gary@idsssd.UUCP (Gary Gealy) (10/17/90)
Comment on Psygnosis playability. (aracade style games) Over the last few years I've purchased most of the games published by Psygnosis. IMHO they are some of the best games on the market, but they do seem to be awful hard to win. The only one that I've completed is 'Menace' and that took a lot of work. What's the deal here, why publish games that IMHO are very hard to almost impossible to beat without cheat modes? Am I the only one with this problem or are there others that feel this way? If so, speak up, what's YOUR opinion? -GMG- -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Gary M. Gealy :-) | ... cp1!sarin!wb3ffv!idsssd!gary System Software Dvlpmt | ... idssup!idsssd!gary -or- ...ctnews!idsssd!gary (301) 329-1100 -- x315 | Insight Route Distribution Sys. - Hunt Valley, MD
ataylor@agsm.ucla.edu (Al Taylor) (10/18/90)
From article <780@idsssd.UUCP>, by gary@idsssd.UUCP (Gary Gealy): > > Comment on Psygnosis playability. (aracade style games) > > Over the last few years I've purchased most of the games published by > Psygnosis. IMHO they are some of the best games on the market, but > they do seem to be awful hard to win. The only one that I've completed > is 'Menace' and that took a lot of work. > > What's the deal here, why publish games that IMHO are very hard to > almost impossible to beat without cheat modes? Am I the only one > with this problem or are there others that feel this way? If so, > speak up, what's YOUR opinion? > > > -GMG- > -- > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Gary M. Gealy :-) | ... cp1!sarin!wb3ffv!idsssd!gary > System Software Dvlpmt | ... idssup!idsssd!gary -or- ...ctnews!idsssd!gary > (301) 329-1100 -- x315 | Insight Route Distribution Sys. - Hunt Valley, MD I agree with you completely. The games look terrific and the ideas are great, but like you said they are a bitch to get anywhere on. I'm not the ultimate game player, but i'm no slouch either. For example Obliterator, the game looks great, but I can't seem to get anywhere on it. This one probably isn't the best example because the interreation with the character on the screen is clumsy, but even on other Psygnosis games where it is strictly joystick action advancing in the game is tough. Glad to see I'm no t the only one. By the way what are the cheat modes? Al The Pal "some day Racer X" - Speed Racer odsaOD
buffa@kish.inria.fr (Michel Buffa) (10/19/90)
In article <780@idsssd.UUCP>, gary@idsssd.UUCP (Gary Gealy) writes: > > Comment on Psygnosis playability. (aracade style games) > > Over the last few years I've purchased most of the games published by > Psygnosis. IMHO they are some of the best games on the market, but > they do seem to be awful hard to win. The only one that I've completed > is 'Menace' and that took a lot of work. > > What's the deal here, why publish games that IMHO are very hard to > almost impossible to beat without cheat modes? Am I the only one > with this problem or are there others that feel this way? If so, > speak up, what's YOUR opinion? > > > -GMG- Psygnosis or Psyclapses games (certainly incomplete) BARBARIANS: old game, but one of the best when it came out. Good playability I finished it without any cheat mode. OBLITERATOR: very close to BARBARIANS in the concept. One of my friend finished it and loved it. Good game too. TERRORPODS: Complex simulation and arcade game with very deep interest. I loved this one, but a little too complex. A good game when it came out. BLOOD MONEY: Excellent playability for the two first levels (I finished them without cheat mode. Is there a cheat mode ?). But a terribly frustrating game as it's almost impossible to play levels 3 and levels 4. (I reached level 3 about ten times, but died after two screens). Level 3 can be played only after levels 1 and 2 and it takes about 35 minutes to complete them (and it's also rather difficult). A good game, but a bad design because of these !@#$%^% levels 3 and 4. STRYX: Who played this game ? I don't know it much (saw some demos) MATRIX MARAUDER: One of my friend told me it was a good game, but very hard to master the controls (you control your ship with the mouse AND the joystick AND the keyboard) ANARCHY: Very playable, very fast, very good defender clone. I love this one. I reached level 7 out of ten, so playability is good. THE KILLING GAME SHOW: top playability. The game is very addictive too, has stunning graphics and very deep interest (a lot of strategy is requiered to pass levels) MENACE: A goo shoot'em up. I finished it. It was one of the best when it came out, but now, R-TYPE, BATTLE SQUADRON, SILKWORM, XENON 2, ANARCHY, BLOOD MONEY, X-OUT are better. BALLISTYX: didn't played this one. Any comment ? SHADOW OF THE BEAST 1: unplayable ! SHADOW OF THE BEAST 2: unplayable ! Very frustrating ! These last two games are the origin of the bad Psygnosis reputation. A normal human can not terminate SOTB 2 !!! ------------------------------------------ Michel Buffa: Projet Robotvis, INRIA, France Internet: buffa@sardaigne.inria.fr Surface Mail: Michel BUFFA, INRIA - Sophia Antipolis, 2004, route des Lucioles, 06565 Valbonne Cedex -- FRANCE Voice phone: (33) 93.65.78.39, Fax: (33) 93 65 77 65 ------------------------------------------
u9041915@wolfen.cc.uow.oz (Michael SWERLOWYCZ) (10/22/90)
gary@idsssd.UUCP (Gary Gealy) writes: >almost impossible to beat without cheat modes? Am I the only one >with this problem or are there others that feel this way? If so, >speak up, what's YOUR opinion? Actually your not the only one with this problem :-)...HOWEVER I find that the increased level of difficulty makes for more exciting and nerve racking game play, which might make you throw the computer through the monitor, Or on the other hand gets you thinking on ways to crack the game (And when you do finally complete it...Its almost as good as making love ...{Well not almost ... :-) *chuckle*})...Anyay thats my opinion!!! Mick.
sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) (10/27/90)
gary@idsssd.UUCP (Gary Gealy) writes: >Comment on Psygnosis playability. (aracade style games) >What's the deal here, why publish games that IMHO are very hard to >almost impossible to beat without cheat modes? Am I the only one >with this problem or are there others that feel this way? If so, >speak up, what's YOUR opinion? I agree. I think game publishers should do some of the following: 1> Have a trainer mode option built in for those of us who just can't win any other way. 2> Have a kiddie level (incredibly hard) and an old folks level of playability choice. Kiddie level would be for those Nintendroids that want hard challenges,and OF mode would be for those less dexterious players who enjoy games but aren't that great at them. [I think having the cheat mode in Shadow of The Beast 2 is a step in the right direction] -- John Sparks |D.I.S.K. Public Access Unix System| Multi-User Games, Email sparks@corpane.UUCP |PH: (502) 968-DISK 24Hrs/2400BPS | Usenet, Chatting, =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|7 line Multi-User system. | Downloads & more. A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of----Ogden Nash
vic@wookumz.ai.mit.edu (Vic Rattlehead) (11/03/90)
In article <3426@corpane.UUCP> sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) writes: >I agree. I think game publishers should do some of the following: > >1> Have a trainer mode option built in for those of us who just can't >win any other way. I don't like the idea of trainers and cheats. If a game is so impossibly hard that you can't finish it without cheating, then its not worth playing at all. The puzzle solving idea in Beast 2 was cool but it took 10 hours to restart the game. It was so freaking hard that you'd have to restart every 5 minutes. It was so unforgivable. If you accidentally miss the little demon that drops the key (was it a key?) anyway, if you miss it you have to commit suicide and wait another 10 hours for the game to start again. Psygnosis is coming out with a lot of good games now like KGS which are much more playable. Still hard but very fun to play! -Vic
sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) (11/10/90)
vic@wookumz.ai.mit.edu (Vic Rattlehead) writes: >In article <3426@corpane.UUCP> sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) writes: >>I agree. I think game publishers should do some of the following: >> >>1> Have a trainer mode option built in for those of us who just can't >>win any other way. >I don't like the idea of trainers and cheats. If a game is so >impossibly hard that you can't finish it without cheating, then its >not worth playing at all. but the problem is that what is easy for one person is hard for another, and vice versa. To you a game might be too simple and you'd complain that it's not worth the money because you finished it in 2 hours (like the person who posted that Loom was too easy), while I might find it impossibly hard. Matter of fact, although I like arcade games, I must admit that I am lousy at them. I frequently find that a game is too hard to get all the way through without some sort of cheat. With a cheat mode or trainer, I can at least get somewhere in a game that I can't win normally. I would rather have a hard game that I can win by cheating than an impossibly simple game that a 3 year old could solve in an hour. -- John Sparks |D.I.S.K. Public Access Unix System| Multi-User Games, Email sparks@corpane.UUCP |PH: (502) 968-DISK 24Hrs/2400BPS | Usenet, Chatting, =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|7 line Multi-User system. | Downloads & more. A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of----Ogden Nash
mapjilg@gdr.bath.ac.uk (J I L Gold) (11/15/90)
I've just started playing AWESOME, the latest shoot-em-up from the writers of the BEAST trilogy (yes, Beast III is on its way...). It is a VERY playable game. The intro animation of a dogfight between two spaceships is AMAZING!!!. The program makes use of external floppy and uses any RAM expansion as a RAM disk, which cuts down on the (still substantial) disk access. Anyway, start the game, and there you are, a green spaceship a third the size of the screen! Move joystick up/down, so does the ship. Move left/right, and space (and the encroaching nasties) rotate about you...it's very confusing at first! There are several soundtracks complementing various patrs of the game. Anyway, you blast your way through the first wave, and then warp factor 1, cap'n, as the stars become streaks, and off you go to the next mission, a similar encounter with asteroids. After that, the landing ship detaches from the main ship, and you fly "into" the screen, to shoot at a large space monster that rips at a fair old speed towards and away from you. Then,...even more shooting, this time in an above view 8-way scrolling shoot-em-up : shoot as many ships as you can to gain extra time for the last mad dash into the starbase. You get 3 tries at that