Viewing Thread:
"A Decline In Retro-Gaming..."

I recently had a go at my mate’s import copy of Namco Museum for PS2 (for the versions of Pac-Man Arrangement, Galaga Arrangement and Dig-Dug Arrangement that aren't currently emulated any other way). And in at least one sense, it's an improvement on recent commercial retro packages, because you get a dozen games instead of the pathetic six or so on most compilations (though after what Capcom did with Generations, and since there's clearly next to no work involved, I don't see that there's any excuse for the PS2 edition not to include the entire six-volume, 30-odd-game Namco Museum series from PS1)

On the other hand, though, it's cack. For one thing, it still suffers from the p***-poor conversions of Pac-Man and Ms Pac-Man that afflicted all the other versions. And for another, it actually offers in many respects less than the PS1 version. For a start, you don't actually get any of the extensive "Museum" content that was such a nice addition to the original releases. And you also get a lot fewer options with the games themselves, such as the opportunity to turn the display sideways for a full-screen image if you can turn your TV on its side, or the choice of display styles on the likes of Galaxian and Dig-Dug.

And other publishers are even worse. Pocket Studios, for example, should have their aces kicked to John O'Groats and back for the atrocity of violation they perpetrated on the GBA version of Williams Arcade Classics. Williams themselves recently managed the impressive feat of producing a commercial pinball emulation package that was orders of magnitude worse than the free alternative offered by Visual Pinball. And crap 50Hz conversions are bad enough on any game, but when you're converting a load of old Atari titles that are already struggling to reproduce vector graphics on a low-res TV screen, cramming them into a crappy 50Hz bordered letterbox is a crime that ought to be punishable by ceremonial drowning in a bucket of Bernard Manning's phlegm.

If there's a decent market for retro-gaming out there, shouldn't it be getting treated a lot better by publishers to keep it alive? And if there isn't, well, we know why. Maybe there’s an ideal business opportunity here, start a software label that just deals in releasing retro games of yester year. It appears to me that the software companies that currently release these retro packs at the moment only do so to cover up bare release schedules. I am staggered that publishers don't yet realize the reason that retro game compilations don't sell as many copies as they might is because there are NEVER enough titles on them. I'd pay £35 time and time again for a GBA package with at least 30 C64 games on. Who else is going to buy them? What good is it that a load of IP is stuck there, in a silo, doing nothing and depreciating in value all the time?

I think that there's a market, but maybe the wrong people are making the decisions on what to release. I had a BBC B (sob) so never got into games until the Amiga, so it's less relevant because you can still pick up the originals on most 16 bit computers and consoles (and lots of 8 bit). But I reckon that I’d pay real money for proper classics like Speedball 2, Toki, Rodland and Sensible Soccer and all the other millions that I can't remember at the moment. There are probably huge arguments over who owns the rights to a lot of old games, too. I reckon that I’d pay real money for proper classics, but I wouldn’t, I tell you that now. Why? Because the truly classic games would be practically impossible to play. As was admirably demonstrated by Sega's MasterGear peripheral, taking a game designed to be played on a television, and displaying it on a tiny LCD screen makes the game really hard to play. Bullets are so tiny as to be rendered invisible; coins are too small to be picked up, and as for a pixel-perfect jump? Forget it. Some games work, but most don't. Remakes are the only way to get a playable conversion. And it'd be unfeasible to put 30 remakes on to one cart due to both cost and time.

However, there are several old 8-bit emulators for the GBA already, and many of them use an optional smart-scrolling system to cope with the size of the screen. Obviously this isn't an ideal solution for all games either, but between that and a normal fixed display you'll find the large majority of old games are perfectly playable on the ickle screen. The Digital Eclipse conversions of Joust and Defender on the GBC (let alone the GBA) were perfectly playable (although I suspect some pixel dropout on the Defender). I made the mistake of picking up the Atari Collection v2 for the PS (tempted by Gauntlet at the very least), some almost unplayable conversions on there.

If idiot publishers can't see the potential in this potential C64 compilation cart, they all deserve to explode in their own poo, or something. Paradroid, Bruce Lee, Spy Hunter, Beach Head 1 and 2, Winter Games, California Games, Wizball, Bounder, Elite, Boulder Dash (which I think is out on the GameBoy Color), Thrust. Sort it! One of the worst retro compilations ever would have to be the Midway Arcade Party Pack. PARTY Pack?

"Hey, guys, I'm having a party tonight!"

"Will there be beer and soft drugs?"

"No. There will be Klax."

Follow that up with the worst conversions of Toobin', 720 and Super Sprint ever, with their eye-buggering-flicker-fest-postage-stamp sized screens, include Rampage just to annoy me, and charge forty quid for it, and you've got a vision of hell in your hands. Still, it did have Smash T.V.

Thanks for reading,
LF

VenomByte wrote:
> A decent retro pack with a dozen or so truly classic games would go
> down a treat... but unfortunately you'll never get that many games
> with any variety on a compilation pack as they'll all be from the same
> publisher.
> That's the main problem with compliations, I think. If they took
> several of the best titles from a wide ariety of developers they would
> be far better.

Why not just grab a copy of Mame (or other relevent emulator) and download the actual arcade ROMs?

Although I do like your idea... it would be interesting if say, EA (for example) gave each of their premier developers (e.g. LionHead, etc..) a random classic title to develop as they see fit, and see what they come up with???

UFO:enemy unknown is one of the greatest games ever! I can't stop playing it at the moment.

Retro games really were the greats. Back in the time where it was the gameplay that counted, not the graphics.

Nice post.

Nice post very intresting! Should win you a gad in my mind.

Cyclone wrote:
> I play UFO: enemy unknown and Pirates! (oooo ARRRR! Me 'arties!) more
> than Commandos 2, Shogun and AVsP2.

UFO: Enemy Unknown. A truly excellent game. Have you got the X-com utility patch v9 to fix the difficulty setting bug?

Anyway, yes I agree with this topic. Retro compilation packs never have more than four or so releases, which is a heinous crime, considering the minute amount of space each takes up. Somehow, they always seem to be far worse in quality, too.

A decent retro pack with a dozen or so truly classic games would go down a treat... but unfortunately you'll never get that many games with any variety on a compilation pack as they'll all be from the same publisher.
That's the main problem with compliations, I think. If they took several of the best titles from a wide ariety of developers they would be far better.

Does anyone remember the old Mega Games carts on the megadrive? Only three games on each, but they were quite good. EA did "double header" sports games, too - not so very long after the originals were released either. You wouldn't see that happening these days...

Retro gaming ended when 3D graphics were used in every game.


:( It ruined the greatness, and sold on visuals.

Nice post.

Good luck. :-D

Well id still play retro games ifi still had my sega mege drive :(

I think the main reason is like you say the games weren't made for playing on Playstations ect. This leaves the developer a choice of either making a poor conversion or making the game from scratch to fit the machine it is to be played on. However if they go for the second choice most just think that it's better to add new elements to the old game to try and jazz them up a bit. Take Sensi on the PSOne. The 3d graphics and poor control set up meant it was atrotious. However if they had stuck to the simple controls and 2d graphics then maybe the game would have been a hit. So why do developers have to tart retro games up? Well mainly it's because u can download them for free off the net so gamers wont want to splash out £20 or so for the same game. Thing is most dont realise that it isn't the same game. The ones off the net are these poor conversions. I suppose you could blame the none-the-wiser gamers. Maybe. Good post though well done.

Retro gamings alive with me.



I play UFO: enemy unknown and Pirates! (oooo ARRRR! Me 'arties!) more than Commandos 2, Shogun and AVsP2.