hunt
Karate Champ
Kung Fu Master
Lode Runner
Marble Madness
Mario Bros.
Moon Patrol
Mr. Do
Ms. Pac-Man
Nibbler
Night Driver
Pipe Dream
Pooyan
Popeye
Qix
Rampage
Renegade
Robocop
Robotron 2084
Sea Wolf
Spy Hunter
Super Zaxxon
Tapper
Track & Field
Tron (?)
Victory Road
Xevious
Zaxxon

 

 

 

[Keatah]

On 5/24/2022 at 4:15 AM, youxia said:

The "easier" definitely doesn't automatically count as "better". Personally, I get bored quickly with ports which had the difficulty tweaked and almost always will prefer the arcade version. And I'm not some sort of twitch expert at all, more of a level 2-3 guy. It's just that easy games are really boring to play when you have to slog through the same levels before the difficulty ramps up. I'd much rather play the wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am version.

Ohh I started hating arcade games that I couldn't advance very far in. There was a point in the very late 80's, like 1989 - 1993, that I almost wanted the arcades to just go away.

 

Like in Pac-Man I couldn't and still can't advance past like level 4 or 5. And those "continue" games like S.T.U.N. Runner or Blasteroids or RoadBlasters just sucked more of my Benjamins. Sucked at any cutesy game like Donkey Kong, Centipede, or Pengo. Defender was impossible. Arcade Space Invaders from '78 was lousy! And on and on. The exceptions being Gyruss, MissileCommand, Liberator, and Assault. I could play till I got bored. But all else it was 5 minutes at best.

 

So the lesser difficulty, and selectable difficulty, on home games fit me much much better. And the 2600 was good here because it helped even the playingfield between adults and kids. Or newbie kids and advanced kids.

 

One other thing. It's amazing how much we can pull out of nostalgia and the good times of yesteryear, today. We may have spent only several (cumulative) years playing the stuff. But those days have expanded into years/decades of discussion today as we explore all angles of the hobby.

Edited May 25, 2022 by Keatah

[zzip]

4 hours ago, Keatah said:

Ohh I started hating arcade games that I couldn't advance very far in. There was a point in the very late 80's, like 1989 - 1993, that I almost wanted the arcades to just go away.

I mostly lost interest in arcades by 87 too, but for different reasons.  In the early 80s arcades were everywhere, and all the hype in videogames was around what arcade ports were coming and how good (or awful) they were.    But then the decline of arcades and rise of home computers in the mid-80s opened up a whole new variety of genres.   So by the time arcades began to rebound, I was much less interested in action games and more into RPGs.   I'd still visit from time to time and there were some games I kind of liked but never got obsessed with particular games like I used to.  I think Gauntlet was the last arcade game that I was really really into.   

 

Plus by the late 80s, many games seemed like they were targetting kids younger than me.   I was slightly too old to catch the Mutant Turtle wave, for instance. 

[Keatah]

I was into to the arcades when the "national videogame craze" was underway. Like when every other news broadcast would have a small clip on saying how the likes of "Defender" were taking over. And how for 25 cents you could become an electronic warrior. Even the the news anchors would describe it all with a sense of bemused lighthearted wonder.

 

5 hours ago, zzip said:

In the early 80s arcades were everywhere, and all the hype in videogames was around what arcade ports were coming and how good (or awful) they were.

We liked ports and all that. But I don't know how much hype I picked up on. Ports to home were just kinda happening and we were cold and clinical in discussions of how good/bad (or even suited to home) they were. I guess.

 

There was so much happening on the electronic frontier and in the information age bitd that today sometimes I recall it as a blur. Not an unpleasant mindset mind you.

 

5 hours ago, zzip said:

But then the decline of arcades and rise of home computers in the mid-80s opened up a whole new variety of genres.   So by the time arcades began to rebound, I was much less interested in action games and more into RPGs.

I had marginal interest in RPGs. They were good and all. Played a few. But I was into graphics and animation. And gravitated toward simulations like flight simulator and FPS games. Or "sciency" math things like fractals. Stunts was cool as was Space Vikings (Apple II) or Behind Jaggi Lines. Games like that had an aura of sophistication about them.

