rar@auc.UUCP (Rodney Ricks) (10/24/90)
In article <34319@nigel.ee.udel.edu> fhwri%CONNCOLL.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu writes: >As I said before, I want M.U.L.E. for the AMIGA! So do I! >...Dan Bunten, who never made much $$$ from this superb game (although the >Nintendo version might make him some--on QLink 4 years ago he said, "If >everyone who has told me what a great game M.U.L.E. is had BOUGHT the game, >I'd be in MUCH better financial shape!"). I bought M.U.L.E. for my Commodore 64 several years ago, and I LOVE the game. Since I haven't used my 64 in a long time, I haven't played M.U.L.E. in a long time. If a version of M.U.L.E was written for the 64 that 1) Takes advantage of the Amiga's graphics and sound capabilities (the graphics should be somewhat better than the original, but the original sound would work just fine). 2) Takes advantage of other capabilities of the Amiga (pull down menus, the mouse, and multitasking). DON'T TAKE OVER THE MACHINE UNLESS YOU ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, HAVE TO!!! 3) Played like the original. Same algorithms for determining growth, etc. Although it would need to load from disk MUCH faster!!! :-) 4) Was priced reasonably. I would definitely be willing to buy it again. Ok, I would still buy it even if it didn't multitask, although it would not be as much as an impulse decision. In other words, if I walked into the store and saw it with ALL of the features that I listed above, when I walked out of the store, I would have bought a copy. Otherwise, It would take a while longer. Of course, if it weren't copy protected, I would be much more likely to get it, with thoughts of installing it on the hard disk I'm saving up for. > I wrote EA with the proposal and >got a phone call back from somebody there who told me that they'd market >it (!) if a good version was written and like I said, I'd buy it if a good version were WRITTEN (not just ported). By the way, anyone want to buy M.U.L.E. for the 64? Original documents and packaging included. How about Deadline? > --Rick Wrigley > fhwri@conncoll.bitnet >M.U.L.E. skinners unite! Rodney -- // \\ // Rodney Ricks, Morehouse College \/
nad@tegra.COM (Nancy Durgin) (10/25/90)
In article <32496@auc.UUCP> rar@auc.UUCP (Rodney Ricks) writes: >In article <34319@nigel.ee.udel.edu> fhwri%CONNCOLL.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu writes: >>As I said before, I want M.U.L.E. for the AMIGA! > >So do I! > So do I! > > [ List of requirements for Amiga version ] > I want a version of M.U.L.E. that plays exactly like the original (Atari 800 version, in my case). I don't care if they enhance the graphics or any of that stuff (though how much extra effort could it take?), but the algorithms for the play must be the same, as that is what makes the game great. Oh, and the sound effects are pretty important to the game play, as well. Enhancements would be fine, as long as there is a "compatibility mode" where everything works like the original... I wish all my games were HD-installable, not copy-protected, etc. But I will settle for it just running on my A3000 under 2.0. The main reason I want an Amiga version is so I can retire my Atari 800, whose only purpose in life at this point is to play M.U.L.E. The problem with any 3rd party writing it (other than someone with sanctioned access to the original source and algorithms) is that they'll never get all the timing and probabilities just right. I'll be able to tell! (I'm *very* familiar with this game...). [ Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.games !! ] Nancy -- ============================================================================== Nancy Durgin | (Usual disclaimers | Tegra-Varityper, Inc. tegra!nad@uunet.com | apply...) | Billerica, Massachusetts ==============================================================================