once you've landed, a man (woman? person?) runs at the whim of your joystick shooting yet more baddies and avoiding traps (or not, as the case may be!). Finally, into the base, sell your cargo, accept a contract mission, buy some weapons, stay in a hotel...off to your next destination, with a bewildering selection of aliens to dispatch...phew. The object of the game is to escape from the solar system before some real baddies blow it to f**k with a mega-weapon. To do this you need fuel, which is (surprise, surprise) rarer than pregnancies in eunuch land. In fact, to get fuel, you MUST take on a contract, and balance your hotel bill, the distance to the destination planet (and hence the fuel needed to get there), the money spent on weapons etc etc, so there is a fair amount of tactical juggling to do, as well as joystick-wiggling. AWESOME comes on three copy-protected, drive-grinding disks, and I highly recommend it as THE shoot-em-up for Ami. A final note... the game runs fine on my A500+A501+A590+1/2 Meg+external floppy, but on my friend's A500+1/2 Meg expansion (not A501)+ external floppy, the game crashes just after the landing craft detatches from the main ship. Weird.... Ratings:(/10) Graphics: 10 Sound : 9 Gameplay: 8 Overall : 9 -- # J.Gold | mapjilg@uk.ac.bath.gdr # # University of Bath , UK | jilg@uk.ac.bath.maths # # The more improbable an event is, the more likely it is to happen :-) #
michael@moby.cs.ucla.edu (michael gersten) (11/15/90)
Well, here's a different opinion of Awesome. First, I want to congradulate Reflections. They're the people who wrote the game. And I'd like to ***KILL*** Psygnosis for ruining it. Tech points: Awesome is large. So large that Reflections knew that it would make sense to use the ram disk on the machine to cache files to reduce disk loads. And I'm sure it does work on their version (without the copy protection, runnable from dos). But Psygnosis put it on their own dos, with their own boot block. So AmigaDos never gets started. So RAM: is *NEVER LOADED* from dos. So there is no RAM: disk for the program to use. ***ARRGH***. Reflections: Keep up the good work, but please, CHANGE distribution companies. The game: The game is supposed to be a semi-realistic model of you and your ship after your crew convinced you (at gun point) that they needed a vacation/time off after a bad trade run. So far, so good. But... Its not semi-realistic. It has no realism in it. It is a game, pure and simple. This is not in itself bad, but if the goal was a simulation, than a little more work would have really made the difference. Consider this: Your ship has an energy supply which can be put into either the shields or the weapon. But you have to make that decision before you find out what caused you to drop out of hyperspace. And you can't move it (if, for example, your shields are getting low). Manuvering in space should turn you around your center of mass (center of ship). Instead it turns around your nose, so you swing very wide. Thats physics. In space, you have to fight things, manuver, etc. But your computer will wisk control away from you and re-engage hyperspace drives the instant it thinks the area is clear. Never mind that you're chasing an energy disk that the last guy disintegrated into. Never mind that you're going after a fuel capsule and there are 5 more fuel cargo pods just off screen. And never mind that you CAN'T fly away from things normally, but if you intercept a fuel convoy you can easily lose a stationary fuel pod. You are going to a system that does a fair amount of space business. You get fuel by running interplanetary deliveries. Every plannet sells space ship weapons. And **NO ONE** repairs space ships. None. Ok, at least the first two plannets do not (haven't made it to the door of the third one yet). And how welcome are you to do these deliveries? Not very. Everyone on the surface of the plannet is out to get you. You`ve got to watch your oxygen supply (after all, you can't breath the air out there, but there are lots of creatures on the surface, lots of local ships flying through the atmosphere which you have to (have, not can) shoot, etc). And you get more oxygen by blasting ships to smithereens. But the instant you make it to the entrace (which is unlocked), everyone is happy with you. No assasins to finish the job. And all the guards are instantly replaced (of course). Finally, the fuel. A Fuel shortage is the heart of the game. Its what keeps you going. I can almost believe that your crew would force you to go to a system when there was just barely enough fuel to make it there. But you don't get enough fuel in any mission to go more than one or two plannets out at a time, yet you somehow must gain enough fuel to make it to another solar system light years away. Right. As a game, I found it to be fun and enjoyable. As a simulation I found it pathetic (there is no real economics as you can't resell anything you buy). And as an example of psygnosis's distribution, I wasn't suprised at all.