Page 40 of 75

Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 9:36 pm
by NorthWay
Someone do Knightlore next? (With plenty of chance for would-haves, could-haves, and should-haves?)

Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 10:02 pm
by tssk
NorthWay wrote:Someone do Knightlore next? (With plenty of chance for would-haves, could-haves, and should-haves?)
Especially with the rare NES port.

I have heard rumours of a C64 port.

The Amstrad port looked stunning in the pages of C&VG. I reckon Head Over Heels is the better game though.

Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 5:53 am
by markopoloman
Knightlore on the C64! Don't think so................

But if its on there, then I'd love to see how bad it is! :shock:

Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 7:55 pm
by tssk
markopoloman wrote:Knightlore on the C64! Don't think so................

But if its on there, then I'd love to see how bad it is! :shock:
Hey, if Head Over Heels could be ported then Knight Lore would be a snap.

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 10:26 am
by merman
tssk wrote:
markopoloman wrote:Knightlore on the C64! Don't think so................

But if its on there, then I'd love to see how bad it is! :shock:
Hey, if Head Over Heels could be ported then Knight Lore would be a snap.
It wouldn't be a snap. It would be a snaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaap, running at very low speeds. I've never heard of a port, mainly because Ultimate found converting games to the C64 very difficult and made C64 exclusives instead. (Witness Nightshade, which runs very slowly).

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 11:42 am
by NorthWay
merman wrote:
markopoloman wrote:Knightlore on the C64! Don't think so................
It wouldn't be a snap. It would be a snaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaap
Well, they did a 6502 version already (BBC) so there should have been some "easy" cash to get from a C= 64 version. They could in fact have gone all kerrrrrrazy and done an A8 port too with its nearer-BBC cpu grunt - would have been something to try to market in the US that one. In fact, if they felt like flogging themselves they could have embraced the Oric too! And the Apple II for that US angle.
(Did I forget any 6502 based machine then?)

Anyone feel like attacking the BBC version with a matching disassembler and get a project going? (Imagine the hackers crawling out of the woodwork that would ensue when the "best port/machine" cards were about to be played!)

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 4:44 pm
by paranoid marvin
Star Wars

Speccy

No music & no sound effects make this a very soulless experience to play. Graphics are ok , particularly on the first 2 sections , however the trench-run doesn't have any cannons on the wall to destroy , leaving you to dodge/shoot the fireballs and obstacles

Realtime made the definitive Speccy version of this game a couple of years earlier with Starstrike- and it had sound effects too!

Image
Luke tried to shoot his nose off to spite his face


C64

Nice Star Wars music on the intro although it doesnt continue throughout the game , but at least it has passable sound effects (sadly no speech though). Graphics are quite crude , with noticeable slowdown when the screen gets cluttered. The only version to features cannon (well red squares!) in the trench run - and for some reason is the only version that uses normal joystick controls , rather than the 'flight controls' of the arcade machine (with no option I could see to change this)

Image
Grands Moff Tarkin kicks himself for forgetting to turn the gas off



Amstrad

Although not using the full screen , definately the nicest looking version of the three.Although not entirely smooth in movement , it does a better than than the other two. However , after a nice tune on the front screen , the in-game effects can only be described as bizarre. Although there are laser sounds and explosions , they sound - well - 'odd' . To full4 appreciate what I mean , you have to listen for yourself - I can only say that they sound nothing like the sound effects from the film!
although this detracts somewhat from the overall experience , it is better than no sound at all - therefore it attains the top spot

Image
Christmas in space - look at those pretty snowflakes!


1.Amstrad
2.C64/Speccy

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 4:54 pm
by markopoloman
Hmmm - there are 2 versions on the C64 - one from 1983 (parker Bros) and one from 1988 from Domark..............


What one did you use and does anyone know how differently they play??

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:02 pm
by paranoid marvin
markopoloman wrote:Hmmm - there are 2 versions on the C64 - one from 1983 (parker Bros) and one from 1988 from Domark..............


What one did you use and does anyone know how differently they play??
The Domark version
Although from a static screen , they look virtually identical , they play very , very differently. In fact the 1983 version better resembles a 2600 game (although it does have the arcade flight-stick controls)
Image

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 8:31 pm
by Emperor Fossil
Nice comparison! I know what you mean about the SFX in the amstrad version. It's such a weird mix of effects. Kind of sounds like a gunfight in an early '80s arcade.

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 10:50 pm
by tssk
Hey PM are you sure about the lack of red cannons in the trench run? (They might appear in about level 3 onwards, I might check this w/end.)

I can confirm that for this and Empire Strikes Back avoiding the C64 is advisable.

Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2007 2:58 am
by emkay
paranoid marvin wrote: Nice Star Wars music on the intro although it doesnt continue throughout the game , but at least it has passable sound effects (sadly no speech though). Graphics are quite crude , with noticeable slowdown when the screen gets cluttered.
Come on. The C64 version is a slideshow of ingame Pictures. Not a game.

Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2007 3:46 am
by paranoid marvin
emkay wrote:
paranoid marvin wrote: Nice Star Wars music on the intro although it doesnt continue throughout the game , but at least it has passable sound effects (sadly no speech though). Graphics are quite crude , with noticeable slowdown when the screen gets cluttered.
Come on. The C64 version is a slideshow of ingame Pictures. Not a game.
I actually preferred the trenchrun on the C64 than the Speccy , as the Speccy 3d effect is unconvincing to say the least

Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2007 5:37 am
by Atari Frog
Why didn't you include the Atari 8-bit version?

I believe the Parker Brothers game is sprite-based while the Domark release uses vectors (both are on the Atari as well).

--
Atari Frog
http://www.atarimania.com

Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2007 11:23 am
by emkay
Atari Frog wrote:Why didn't you include the Atari 8-bit version?

I believe the Parker Brothers game is sprite-based while the Domark release uses vectors (both are on the Atari as well).

--
Atari Frog
http://www.atarimania.com
I think, both ATARI version are good. At least by the usable framrate.
But, here clearly the CPC wins.
Seems that the 4MHz Zylog and the linear framebuffer was a good ground for making this game.
The ATARI "1988" version plays as good, but the resolution is 1/4 of the CPC's .