Because you don't need to get all Einstein-specific about this. If they got the same name, and are practically the same game, they're ports.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Black Falcon
Printable View
Because you don't need to get all Einstein-specific about this. If they got the same name, and are practically the same game, they're ports.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Black Falcon
I see that attitude often, and honestly it's annoying. If the games are different, by different teams, have different levels, are not two versions of the same exact program, then they aren't "ports"! They are different games based on the same concept.Quote:
Originally Posted by azonicrider
For instance, Micro Machines for the Game Boy is a port. It's a GB-ized version of the console game. Bionic Commando for GB, however, is not a port -- it's an original title with all-new levels, some new game mechanics, and more, versus the NES original.
Yeah. Odyssey cartridges don't contain code. The way the Odyssey works is very very weird. It's not a real game console any more than the Pong units are.Quote:
Originally Posted by gamevet
It also wasn't very successful. It was the first, but I'm not sure that it made a big impact on what followed. Probably its biggest claim to having an impact on the industry is the fact that Pong was a ripoff of one of its games. Even without Pong, it was only a matter of time before an arcade video game took off. Once there was a hit, the next logical step is to make a home version.
I'm sure people could explain away all kinds of great inventions, but there's no reason to believe that things would have been the same without the Odyssey... computers were definitely going to take off, but dedicated videogame consoles that attach to TVs? Maybe, maybe not.Quote:
Originally Posted by j_factor
Quote:
Originally Posted by A Black Falcon
When I was a kid, the Sears catalog was filled with Pong clones and other videogame devices, like Atari's Stunt Cycle game. Everyone remembers the pong clones, but they seem to forget the other weird videogame devices that came before the VCS.
http://www.gooddealgames.com/article...20History.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_(video_game)
^ most of those are pongs though
unless you meant the rca studio II
the fairchild channel F ( what does the F stand for ? fairchild ? fairchild channel fairchild ? )
atari video pinball
and atari video stunt cycle
but those are only a hand full in a sea of pongs old computers museum has a whole section devoted to nothing but pong machines http://www.old-computers.com/museum/default.asp?st=3
they have 112 pong machines on display
112 machines just for bloody pong !
Pong, and all Home Pongs, exist because of the Magnavox Odyssey. They would not exist without it.
If you don't doubt that computers would have taken off why must consoles be so different? At the end of the day a console IS a computer. It's just one that uses your TV for it's monitor. And before you say "But PC is different", we're talking about an era before IBM made their first PC.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Black Falcon
Pong's popularity was a result of the arcade game being a hit, and Pong was not the 1st videogame to exist. If Pong didn't do it, another videogame would have came along that would have. Baer may have invented video tennis (if you don't count Tennis for Two), but it took a slick salesman like Bushnell to find a way to make the product more enticing to consumers. Let's not forget that there was a videogame crash in the 70's and it was the VCS that helped bring that market back to existence.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Black Falcon
The arcades are what fueled the home console boom and the arcades crashed right around the same time that the consoles did in the early 80s.
Yep!Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
The console market crashed, yet the computer market continued to expand.
was there a crash in the 70's too ?
probably the glut of pong consoles
Pretty much. Even Magnavox had like 4 different Odyssey systems within 3 or 4 years. The video arcade business took a nose dive as well, but with the release of Space Invaders the market started to boom.Quote:
Originally Posted by KitsuneNight
http://www.neiu.edu/~cjhudso2/timetable.htm
On the topic of a theoretical version of F-Zero GX running on one of the other systems like the DC/PS2.
I own and have played Speed Racer:The Game on the PS2 and (to me at least) it give a F-Zero GX type feel if only in the style of the courses.
The graphics seem pretty detailed (from what my short sighted eyes can tell anyway :lol:) and the action runs at a good pace too (not sure if its 30fps or 60fps). For those who've never heard or seen the game here's a video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCxer_Ezows
Any thoughts?
I think it looks pretty flipping awesome. It reminds me a little of Dethkarz on PC by Melbourne house, I wonder how the engines compare. The above vid also reminds me of Looney Tunes Space Race on PS2 and Dreamcast.
Gameplay at 2:30
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncYL9Lmmlls
Gameplay at 2:47
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6C3pV_KQ2x4
Good one! I didn't remember about this game. Far closer to F-Zero GX graphics style than Wipeout Fusion IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by stu
It runs at 30 fps and has some slowdown in the most hectic moments though.
It also lacks most of the transparencies of F-Zero GX and the textures are nowhere near as sharp.
The cars seem to use more complex models than in F-Zero GX but it's 10 vs 30 (F-Zero GX) on the track.
It has a lot of blur and lighting effects though, but they really don't appeal to me that much.
Oh, and it was released five years later.
Compared to F-Zero GX it has almost no lighting effects, far simpler special effects, far simpler trackside buildings, way less AI "cars", little to no transparencies, no multi-tiered tracks IIRC, no bump mapping, etc...Quote:
Originally Posted by sheath
And the frame rate already takes a serious hit in 2P split screen mode, F-Zero GX runs 4P split screen also at 60 fps AFAIK.
Not bad for a 2000 game on the Dreamcast, cell-shading wasn't all that common at the time. OTOH, quite poor for a 2002 release on the PS2 IMO.
I haven't played the PS2 version of Speed Racer, but it's a fun game on the Wii. I'd imagine it doesn't look quite as nice on PS2, though.
As for Looney Tunes Space Race, yeah, that looks okay, but nothing great. I don't know if that game even pushes the Dreamcast, much less the PS2. Great visual style, yes... but technical accomplishment? Not so sure.
Yeah, it was the second one, following Computer Space, a quite unsuccessful game.Quote:
Originally Posted by gamevet
Perhaps so, but it didn't happen that way, so how can we be sure? Pong's success is what inspired others to try, after all.Quote:
If Pong didn't do it, another videogame would have came along that would have.
Well, I think that as much as anything the new cartridge-based consoles helped CAUSE that crash, or at least make it worse, yes? I mean, the Fairchild in '76, and RCA and Atari systems in '77... that's the same time that many Home Pongs were still releasing, but people were getting tired of those one-game systems as you say... and then here come these new things which can do a lot more. The Home Pong thing would probably ahve crashed, sure, but I can't help but think that the first cart-based consoles probably helped speed up their decline...Quote:
Baer may have invented video tennis (if you don't count Tennis for Two), but it took a slick salesman like Bushnell to find a way to make the product more enticing to consumers. Let's not forget that there was a videogame crash in the 70's and it was the VCS that helped bring that market back to existence.
True, though arcades did continue to exist; it wasn't until the mid to late '90s that the arcade business in the US REALLY failed.Quote:
The arcades are what fueled the home console boom and the arcades crashed right around the same time that the consoles did in the early 80s.
While this is technically true, it did not come anywhere remotely near replacing what was lost -- computers just continued on or increased in sales slightly, I think. This idea that people all just shifted over to playing games on computers is something of a myth; most people didn't do that. Far more left consoles behind and just stopped playing games for a while -- the numbers we have for computer and console sales makes that pretty clear.Quote:
Yep!
The console market crashed, yet the computer market continued to expand.