 

But cutesy garbagey stuff like TMNT & Mario went way over my head - Sonic is the most I tolerate. My thinking at the time was I had to grow up and "accept" the TMNT style. It was so boring though. And there were times I felt bad not being able to rise to the occasion. Shit! I don't think I ever played TMNT in MAME either. I was immediately soured on those games and the institution they represented.

 

I was honest-to-gods hoping Amiga would've been my gaming savior seeing as how Apple II ran its course. Yikes! The A2 hardware was going on 10+ years old. And new technology was everywhere! But, alas, I would need to wait till the 486 era got underway.

 

[+OLD CS1]

1 hour ago, Keatah said:

I was honest-to-gods hoping Amiga would've been my gaming savior seeing as how Apple II ran its course.

So many good opportunities on the Amiga.  So many wasted.  There are plenty of good Amiga ports, but far too many crappy ones.

[MrMaddog]

I pretty much had the same view of computer games being more "grown up" than Nintendo games that were all the rage in the late 80's/early 90's. I only had a NES at the time because that's pretty much where "all" the latest games are while my Atari 8-bit had literal slim pickings outside of mail order places.  But by the time I graduated, I couldn't even look at the 16-bit consoles that were coming out since they were targeted towards Junior High Schoolers and I found more sophisticated stuff to play on computers.

 

But I couldn't say I outgrew arcades since during that same time period they had games that were more mature than what's available on the NES at the time.  In fact they became more like small hangouts for teens than the family friendly places they were a few years prior.  So I was able to play the latest arcade titles on location, like Street Fighter II, while playing the early classics on my Atari computers at home.

 

[ColecoGamer]

I know this is about Apple II arcade ports, but… the IIGS port of Rastan is near-perfect.

[The Usotsuki]

It's not that the Amiga couldn't do it, but that no one gave enough of a damn to do it right.  If people actually attempted competent ports on the Amiga, it would be able to hold its own more than well enough.

[ColecoGamer]

54 minutes ago, The Usotsuki said:

It's not that the Amiga couldn't do it, but that no one gave enough of a damn to do it right.  If people actually attempted competent ports on the Amiga, it would be able to hold its own more than well enough.

That recent port of Rygar for the Amiga is definitely proof it could be done. Sadly, developers like US Gold would half-ass everything.

[Keatah]

11 hours ago, OLD CS1 said:

So many good opportunities on the Amiga.  So many wasted.  There are plenty of good Amiga ports, but far too many crappy ones.

Never had the opportunity to go through them all. It was next to impossible to acquire any games for it. Legit or pirated.

 

11 hours ago, MrMaddog said:

But by the time I graduated, I couldn't even look at the 16-bit consoles that were coming out since they were targeted towards Junior High Schoolers and I found more sophisticated stuff to play on computers.

I viewed 16 bit computing as somewhat sophisticated right up to the end when I got into a 486 in 1993. And forever after that transition I saw 16-bitters as low-end or toys.

 

11 hours ago, MrMaddog said:

But I couldn't say I outgrew arcades since during that same time period they had games that were more mature than what's available on the NES at the time.  In fact they became more like small hangouts for teens than the family friendly places they were a few years prior.  So I was able to play the latest arcade titles on location, like Street Fighter II, while playing the early classics on my Atari computers at home.

There were a few "upscale" games I enjoyed in the waning years of visiting the arcades. Assault from Namco was one of them. Super Space Invaders '91 was another. SSI'91 was starting to pique my interest as a shooter. I'm not sure if I should label it as a modern shmup though. Certainly not a bullet hell. But it had bosses.

 

I was also sad that many early 80's games had gone away. Especially vectors. But business is business I guess.

 

8 hours ago, The Usotsuki said:

It's not that the Amiga couldn't do it, but that no one gave enough of a damn to do it right.  If people actually attempted competent ports on the Amiga, it would be able to hold its own more than well enough.

I wonder if that would've extended its lifespan? Not having arcade games was among the reasons I gave up on the platform.

 

And while Apple II couldn't possibly keep up with games of the 90's, there were still useful things I was doing with it - till I transitioned to PC completely.